Tweeter? Or twit?

I just became a Twitterer. But I feel like a twit. After three days, I’m still scratching my head and wondering why I don’t feel the love.

I set up a Twitter account because I thought I should. As a communicator, it’s important that I understand ALL media, both new and old. Having worked as a  reporter and editor back in the golden days of newspapers (no, I did NOT work for William Randolph Hearst), I think I understand the old media pretty well.

But, things are changing. If you pay any attention to the “new media” gurus these days — and even some of the old media gurus — printed news will soon take its place beside the dodo in the American Museum of Things We Killed that Once Were Useful.

According to some prognosticators, papers like the Washington Post will eventually close their printing plants, fire all their J-school-trained reporters and devote all of their resources to quick-hit Internet postings by man-on-the-street pundits. When that happens, I don’t want to miss a beat . . .  er,  tweet.

I also set up a Twitter account because if there’s one thing I can’t stand, it’s being behind the times.  I am now waiting for someone to ask  “do you understand social media?” just so I can say, “of course, I do! The more social the better! Tweet me @genemonteith!”

Twitter is my latest step in a slow journey into the realm of social media.  I joined Facebook about a year ago, becoming one of the baby boomers who are now crowding out the college kids for dominance of that site. I created a Facebook account to monitor an alumni group, but I stayed because I found it an extraordinary way to find and and keep up with people I hadn’t seen or spoken to in 30 years.

I started Out of Nowhere earlier this year as both an outlet for my pent-up ramblings and as a way to understand the blogosphere more fully. I’ve learned a tremendous amount since then, though Out of Nowhere remains a crapshoot for readers seeking socially redeeming commentary.

Now, I’m Twittering and waiting for the payback.

I have four followers. I could have a lot more if I wanted to be followed by porn spammers and marketers. At the same time, I’m following 15 people — two friends and 13 people I don’t know, ranging from news commentators, to Lance Armstrong, to The Onion.

I do like the immediacy of the posts and the ability to see at a quick glance what others are posting. But I’m not really feeling at home with Twitter in the way I immediately felt at home with Facebook.

First of all, the Twitter site is graphically dead — boring, in fact. I’m guessing that the value lies not just in the postings of what your friends or business colleagues are doing, but their links to informational resources. I’m also guessing that its mobility — it can be accessed away from your computer in ways that Instant Messager could not — is a plus.

But I don’t have a Blackberry and have never used IM. So, Twitter has left me, to this point, underwhelmed.  Which makes me feel bad — like something is wrong with me — like a twit.

But, I’m going to hang in there, because I know other people do find it useful and I’m optimistic that, eventually, I will tap the unlimited potential of Twitter. Why, just this afternoon I got a tweet that links to a CIO magazine article about Twitter’s potential for business users.

Please wish me an epiphany that will bring everything into stunning focus for me this week. In the meantime, if you don’t hear much from me here, it may be because I’m working hard to fall in love with Twitter.

TV Twitter

Is this the new face of broadcast journalism?

You decide.

Our local NBC-TV affiliate this week launched a new “interactive” format for its 5:30 p.m. newscast. In announcing its new program on Feb. 13, the station told visitors to its Web site that:

“With the rise in social networking/journalism via blogs, chats, Twitter and Facebook, @5:30 on 4 will revolve around these interactive tools to get viewers and users feedback. Instead of sitting behind the anchor desk in the studio, Cabot Rea and Ellie Merritt will deliver the news and interact with viewers from the heart of the NBC 4 newsroom, in front of their computers.”

I’m never home at 5:30, so am eternally grateful to The Other Paper, the alternative news in this town, for writing about the change yesterday and wondering in print whether “Colleen Marshall (also at TV-4) will show us her Tweets.”

While I haven’t watched @5:30 on 4 live, I have watched a couple of the archived shows. And, as proof of my own tech-savviness, I’ve made some screen captures. Here’s the first one:

Anybody who thinks news anchors have a cushy job should just look at the conditions Cabot and Ellie work under. No corner office, no mahogany desk. Even my cube is bigger than theirs.

While they broadcast the news as before, they invite viewers to weigh in with their opinions on the news.  And so, in the middle of the show, we get missives like this:

One of the hallmarks of the program is the mobility of the anchors. Here, Ellie walks through the newsroom to meet up with a waiting interview subject.

In this particular case, Ellie interviewed a respected healthcare professional at the same cramped desks they have to work at — while standing over her.

OK, I’m going to take a deep breath and tell you what I think. . .

First, I owe you a disclaimer. I come from a print journalism background. We never liked broadcast journalists anyway, because they tended to show up uninformed and ask stupid questions. And they would set up their cameras in front of us. We hated that.

Second, I know journalism is changing and we have to be open to that. But is TV-4 doing me a service by telling me what Jim in Pataskala thinks about snow removal? Hell, I can ask him myself. And if I want the news, I want it first without Jim’s opinion on it.

Third, I don’t hate the walking-around-the office format, but they need to confine their wanderings to a smaller area, instead of traipsing all over God’s green earth.

But there is a more fundamental issue here than format or style. Namely, does this greater interaction with the audience better inform people?  Does it not only draw people in but do so in a way that allows them to make the decisions that need to be made in a democracy?

In this era of new media, my biggest question always has been this: Who will do the real work that needs to be done? The man on the street? Or the women and men who, through our best days of journalism, have asked tough questions, made a hundred phone calls, filed Freedom of Information Act requests and never taken no for an answer. The kind of journalism that pulls the curtains away to reveal what’s really going on in Oz.