While many teenagers argue that Twitter is the new social networking media site of today and that most people should consider creating an account, others argue that its use is meaningless and insignificant. One of these opposers is Robert W. Lucky who is a member of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers and a writer of technology, society, and engineering culture. In his article “To Twitter Or Not To Twitter? ” Lucky parallels Twitter to senseless barking and shows very little concern in his exclusion from the site.
Lucky also bars important information in order for the readers to decide for themselves whether it is in their best interest to create an account, including: site details, pros and cons, complexity, and secular applications for its use. His argument is also hampered by its obviously bias stance, unwillingness to expand on opposing views and ambiguous sarcasm. Lucky establishes a bias that is sustained throughout. He opens with a brief introduction to the site and a little background information concerning its “digital natives,” i. e.today’s youth. He continues with an instance that happened at work one day when “a young speaker mentioned that every morning he Twitters that he has just woken up. ” It is with this comment that Lucky justifies most of his assertions about the site. He embraces its insignificant aspects and fails to declare possible positive outcomes. This obviously bias stance makes it difficult to completely understand the full capabilities of the site. Lucky’s inability to recognize and respond to opposing views affects the article’s authoritative stance.
For example: the article progresses with another instance that occurred at work when a different “young speaker berated the whole audience of industry leaders. ‘I was told this was a conference of executives, so I’m going to talk slow and use big slides,’ he began. ‘You are living in a bubble. You come here to find out what kids do. You guys are pencil pushers. You’re forced to make money. ’”It is with this allegation that Lucky manipulates the audience into thinking that this is the face of the new social fabric.
Besides the obvious point that the speaker’s comment was rude and obnoxious, he does state the theory that Robert’s generation is living in a “bubble” due to their ignorance of social networking, but rather than at least trying to adapt to this new society through the internet, he continues with the defending comment of, “we’re in the middle of something happening around us, and we don’t really understand the consequences. ” The lack of collected data, like the site’s pros and cons as well as its complexity, leaves the impression that the author had far less motivation to answer his question in the first place.
The conclusive flaw in Lucky’s article is his use of sarcasm as the melting pot for his final assertion. After talking about work, he follows with two very short paragraphs regarding two comics that were published in a newspaper several years apart, each poking fun at the internet and social media. Afterwards, he indirectly answers the question “so is the networking phenomenon a great revolution in social consciousness, or is this just a lot of pointless, incessant barking? If you get a message that I’ve just awakened, you’ll know what I’ve decided. ” Lucky’s main impression of Twitter is that it is just “pointless, incessant barking.
” While I agree with Lucky’s acknowledgment that Twitter has been the victim to constant insignificant tweets regarding what was eaten in the morning, what brand of toothpaste was just bought from WalMart, etc. , he falls short on touching base with the site’s actual business benefits. The lack of knowledge that many corporations actually do create Twitter accounts in order to get messages and announcements across easier to the public only further solidifies the stand that Robert did not consider opposing views too well or even try out the system in the first place.
So is it worth the hassle of getting acquainted with social media sites like Twitter? Depending on how practical the use initially is chosen to be, this system can be found to be a huge asset to connecting with large crowds. It would be difficult for somebody to truly judge for themselves if Twitter can be a good thing or a bad thing based on Lucky’s assertions. His title of the article does not fully uphold the nature of the essay and his arguments are invalid due to an obviously bias stance, his unwillingness to expand on opposing views, and ambiguous sarcasm.