Are You Over Celebs on Twitter?

By Caroline Gilmour

Twitter’s a bit like a tea party in a mental institution where everyone’s a bit drugged up and none of the usual social rules apply. You can stroll up to anyone who looks quite interesting, say a couple of words, note a response (or not get offended if you don’t get one) then saunter off again to grab a few more cucumber sandwiches. There’s not much of a hierarchy at the party and nobody expects you to talk if you don’t want to. In fact, in many ways Twitter is a lonely misanthrope’s idea of heaven.

Back in the day, when Twitter started gaining critical mass due to Obama’s deftly handled Twitter campaigning and Stephen Fry’s bland but charming missives from around the world, the accessibility of celebrities on Twitter was like a little bit of gold dust in the rusty tea urn. They shimmered into view then shimmered out again, and if you were lucky, they might answer one of your queries. But usually, they wouldn’t. It was almost as if Twitter was redefining what a celebrity was, how they could act and how close we could get to them.

For a celeb, Twitter is perfect PR. Thousands of people are just sitting there waiting for you to talk at them but, happily, you don’t have to say anything that would worry your publicist. Just mention a co-star, a celeb mate or actually anything, anything at all and thousands of tweeters are enthralled. And it doesn’t matter how badly your career is going, your Twitter follower numbers are always going to be stellar because you’re competing against the proles.

But let’s remember these celebrities aren’t listening back. To his credit, when Stephen Fry first came onto Twitter he followed back everyone who followed him until the numbers became unmanageable. Most don’t. Look at their profiles – they usually have a ‘following’ list in double figures. They’re following the people they know in real life and that’s it.

So in effect, these celebrity chums are broadcasting to the world but only listening to their mates. They can hear your direct @replies, of course, but then those replies are to and about them. They don’t see the constant stream of minutiae and overheard conversations the rest of us do. And sadly enough, we wouldn’t expect them to.

You can sense the glee some of them get out of it, particularly UK chat-show host Jonathan Ross and daytime TV presenter Philip Schofield. Both are quite open, happy tweeters, and there’s nothing wrong with that. But is that enough? And after all, why wouldn’t they be?

There’s a sense that the Twitterverse is beginning to turn on them. Even the admired and saintly Stephen Fry had to deal with a lot of attacks in the past week because he expressed sadness at the death of Jade Goody and mentioned he’d developed a fondness for her.

Other celebrities faced similar reactions. Whatever the rights or wrongs of the matter (Jade’s a particularly divisive topic), it seemed a lot of tweeters didn’t feel the reaction was ‘real’ or was, perhaps, too easy and too predictable and joy of joys, could now say so to their faces.

 Another part of the problem is that these celebrities are no longer isolated voices mingling with the Twitter stream of consciousness – they’re talking to each other. This was particularly noticeable on Tuesday this week, the day after the announcement of the UK TV BAFTA nominations.

Major and minor celebs were all over each other on Twitter offering congratulations on their nominations. It was a bit like unexpectedly finding yourself in Soho House wedged between a couple of TV presenters that had sat down so hard on you they’d forgotten you were there. Even worse was the chiming in of congratulations from normally dignified ‘normal’ people.

The problem with this incestuous celeb chat, and the treatment of celebs as, well, celebs, is that it’s brought the insane, fawning world of fame worship to a place where, at its best, everyone is someone and no one matters more than anyone else.

Why spoil that just so you can know where Demi Moore was last Saturday? Ask yourself what any of the celebs you follow have done for you lately. Have they amused you? Have they answered a query? Have they chatted with you? Have they told you something you don’t know? If you can’t answer ‘yes’ to any of these questions, then click ‘remove’.  

 

POSTED IN: TECH
Wed, 25 Mar 2009 15:58 (GMT+00)
3 Responses
1.

sooooo over

Laura
Wed, 25-Mar-2009 16:00 GMT
2.

Very well put I must say. Refreshing to read a post about Twitter by someone who actually understands it.

The Style PA
Wed, 25-Mar-2009 16:49 GMT
3.

I'm glad I'm not the only one! It's nice for the developers to get so much publicity but Twitter going mainstream has put a bit of a dampener on the network. It seems more one-sided than it used to be. I'm far more interested in what everyday people are doing anyway!

I just unfollowed a whole heap of celebs and feel much better for it. I still like the work of these people, I just don't need censored thoughts and PR.

Halia Lane
Thu, 26-Mar-2009 04:54 GMT

Add Comment

Note: Your email address will be verified but will never be published on the site.

If you are a registered user, please Sign In.




The opinions expressed by the author and commenters are their own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BitchBuzz or any employer or organisation. The aforementioned are not responsible for the accuracy of content published.

social feed

@BitchBuzz: The [Digital] Revolution Will Be Gendered - from @katelaity on BitchBuzz Tech http://t.co/5bkxZo0x
09 Feb @ 10:46 GMT

search



buzz we love

Bitchin' Lifestyle
Vikki Chowney
Bangs and a Bun
Vintage Patisserie
Pop Justice
The Other Woman
Pamflet
Gala Darling
Red Velvet
Shape What's to Come
Bird's Eye View
Gala Darling
Bake & Destroy
Kris Atomic
Mark Johns
Garfunkel & Oates
India Knight
Kate Nash
Erin Gibson
Sarah Lacy
Vegansaurus
The Boss of You
Meantime Brewery
Make and Do with Perri