ancient history

In 1996, I applied for a grant from the New England Foundation for the Arts <http://www.nefa.org> to attend a class for artists who wanted to create their own websites. Being a science fiction writer, I thought it wise to explore what looked to be the most important communications innovation since print. Back then some skeptics said that the World Wide Web was just a fad, like CB Radio <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens%27_band_radio>. They conceded the uses of email, but why would a writer need a website? What would a writer put up on it? Pictures of his cats?
The class gave me just a basic understanding of HTML < www.w3.org/MarkUp/Guide> and my first handcrafted website was a mess. Later I started using a WYSIWYG <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WYSIWYG> editor and the thing acquired some personality. I did find stuff to put on my site, my bibliography and resume, news when I made it, some essays on writing and the writing life and later bunches of my stories.
Skip ahead a few years to the rise of the blogs. Blogger <blogger.com>, one of the very first blog-publishing tools, launched in late 1999, and was acquired by Google in 2002.  The skeptics once again scoffed.  Why would any sane person want to post their virtual diaries online?  Who would take the time? And what would bloggers write about? Their cats?
I have to admit that even today I drift bloglessly through the blogosphere.  But I breathe the blogosphere as deeply as anyone and it didn’t surprise me at all that the skeptics were once again proved wrong.  For example, since 2002, Technorati has indexed 133,000,000 blogs, according to its State of the Blogosphere 2009 <technorati.com/blogging/feature/state-of-the-blogosphere-2009>. It reports that more than three quarters of all internet users read blogs. 
Many of my genre mates were early adopters <valuebasedmanagement.net/methods_rogers_innovation_adoption_curve.html>, despite the skeptics. Longtime readers of this column will recall that back in 2005, I offered up my personal list of the top 40 science fiction writers’ blogs <asimovs.com/_issue_0502/onthenet.shtml>. Most of those bloggers are still busy typing. For a more objective list, nip over to 42blips <42blips.dailyradar.com/blogs>, where you can see the top two hundred science fiction and fantasy blogs. 42blips ranks using the metric of inbound links from other blogs. Here are the top five: io9 <io9.com>, Sci Fi Wire <scifiwire.com>, SF Signal <sfsignal.com>, SFWA Blog <sfwa.org/category/news>, and Film » Sci-Fifi <slashfilm.com/category/movie-genres/scifi>. (This last was new to me—lively site!) 
Last fall I attended a workshop about online branding for artists. The one thing that took me by surprise was when the presenter made the point that a blog was probably more important than a website for the individual artist. I know, I know a blog is a website. But people return again and again to a blog that is updated regularly; visiting a static website is a sometime thing.  Moreover I have heard science fiction editors instruct their authors, new and old, that it’s really important to start a blog, like yesterday.

stats

But are they right? Even as the wisdom of 2010 seems to have turned in favor of blogs, the statistics are beginning to point elsewhere. Certainly blogging is on the decline among teens and young adults, according to the Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project  <pewinternet.org>. 
“In 2006, 28 percent of teens ages 12-17 and young adults ages 18-29 were bloggers, but by 2009 the numbers had dropped to 14 percent of teens and 15 percent of young adults. During the same period, the percentage of online adults over thirty who were bloggers rose from 7 percent blogging in 2006 to 11 percent in 2009.  Much of the drop in blogging among younger internet users may be attributable to changes in social network use by teens and young adults. Nearly three quarters (73 percent) of online teens and an equal number (72 percent) of young adults use social network sites. By contrast, older adults have not kept pace; some 40 percent of adults 30 and older use the social sites in the fall of 2009.”
The Big Three of social networking, as I type this, are Facebook <facebook.com>, Twitter <twitter.com> and LinkedIn <linkedin.com>. And again there are skeptics ready and willing to declare that social networking is nothing but a worthless time sink. Consider this, however: In March, according to CNN <money.cnn.com/2010/03/16/technology/facebook_most_visited/index.htm?hpt=T2>, “Facebook topped Google to become the most visited U.S. Web site last week, indicating a shift in how Americans are searching for content.”  The rise of Facebook has accompanied a corresponding decline for its progenitor, MySpace <myspace.com>. Back in December 2008, Facebook rising passed MySpace falling; the trends in either direction continue apace. Many now consign MySpace to the trash heap of internet history. Meanwhile in 2009, Twitter grew at a croggling 1,382 percent, according to Neilsen Online <http://en-us.nielsen.com>. However, data from 2010 thus far show a slight decrease in the number of unique visitors to Twitter, indicating that its initial surge of popularity has ebbed. Whether it will regain momentum remains to be seen. And then there is LinkedIn, which has about the same number of users as Twitter. It’s a great network to join if you’re in business, but not necessarily the place to discuss the latest issue of Asimov’s.

face the tweets

Like many neophytes at social networking, I had a Facebook page long before I knew what to do with it. I couldn’t wrap my mind around the concept of Friends—the coin of exchange on Facebook. I knew who my real life friends were, but what was my relationship to my Facebook friends, many of whom I had never met and probably never would meet? How did I decide which friend requests to honor and which to ignore? And if strangers could be Friends, what was appropriate to post on my Facebook page for them to read? What would be meaningful? It wasn’t until I decided to treat my Facebook page as the blog I never had that things began to come clear. I would show my writerly self only to my Friends and save personal stuff for email to family and friends—small “f.” And as for accepting Friend solicitations, check out the sensible policy outlined by social media blogger Shel Israel <redcouch.typepad.com/weblog/2007/08/my-facebook-fri.html>.
Although they share many attributes, there are two notable differences between Twitter and Facebook. The first is the famous and ironclad 140 character limit to each post, called a tweet. Some will string several tweets together to express more complex thoughts, but by and large the 140 character limit rules. The second is that Twitter is more democratic than Facebook. Instead of granting permission for people to friend you, in Twitter you have followers. Anyone can follow you, assuming they can find you. If you want to get to know your fave SF pro better, start by consulting the list of tweeting writers at Greententacles.com <greententacles.com/twitter>.
It used to be the case that the third major difference between Facebook and Twitter was that tweets happened in real time. This meant that Twitter was always up to date and that it was easy to have Twitter dialogues. The downside of the “now web” is that Twitter is a stream, and once a tweet floats by, it can be hard to retrieve. In 2008, Facebook tried to acquire Twitter, but when that failed it began to make itself more Twitter-like. Posts from your friends now stream by on the “News Feed” on your Facebook landing page.
It’s easier, in my opinion, to understand what Facebook is for than it is to understand the power of Twitter. If you must compose a blog post, you need only consider a Facebook post, whereas you more or less blurt a tweet. Yes, they are spontaneous and often as not ungrammatical, and those who decry the corruption of language to which tweets lend themselves have a point. But it strikes me that the 140 character limit imposes a welcome succinctness on our windy culture.
I have to admit that I was a Twitter skeptic until about a year ago, and so have lagged behind in my exploration of the Twitterverse. So I put the question Why tweet? to my 138 followers. Three of my writer friends responded almost immediately:
C.C. Finlay <ccfinlay.com>, “Why tweet? Because social networking takes up so much of my time now I no longer have any time to blog. @ccfinlay”
Greg van Eekhout <writingandsnacks.com>, “Because I can hang out with my friends, keep up with news, and do professional networking in one window (I use Seesmic, btw). @gregvaneekhout”
Steven Gould <eatourbrains.com/steve>, “My friends are all over the country (and world.) Getting micro-slice glimpses into their lives helps me keep in touch and while I’ll talk about my work/career as stuff happens, I hate it when people flog their work endlessly on twitter. @ StevenGould” (It took Steve two tweets to say all of this.)
Reviewer and webmaster extraordinaire Mark Watson <bestsf.net> wrote, “Twitter complements and enhances blogging + websites, replaces rss + some forums, has drawbacks, may be a fad, but elegant simple. @BestSF”
Science fiction and fantasy fan, Molly Kalafut, added, “Why Twitter? Watching authors talk to each other is fascinating. Plus, it’s my only chance to ever be quoted in Asimov’s! @mollie31416” Happy to oblige, Molly!
Greg mentioned Seesmic <seesmic.com>, one of many Twitter clients that allow you to manage multiple social media accounts. While you can post to both Facebook and Twitter from Seesmic, there are other clients, for instance, Tweetdeck <tweetdeck.com>, which allow you to update Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, and LinkedIn from the same window. It occurs to me that the ultimate fate of all these social media services may be merger and/or acquisition. Should that happen your SM (unfortunate acronym, that) identity will be as commonplace as your email address.

exit

While the various iterations of social networking may come and go, there is no question in my mind that it will play a central role in the expansion of the internet into our lives. As it changes the way we communicate, it will also change the way we think and feel. What, you don’t believe me? Scoff all you want, skeptics. Feel free to send your comments to my Twitter account, @jaspkelly. And don’t forget the 140 character limit.
Oh, and by the way, if anyone is really interested, I’d be happy to email you pictures of Thelma and Louise, my remarkable and talented cats.