Not too long ago, a piece was published that hypothesized that the number of friends a person had on Facebook was directly related to how narcissistic that person was. Upon reading the article, I could definitely see the correlation there, but there’s another side of the coin (for people like me), and that’s just being too lazy to “de-friend” someone or to apathetic to not accept someone’s friend request (I mean, if that’s not the ultimate in passive aggression, then what is?).
Today, a new piece came out in the LA Times about Twitter being the newest form of “digital narcissism.” However, not all Twitter users are out to promote a product or service or employ a sort of public relations campaign, or even themselves. There are those user, like Jay Rosen, an NYU professor, that look to “mindcast” rather than inundate the Twitterverse with more meaningful Pink Floyd quotes.
The real question that comes to the forefront is whether or not, with a constant barrage of messages from any number of the people you follow (and some people follow thousands), how are we supposed to find that one gem of knowledge that’s actually useful to us. This type of social media (and the marketing therein) hardly seems like it could be effective.
And if we know that we’re spending our time sifting through otherwise inconsequential microblogs, can our participation in the Twitter dialogue be attributed to our own narcissism.
To read more, check out “On Titter, mindcasting is the new lifecasting.”