click to enlarge
A thousand apologies if the headline above makes your head hurt. It's a failed attempt at Twitterese, the pidgin tongue of the newest, faddiest social networking service Twitter. For the 13 of you who still don't know what that word means, Twitter is like a simplified version of Facebook's status update, where you tell people, in 140 characters or less, what you're up to at that exact moment. And yes, it's about as navel-gazing as it sounds.
So what's this have to do with Tennessee politicians? Well, like a lot of elected leaders, they're Twittering. (Seems politics and solipsism go hand in hand. Who knew?) Congressman
Zach Wamp, State Senator
Jim Kyle and Democratic gubernatorial candidate
Ward Cammack are but three of the dozen (?) earnestly updating their constituents via Blackberry or Mac. And it's easy to understand why.
For a politician, the benefits of Twitter seem pretty obvious. If you're beholden to the people, why not communicate with them directly? It seems like a service completely in line with Democratic principles. A way to run end-around the traditional path of press release + summarizing article. For low name recognition candidates like Cammack, turning down any chance to bullhorn your way into the public consciousness would seem tactically negligent. And for politicians like Kyle, who we might otherwise know little about, Twitter can act as a "Stars, they're just like us!" humanizer; it's hard not to be endeared of a guy who proudly Tweets his daughter's third-place showing in a
problem-solving tournament.
But, as political reporter Matt Bai points out in last weekend's
New York Times Magazine, Twitter's blend of brevity and immediacy contributes little to meaningful debate. Which makes it
the last thing politics needs right now...