Rainer Seiffert's Blog

Essay from 17 July 2009 with additions up to 2016

Twitter – Opportunity and Challenge of a New Communication Culture

Nothing remains as it is – neither our communication system nor our media landscape. Technical development is advancing ever more rapidly, and the shift toward a digital society represents an enormous leap forward. More and more people, especially younger ones, are turning away from traditional media. Instead of newspapers, radio or television, they use social networks such as Twitter and Facebook to inform themselves and exchange ideas.

This free flow of information fosters the development of more mature citizens worldwide. People can now inform themselves more freely about political events and social interconnections. The new possibilities not only contribute to improved education but can also lead to greater self-awareness. Yet it is already becoming apparent that this new freedom does not act in a purely enlightening way.

In recent years Twitter has developed into a rapidly growing platform with around 800 million users. In a maximum of 140 characters, short messages can be sent to a large number of subscribers – known as followers. Precisely for this reason the network has become highly significant for politics, business and private individuals alike.

It is said that Barack Obama significantly supported his election campaigns with Twitter. The new American President Donald Trump now uses the platform as one of his most important information and communication media and relies less frequently on conventional media. The change is also noticeable in Germany: only a few years ago “Twitterers” were ridiculed. Today government spokesperson Steffen Seibert and numerous ministries tweet.

According to available statistics, around 14 percent of Germans over 50, 24 percent of those over 30 and already 70 percent of those under 30 are registered on social networks. The younger generation in particular increasingly obtains its information directly from these platforms. In the United States and Great Britain there are users with several million followers. Similar developments are emerging in Germany as well.

Free networking enables the meeting of supply and demand on many levels. At the same time, however, dynamics are emerging that run counter to optimistic expectations of a more enlightened public. Users’ attention has become a scarce currency. Posts that trigger strong emotions – especially outrage, fear or moral indignation – spread far more quickly than measured, differentiated statements. The virality of outrage rewards exaggeration and punishes nuance. What appears as democratic directness can thus contribute to the flattening and heating up of public debate.

Added to this is the effect of algorithms, which is already perceptible even if their long-term consequences cannot yet be fully foreseen. The platforms preferentially show users content that matches their previous interests and opinions. This creates filter bubbles and echo chambers: people mainly encounter like-minded individuals, while opposing positions become rarer or invisible altogether. The result is a gradual polarization. Complex social questions are reduced to simple friend-enemy schemes. Public debate culture is changing – away from the laborious search for common solutions and toward a culture of mutual confirmation and symbolic boundary-drawing.

Every user should therefore carefully examine which private information they disclose. Anyone who wishes to send messages not intended for the public should restrict the public status of their account. It also seems of little use to spread trivialities. Anyone who wants to use the platform seriously should strive to post interesting and substantial messages. Yet even well-intentioned contributions are drawn into the vortex of the attention economy. The logic of the platform primarily favors reach and emotional resonance rather than truth or responsibility.

A central feature of Twitter as a social network is mutual following. Anyone who wants to build a larger readership would do well to follow their followers back. Only in this way does genuine exchange arise. Many institutional accounts – celebrities, authorities, municipalities or newspapers – still shy away from this step. Yet with several thousand followers it can hardly be expected that all of them have been equally “vetted.” In the United States even personalities such as Barack Obama and Arnold Schwarzenegger have for years followed tens of thousands of users. Nevertheless the question remains open whether reciprocal following alone is sufficient to counteract the fragmentation of the public sphere.

Twitter offers concrete opportunities for businesses and the self-employed. Through regular, informative posts it is possible to attract visitors to one’s own homepage or blog. One can position oneself as an expert – provided one does not overwhelm readers with advertising. Twitter’s rules explicitly prohibit spam. Here too, however, visibility follows the logic of attention. Serious information competes with loud, simplifying messages.

The power of Twitter to promote understanding among nations should not be underestimated. Practically anyone today can connect with people from all nations. More and more people can obtain and disseminate news without censorship. These possibilities can help bring us closer to the old dream of a brotherhood of nations. Through increased transparency, societies can gain in humanity and tolerance. Yet the same technology that enables understanding can equally foster isolation and mutual radicalization. The hope for a more tolerant and enlightened age is justified – but by no means self-evident. It depends on whether users and platform operators actively counter the foreseeable dangers of fragmentation and a culture of outrage.

A personal example may illustrate the ambivalence of the platform: Since March 2009 I have been using Twitter, initially to report on my life and work, later primarily to disseminate uplifting and inspiring quotations. The motivation was and remains to set something positive against the many negative news items. By now there are more than 20,000 posts. In 2010, together with then around 380,000 followers, I succeeded in searching for the hit-and-run driver who had struck my son and left him lying dying. The campaign generated an unprecedented number of tips. The perpetrator was caught. It was the first major Twitter manhunt in Germany and impressively demonstrated the potential of the medium. At the same time, this very experience makes one aware of how powerful – and how easily steerable – the dynamics of attention and emotional mobilization are.

Twitter is more than a short-message service. It is a tool that enables participation and direct communication to a degree previously unknown. The opportunities are great. Yet the platform dynamics – attention as currency, the virality of outrage, the formation of filter bubbles and the resulting polarization – are already recognizable and will presumably permanently change the culture of public debate. Whether technical progress becomes social progress depends not on the technology alone, but on whether we are prepared to clearly name its dark sides and deal with them responsibly.