The Death of RSS and the Rise of Twitter

twitterWhen news broke yesterday that Google was dumping GoogleReader there were two kinds of reactions from bloggers noted Bruce Carton at Legal Blog Watch: Those for whom it was the end of the world and those who shrugged.

Carton was in full panic mode. I was a shrugger. I stopped using my RSS feed about a year or two ago, as it simply died a slow death for me.

And that’s because most anyone that I would have followed on RSS is placing links to their blog posts on Twitter. And Twitter also had the advantage of having (short) comments on those blog posts, which might also give you an idea if something was interesting or contentious. RSS was not just redundant, but inferior. (And, as I noted the other day, it can make you a better writer of legal briefs.)

Between Twitter, RSS, Facebook, LinkedIn, Google+, Instagram, blog post comments, YouTube, listservs, all manner of open discussion forums and whatever else is incubating now that I don’t know about, participating online can easily be a 24/7 job/hobby/distraction. But I have a real job and a real family, as most of you do, and I have to pick and choose. RSS lost. I also have an account at LinkedIn that I rarely check/use, I stopped using forums years ago, and I haven’t yet figured out what to do with Google+, or had the time to explore it.

I haven’t always been a fan of Twitter, and ripped it right after it came out. But I’ve come to appreciate its utility, an appreciation that comes only by carefully screening those I might follow.

When someone follows me, I generally look at their last three tweets (or “twits” as Scott Greenfield quite appropriately calls them). If those tweets are about a local accident, in the desperate hope the victim will log on to Twitter and find this brilliance, I know this is not a person to follow. So too with anyone in legal marketing. I need more phone calls and emails from these hucksters like I need a hole in the head.

But worse still are those that respond to an individual with something like “Ha!”, apparently forgetting that many others will see this gibberish, not just the one that sent the message being responded to. And even worse are those that write, “Thanks for the RT!” Thanks for sharing your insecurity, with me by noting how important an RT is to you.

Why anyone would want this crap clogging their Twitter feed and rendering it useless is beyond me. Links and short comments on relevant stories are what works.

And you know those folks that are following thousands of others? It’s pretty clear such folks are not reading their own Twitter feeds. I don’t give a damn if they follow me or not.

Last year I spoke at a conference on social media down in Washington DC. And a woman that followed after me was hit by an audience question: If someone follows you on Twitter, are you supposed to follow them back? “Yes!” she cried, as that was the polite thing to do. I almost fell off my chair as I recognized the entire audience had just become dumber for having heard this.

Twitter can be a good tool that certainly replaces RSS. Just be sure to carefully cull the list of those you follow. You can follow me if you want (@Turkewitz) but don’t be upset if I don’t follow back. My brain has a limited capacity.

That’s my two pesos. Bruce Carton’s mileage will vary. And remember that no one will ever put the number of your Twitter follows on your headstone.

Elsewhere on the subject:

Really Simple Sign of the Future (Greenfield)

The End of GoogleReader: A Sign of Blogging’s Decline and Lessons for Lawyers (Elefant)

 

Tags:

6 Responses Leave a comment

  • Bruce Carton 2013.3.15 at 10:28 | Quote

    I guess I could create a new Twitter list of several hundred Twitter feeds for the many sources I now try to sift through daily on RSS. But that sounds like a project that will take many hours. More likely I’ll try to find a way to transfer the feeds to a different feed reader.

    I wouldn’t say I’m in panic mode over it, more just annoyed: RSS via Google Reader “ain’t broke” for me and I really don’t want to spend the time to fix it.

  • Eric Turkewitz 2013.3.15 at 10:48 | Quote

    I didn’t make a decision to shift, it just happened gradually as my Twitter feed started to encompass stuff I was following via RSS. If I was told I had to take care of something in the next few months it would have felt like a project.

  • Bruce Carton 2013.3.15 at 10:55 | Quote

    @Eric Turkewitz – I follow 700+ people on Twitter. Too much noise to capture all of the posts, etc. I’d want to make sure not to miss. I guess you can use TweetDeck or something to organize just the sources and weed out other stuff? Again–”ain’t nobody got time for that.”

  • Eric Turkewitz 2013.3.15 at 11:09 | Quote

    I follow 700+ people on Twitter. Too much noise to capture all of the posts, etc.

    Therein lies the problem, perhaps? If you cull the noise, you might have a better tool?

  • Old Geezer 2013.3.15 at 12:20 | Quote

    “And remember that no one will ever put the number of your Twitter follows on your headstone.”

    If you have not already applied for a patent on an Internet-enabled headstone then I might do so myself. Google would love it! China would make it. Apple would sell it. Samsung would offer a better alternative with a different OS. ATT/Verizon will figure a way to bill you in the afterlife (in either destination).

    Genius!

  • Eric Turkewitz 2013.3.15 at 12:27 | Quote

    Samsung would offer a better alternative with a different OS.

    I think you meant to write, Samsung will steal the interface and offer as much of a clone as they can get away with under IP laws.

Comments are closed.


The New York Personal Injury Law Blog is sponsored by its creator, Eric Turkewitz of The Turkewitz Law Firm. The blog might be considered a form of attorney advertising in accordance with New York rules going into effect February 1, 2007 (22 NYCRR 1200.1, et. seq.) As of July 14, 2008, Law.com became an advertiser, as you can see in the sidebar. Law.com does not control the editorial content of the blog in any way.

Throughout the blog as it develops, you may see examples of cases we have handled, or cases from others, that are used for illustrative purposes. Since all cases are different, and legal authority may change from year to year, it is important to remember that prior results in any particular case do not guarantee or predict similar outcomes with respect to any future matter, including yours, in which any lawyer or law firm may be retained.

Some of the commentary may be become outdated. Some might be a minority opinion, or simply wrong. No reader should consider this site (or any other) to be authoritative, and if a legal issue is presented, the reader should contact an attorney of his or her own choosing for advice.

Finally, we are not responsible for the comments of others that may be added to this site.