Most days I get an e-mail informing me that somebody or other is “now following you on Twitter!” I find this slightly baffling, since I hardly ever tweet – that is, broadcast my every thought and deed to the world, using 140 characters or fewer. I tried Twitter out on the night of the US presidential election in November and did not like it much. One of my very last tweets was: “This is possibly the most moronic form of journalism I have ever done.” Since then, I have fallen largely silent.
But now I am having to rethink my disdain. Twitter is the most fashionable political medium of the moment, widely hailed for the role it played in allowing Iranian demonstrators to stay in touch with each other and avoid censorship. The US state department was so impressed by the role the microblogging service was playing it asked Twitter to delay an update that would have taken it off air. A headline in the Los Angeles Times summarised the conventional wisdom when it roared: “Tyranny’s new nightmare: Twitter”.
Even before Iran, Twitter was becoming increasingly trendy. Everybody from Senator John McCain to Britain’s Foreign Office was tweeting. The whole phenomenon has made me belatedly accept that the most important and profound political messages can, in fact, usually be encapsulated in 140 characters.
The remainder of the article can be read here. Please post comments below.
For views and opinions on the European Union from Peter Spiegel, Joshua Chaffin, Alex Barker and Stanley Pignal, follow the 