I’m deeply wounded to hear that a website referred to me as an analogue MP after I attacked the over-use of BlackBerries and iPhones during the House of Commons proceedings.
Wounded – because I could be thought a techno-geek. I build my own PCs, maintain and set up my office networks, buy books on Linux, and hold endless, sad conversations about interoperability. I am not a technophobe.
I just notice that (1) sometimes people pay more attention to the virtual world in their hand than the real world around them; (2) sometimes it’s rude to do so (say, when talking to real people); and (3) sometimes its obsessive and pointless behaviour.
The Tweetminster site promises to link Westminster to the real world, and I do want MPs to have real friends, real debates and real conversations. But that is not the same thing as sending random messages to strangers in the virtual world. I question the value and indeed the intrinsic interest of a public running commentary on one’s life – partly because I want people and politicians to have more time for an inner (ie, non-public) life: reflection, thought, listening, reading, etc .
You don’t always get more interesting by talking all the time and there is no reason why tweeting constantly should be any different. I worry about people who can’t anymore just go to the gym, cafe or event without having to tell thousands they’re doing it . Just do it, I say !
For a politician to oppose tweeting, I am told by Labour’s Twitter czar, is like not looking ‘the public’ in the eye – but it is the addicted tweeter eyes, glued to their devices, who are (I observe) least likely to look the people around them in the face.
Tweeting may have a genuine place in show-business, where adoring fans hang on one’s every word – and maybe politics really is after all showbiz for ugly people – but does it get taken more seriously if encoded in instanteous messages. Had Churchill tweeted at Yalta “Just popping into see Joe Stalin – my what a huge sofa!” – would the event have become more relevant.
Ultimately I suspect that lightning-fast, perpetual communication does not much advance or deepen thought; rather, it encourages ill-thought out re-circulation of stock opinion and borrowed expressions.
Soren Kierkegaard, as garrulous and self-absorbed philosopher as you could find, said of the mass media – “the vast mass of the people have no opinions on many topics but, thanks to the press, here they come!” Tweeting – fun though it may be – is instant, undeveloped observation which makes the circulation of opinion easy without noticeably enhancing its critique.
* John Pugh is Liberal Democrat MP for Southport.
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
The Sun story about Chris Huhne that was a total invention (and which the other papers happily copied)
11 Liberal Democrat MPs vote for registrars to be exempt from marrying same sex couples
How Liberal Democrat MPs voted on same sex marriage amendments
Same sex Marriage: another Liberal Democrat victory
Opinion: Why Lib Dems should support the Referendum on the EU – and let’s have it before 2015
Report on internet pornography highlights need for education, not restriction
Michael Moore MP’s Westminster Notes
Opinion: The media have failed the public over the Woolwich atrocity
Baroness Sarah Ludford MEP writes…An EU-US trade deal would be good for Europe and for Britain
"Hard-working Brit" is US import
Today's Link-Love: May 24, 2013
Sandgate Beach joins the list of 'Seaside Award' winners
BIG NEWS - After a long 10+ year battle, Gibraltar finally admitted as a full member of UEFA, Europe's football governing body
Nine years for Cheadle women who killed ex-boyfriend
SMR Column: In Memory of David Lee Collins
Watch and laugh: Clarke and Dawe - Safeguarding the Integrity of Racing in NSW
Report on internet pornography highlights need for education, not restriction
Victory Parade
LiberalAl
Giles Goodall
John Minard
Melanie Harvey
paul barker
15 Comments
You’re roughly correct. What you’re talking about is called “Continuous partial attention”, it’s a well-known phenomenon (look it up). To some extent it is useful in small doses, but you cannot accomplish anything complex and well-reasoned in that manner. You need to allocate time without all the distractions, so that you can get things done.
Personally I find the people who spend all their time on the iphones and Blackberries best left alone doing that.
I think that, from the point of view of a politician’s role, you’re probably right. There are far better mediums for proper communication with constituents – Facebook seems to me to be a genuine success there.
However, I’m still interested in the issue-campaigning possibilities of Twitter, and it’s on account of those possibilities that I suspect politicians should want to keep an eye on it. At the moment it’s a successful campaigning tool purely because the media still report on what happens on it – the medium is still the message. E.g. Trafigura got boosted up the news agenda because the papers were interested in the fact that it was trending on Twitter, although no incredibly impactful direct action resulted from all the tweets, that I recall.
It will be interesting to see if Twitter manages to make the transition to a proper organising tool which carries on being useful even after the media have stopped reporting on it. By analogy, the media went through a period of obsession with Facebook and how many friends politicians had, but the really successful political uses of Facebook – Tom Brake’s surgeries being the obvious example – have turned out to be entirely different from the media’s focus.
I was called a “technophobe” for arguing against electronic voting and machine counting of votes.
I have never met any of my fellow professional computer scientists who disagree with me on that issue. People who really know their technology know when not to use it.
There are several issues here which seem to be getting conflated. Would it be nice if MPs were paying more attention in select committees? Sure. But as anyone who has visited Parliament in recent years can testify, if MPs aren’t twittering they can frequently be found sitting there organising their post, signing letters, et al.
This isn’t about twitter at all; it’s about how seriously MPs take select committees. If they had rather more authority (Ed Balls’ dismissal of the Education SC’s objection to his chosen Children’s Commission springs to mind) and were more independent of the whips, I suspect people would pay rather more attention. Ditto short debates. What is the point in them other than a rather more dignified version of the Jeremy Kyle show? If Parliament is irrelevant then it is no surprise that MPs find themselves doing other things. And it is no surprise that some people conclude that Twitter is a better use of their time. I suspect they are voting with their thumbs here.
Finally, if communicating via Twitter deeply sad, how much sadder is communicating by EDM? I’m the first to defend EDMs in the face of their detractors. But is this one really worth the paper it is printed on? It seems like a waste of resources to me. Surely there are more effective ways to put your point of view across?
We thought you might be interested in our thoughts on your piece: http://tweetminster.co.uk/posts/view/235327621
Well said John!
Twitter is great for spreading uninformed opinionated nonsense further than it deserves, but it shouldn’t be mistaken for advancing the cause of politics or representation.
Tweetminster, if you think people might be interested in your thoughts on John’s piece, you didn’t understand John’s piece!
Twitter is only useful as a conversation; if it’s one-sided then yes, your criticisms apply. But if it’s an interaction then it’s useful. It’s like any other tool; a person can use it for good or ill, or not use it at all. But it makes no sense to blame the tool for its misapplication.
Who’s blaming the tool? All he’s saying is: don’t sit around chatting when you’re supposed to be working. We don’t tolerate it when people do it by talking; why should we tolerate it when they’re doing it with the latest web toy?
But people who are tweeting from the commons are not being inattanetive, as they would be if they were just chatting, or signing letters or whatever; they are paying attention to what’s going on because they are tweeting about what’s going on.
We don’t allow talking in many places, not simply because it means people are not paying attention, but because it is distracting to others.
I take notes on my BlackBerry in meetings; it is silent and more effective for me than writing them. Is writing to be banned in meetings? And if typing a note for myself is ok, why not tying a brief note for others and sending it – because that is all Twitter is?
FInally, in the past month, I have picked up as much councillor casework through Twitter as I have through the post. I still get most casework through email and face to face contact, but Twitter and Facebook will soon catch up with phone as well as post.
People overlook, not only the trending possibilities of twitter, but also its use as a handy sort of running commentary of links.
I I were to post, say, 10 tweets with 6 blogposts, 2 articles/essays, 1 video of a news TV programme/Youtube video produced by independent bloggers, & 1 book description, with a sort of pithy phrases, eg. “I didn’t much care for this” or “Oh, I really enjoyed this” (but obviously employing langauge of the sort that’s frowned upon here- see my link for example) would that be a waste of time?
I know what you mean about the fraying of attention spans. But I find it doesn’t really happen with me. I read serious books & print journalism. I also take time out to, for example, walk & cycle during which I chew over everything I’ve taken in during the day. I regard this as the crucial bit- we do need to switch off. I am sceptical about mind-enhancing drugs because I think we shouldn’t just max what we have in our conscious minds, we should let inspiration come from outside or from some recess deep within from which it must be coaxed with patience.
Now weirdly, & make of this what you will, I am able to do this deep & powerful thinking whilst listening to an ipod. I don’t play it when reaing but I do when processing/digesting my thoughts during my spare time. I disagree with them as claim it draws attention away- I am listening to music now (Buffalo Springfield- thanks for asking!) & have no problem focusing on this, in fact one of the many advantages the web has over TV is that it allows tunes to be played at the same time.
I am not with them as attack Twitter. If some people misue it, that is essentially their issue rather than owt that is innate to twitter. Maybe it isn’t suited to some people, but it is suited to me. & I really think the majority of internet users can figure out a way of fitting in it, Facebook (another thing I find very valuable, Blogger etc).
I am backward in one respect & one respect only. I can’t see much use for these electronic books. The whole benefit of a printed page is that it isn’t a screen.
“when reading”
Quite apart from making a typo- I meant reading books rather than web pages.
They are two rather different things. I always like to read the papers first & then, if said journalist is on my ‘roll, I will read the article again online.
Can we have a ‘like’ button on LDV – I dont have the attention span to write a full answer saying how much I agree with John on this…