I know I've blogged a lot about Twitter (especially for someone who doesn't even Tweet), but, I promise, there is a reason for all of it. Lately, it seems that Twitter is everywhere: if it's not someone inviting people to follow him/her on Twitter, it's a news article questioning the effect that's being had on the business world.
I think the first time I noticed the networking site's increasing popularity was when CNN Breaking News and Ashton Kutcher competed to see who would be the first to reach 1 million followers. Kutcher pledged that upon winning, he would make a donation to Malaria No More, and CNN announced that, regardless of the outcome, it would match his donation. When Kutcher won, he donated $100,000 to the medical charity (see FOXNews' Ashton Kutcher Beats CNN, Becomes First 'Twitter Millionaire'), and nothing against Kutcher, but I found myself wondering what it meant that people were more interested in following a celebrity than a reputable news network.
This morning Forbes posted an article by Mike Schaffner, IT director of Cameron's Valve and Measurement Organization. Schaffner writes, "I've even suggested that Twitter has a place in the corporate world. Although I see the value in Twitter, I am beginning to wonder about its long-term viability." He cites search and capacity issues as the basis of his concern, ultimately questioning if Twitter is growing at a faster pace than it can handle.
If Twitter can't keep up with its ever-growing number of users, will it lose them as fast as it has been gaining them? And if people are no longer Tweeting, what will they use to replace Twitter, since they'll likely be accustomed to having as a part of their daily life?
eRb
For more articles that Schaffner has written for Forbes: By Mike Schaffner
No comments:
Post a Comment