Twitter “RT” tag use could be curtailed
January 7th, 2009 |
I was involved in some (very brief given the triviality of the topic) discussions about the etiquette and formatting for the “RT” or retweet tag on Twitter. I think most current uses are unnecessary. The only time I use “RT” in an update is when republishing an original thought.
The intent of the RT tag, according to most people I have discussed this with, is to “give credit” to someone for the original content, but I would argue that a link to someone else’s blog post or news article isn’t original content in the first place and so the “courtesy” is an empty one. And in a 140-character world, those three characters (RT plus a space) could be put to much better use.
Update: Props to PR Newswire for this very complicated quintuple RT, five “RT” tags in a single tweet. Very nicely done!
Tags: | Sphere This |
Retweets have always intrigued me. I think they are a way to share info and give a “source”, not exactly credit. I believe that the “RT” is the Twitter equivalent to a “Digg” on Digg or a “clip” in socialmedian. @pitchengine
Comment by Jason Kintzler — January 7, 2009 @ 2:16 pm
I agree with Jason.
It’s about wanting other people to see something and giving credit to the person who notified you about it. That’s all.
Plus a RT is really easy to spread stuff. Just two clicks and you’re done.
Comment by Bas - Serial Expat — January 7, 2009 @ 2:21 pm
I am going to have to side with Jason on this one too. I actually discover interesting people to follow by looking at the source of a RT. Like giving props to a DJ. They didn’t write the song but they DID play it which is worth something IMHO.
Comment by Rob Taylor — January 7, 2009 @ 2:33 pm
It may be overkill, but when posting links to blog posts where the author is on twitter, i try to credit them, so that further RT’s credit both me and the original author.
It may seem silly, but I think giving credit where credit is due is a big part of the authenticity implicit in the Twitter network (well, in mine, anyway)
Comment by Jeremy — January 7, 2009 @ 5:11 pm
I also agree with the others. It not only let’s you give credit to a source, but by retweeting you can maximize dissemination of quality content. The original tweeter may be following a completely different group of people than I am; by retweeting I am offering his good content to a group of followers he would not have access to, other than thru the public time line. I also like to retweet messages regarding worthy causes, such as charitable donations like Mail Our Military, or even amber alerts and word of the passing of someone of note. Strangely enough, I hardly ever retweet my own stuff.
Comment by The Harriman Team — January 7, 2009 @ 6:23 pm
RT 4. … by Jeremy
Comment by George Frink — January 7, 2009 @ 6:28 pm
Am I the only one to see both sides? Yes, the RTs can become redundant. OTOH, attribution is important, and I also agree that useful things can be learned by seeing where the tweet came from originally.
So, I’m ambivalent. I think they don’t bother me enough, yet. How about, when retweeting, you clean it up and just leave the original?
Comment by Hadass — January 7, 2009 @ 10:32 pm
I find the RTs useful as they give me the chance to check someone’s profile, check their blog link (if they have one) and consider whether they are someone who might be worth following. They may be a bad thing if the tweet only has a series of RT @names and no other content - that is 100% pointless.
BTW, your blog is unreadable on my laptop with the current colour scheme, I had to use FF “NO PAGE STYLE” to read it.
Comment by Dougie — January 8, 2009 @ 1:24 am
Twitter doesn’t have a lot of complexity. Retweeting is simply a way to repost a tweet, like when I bookmark something on Delicious or use trackback. Who wouldn’t want something they said to be spread amongst a greater network?
Comment by Ryan Jerz — January 8, 2009 @ 5:29 pm
A few thoughts–
Some of the external apps use your RT rate as part of their measurement of your influence. I don’t know whether their calculations are particularly useful to very many, but in a way it reminds of me of the use of citations in academia, as a measure of the value of your work to others.
I agree with those who value the RT as a way of finding interesting people to follow–I use them that way as well.
I like it when I can see the actual form of expression someone uses. I don’t plagiarize the wit of others, & I don’t want someone passing my words off as theirs if I’ve made a semi-original observation. Just sharing a link, I don’t care.
If I’ve found a link worth following I’ll write my own comment on it & include a “thx to @so-and-so” for pointing it out. Not just an echo, but an amplification with variation, so it’s more of a conversation. (and yes, this takes more character spaces, but then that’s always the challenge w/tweets!)
@BarbChamberlain
Comment by Barb Chamberlain — January 11, 2009 @ 11:09 pm
Every RT I’ve received was a personal reply to someone that was of no interest, or even understandable, to anyone else. Before I googled “RT Twitter,” I had decided that it meant “Reply To” and was a device to force the world to receive your nonsense… nonsense to everyone except the person replied to.
Comment by Lane — April 22, 2009 @ 11:54 am