History will judge our tweets
This might go down in history as the most bird-brained idea ever.
We are talking here about Twitter, whose logo is a bird.
The Library of Congress has announced plans to begin collecting public tweets for its collection. The collection will date from Twitter's inception in 2006 until now. Right now, about 340 million tweets are posted every day.
The Library pointed out in its statement that “social media is supplementing and in some cases supplanting letters, journals, serial publications and other sources routinely collected by research libraries.”
Translation? The snapshot of our world today might be composed more of our tweets than of “50 Shades of Grey.”
Well, thank goodness. The last thing we need is to have future generations thinking we'd all slosh through a trio of horrid, kinky novels just to read the juicy bits that are still terribly written.
But the next-to-last thing we need is to be judged by the tweets of any given Kardashian, Charlie Sheen and most professional athletes. And then there are those tweets announcing breaking news — “RIP Morgan Freeman” — only to reverse course 15 minutes later after learning he is not dead: “Oops. My bad!”
In the grand scheme of things, we could come off looking worse than the 1980s.
Because the Library has about a million newspapers in its records, there's a chance I'm in the history books. But let's be realistic — no one cares about periodicals anymore.
So to angle for a bigger place in history, and to get a better understanding of the historical significance of saying as little as you can in 140 characters while often abandoning grammar, I've joined the dark side. I'm now on Twitter.
Almost immediately, I had my doubts. After choosing a name and rejecting an invitation to follow Mariah Carey and other luminaries, I officially launched the account. It took only six minutes to get my first follower. Could it be that the world has been waiting for me … on Twitter? Had Stephen King followed me already?
Not really. My first follower was @Sherri_Garich, whom I do not know and who is probably not a real person. Under her name on her profile was the message, “I will destroy you.” If that does not say, “Welcome to Twitter,” then what does?
Still looking for historical significance, I scanned my page and found a section highlighting trending tweets in the United States. At the time, one of the most popular topic hashtags was #HowToKeepYourMan, which offered a lot of advice that will no doubt stand the test of time. Among them: storing your boyfriend in formaldehyde and learning how to play “Call of Duty.” Also this advice: “Do exactly the opposite of whatever Taylor Swift is doing.”
OK. That was funny. Historically significant, though? I guess we'll find out in 50 years, when some doctoral student is tweeting her thesis about what life was like in the 2010s.
Twitter could be a good thing, perhaps. It's good to know that you don't have to be Stephen Hawking to reserve a spot in history. On the other hand, somewhere stored in the Library will be a tweet from Chris Brown denying he's dating Rihanna again.
Oh, yeah. History will be kind to us.
Nafari Vanaski is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. She can be reached at 412-856-7400, ext. 8669 or firstname.lastname@example.org. You can also reach her on Twitter at @NafariTrib. Remember — your tweet is destined for history.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.