Your Twitter Identity

The Associated Press reports that the rapper Kanye West posted a scathing essay on his blog criticizing Twitter for allowing users to assume his identity on the social networking service. He called on Twitter to suspend any and all accounts that were impersonating him. The complete text of this essay follows with original punctuation intact:

Photo Credit: Tyler Curtis(This spaz comes courtesy of losers making fake Kanye West Twitter accounts) I DON'T HAVE A FUCKING TWITTER... WHY WOULD I USE TWITTER??? I ONLY BLOG 5 PERCENT OF WHAT I'M UP TO IN THE FIRST PLACE. I'M ACTUALLY SLOW DELIVERING CONTENT BECAUSE I'M TOO BUSY ACTUALLY BUSY BEING CREATIVE MOST OF THE TIME AND IF I'M NOT AND I'M JUST LAYING ON A BEACH I WOULDN'T TELL THE WORLD. EVERYTHING THAT TWITTER OFFERS I NEED LESS OF. THE PEOPLE AT TWITTER KNOW I DON'T HAVE A FUCKING TWITTER SO FOR THEM TO ALLOW SOMEONE TO POSE AS ME AND ACCUMULATE OVER A MILLION NAMES IS IRRESPONSIBLE AND DECEITFUL TO THERE FAITHFUL USERS. REPEAT... THE HEADS OF TWITTER KNEW I DIDN'T HAVE A TWITTER AND THEY HAVE TO KNOW WHICH ACCOUNTS HAVE HIGH ACTIVITY ON THEM. IT'S A FUCKING FARCE AND IT MAKES ME QUESTION WHAT OTHER SO CALLED CELEBRITY TWITTERS ARE ACTUALLY REAL OR FAKE. HEY TWITTER, TAKE THE SO CALLED KANYE WEST TWITTER DOWN NOW .... WHY? ... BECAUSE MY CAPS LOCK KEY IS LOUD!!!!!!!!!

As of this composition, Twitter has complied with Mr. West's request as accounts such as "kanyewest" have been suspended. However, those with the user names "WestKanye" and "MrKanyeWest" continue to operate. The co-founder of Twitter, Biz Stone, said that Twitter is looking at how best to implement an account verification system.

This incident received much publicity in the national media primarily due to Mr. West's profanity-laden blog posting and his unique grammar. But little has been said about Mr. Stone's assertion that Twitter will look at ways to ensure that situations like this do not occur in the future. How can this be achieved?

The issues Twitter has faced with celebrity impersonations have been numerous. A previous entry on this site detailed the celebrity impersonation of Dr. Robert H. Schuller, the famed televangelist. It was noted that Twitter's policy states that "pretending to be another person or business as entertainment or in order to deceive is impersonation." The criterion used is this: "Would a reasonable person be aware that it's a joke?" In the meantime, the approach taken is that absent any complaints, the assumption is that registrants are who they claim to be.

Since even before the famous New Yorker cartoon whose caption read "On the Internet, nobody knows you are a dog," the question of verifying one's identity in the online community has been a concern. The national media has focused on the celebrity aspect of this issue. But because a celebrity is, by nature, a public figure, sorting out the impersonators is a relatively easy task. By nature of the publicity and notice that a celebrity can generate, all doubt as to which accounts are legitimate can be eliminated.

Not everyone, however, is a public figure. What can be done when a normal citizen wants to defend or establish his or her identity on Twitter that is believed to be hijacked? For example, if John Q. Public wants to assume the identity of his neighbor John Doe, how would Twitter stop this? What account verification system of which Mr. Stone speaks can ever solve what is essentially identity theft? These questions become more important as online social networking assumes an ever-more important role in our lives.

The federal government addressed its own concerns regarding the identification of individuals by compelling its citizens to apply for Social Security numbers, which have become a de facto national identification system. One can change his or her looks, name, even gender for all that matters, and the Social Security number will serve as the unique identifying marker differentiating one person from all others. Twitter, obviously, cannot use this method.

In the end, the aggrieved may not have any recourse. So a person with an ax to grind with a neighbor can wreak havoc by issuing tweets under his or her assumed name and little could be done to stop it. Teenagers in school can torment the less popular among them by doing the same. On Twitter, a person is who they say they are. And, unless you're a celebrity with the power to compel media attention, that seems unlikely to change anytime soon.

Does God Hear Tweets?

Time reported how some churches across the country are integrating Twitter into their Sunday services. The article focused on two pastors who have been at the forefront of this nascent movement. John Voelz and David McDonald, from the Westwinds Community Church in Jackson, Michigan, spent two weeks educating members of their congregation on how to use Twitter and prepared for it by increasing the bandwidth in their church.

They integrated Twitter by having congregants issue tweets during the service that subsequently would be flashed onto large video screens for all to see. Other tweets involve questions for the pastors to be answered at a later time. Also, congregants can tweet their thoughts in real time to see if a fellow member will respond in kind. Often, there's a tag-team approach: Mr. McDonald preaches while Mr. Voelz tweets conversation starters such as:

In what way do you feel the spirit of God moving within you? Discuss.

Mr. Voelz regularly receives emails from congregants of other churches inquiring how they can use Twitter as well. Among the questions asked: Got any tips to persuade church leadership this is way cool?

Various studies have shown that while Americans retain their spiritual devotion, church attendance has been declining steadily for many years. It has been an ever-present goal of church elders to attract the more youthful of their faith to attend services, planting seeds of devotion for the next generation. One way to do this is to turn to technology.

This is nothing new. Religious institutions have always embraced technological advances in communication to increase the number of their followers. The earliest radio and television programs were hosted by pioneers such as Aimee Semple McPherson and have led through the years to personalities who were especially adept in the new media including Pat Robertson and Joel Osteen. The Internet, however, has presented more of a challenge. Religion has been slow in taking advantage of the online world when compared to the realms of business, sports, and entertainment. With Twitter, that may now be changing.

The efforts of the aforementioned pastors form Westwinds are laudable in its unique approach. Too often, institutions with such a strong tradition can see change as a threat rather than an opportunity. There are, however, consequences to consider. Is their embrace of Twitter coming at the expense of the message of the church?

It has been proven definitively that the ability of most people to multitask effectively is limited. When a congregant tweets during a service, is he or she still paying attention to the pastor's words as the thumbs begin their furious tapping? The primary purpose of attending church services is to hear the word of God through the preaching of the Gospel and to form a bond with fellow congregants in their shared faith. Twitter can work towards such goals depending on how it is used and in what context.

Perhaps the best place for Twitter in relation to church is to relegate its use to before and after services. The ability to connect with fellow believers using Twitter is not necessary when everyone is already gathered together in one place. At that point, it not only distracts the individual staring at his or her cell phone, but, most likely, those nearby. This is another example of forcing a technology to solve a problem it was not meant to address. And it poses an important question to anyone who embarks on such efforts: Is it worth the risk integrating a new technology in church at the expense of God's message? An answer in the affirmative may turn out to be a Faustian bargain.

The Medium is the Message

The title of this entry is the famed postulation by Marshall McLuhan, the Canadian scholar of the mid-twentieth century. In his book, Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man, he elaborated on this concept by stating that it is the medium conveying the content, rather than the content itself, that has a greater effect on society.

Further, Mr. McLuhan believed that the content distracts us from what is important, which are the structural changes in our affairs that the new medium introduces over time. He referred to these changes as the "unintended consequences" that are not obvious at first, but are clear in retrospect. These changes include the inter-personal dynamics that the new medium brings with it as well as the effect the medium has on the individual's understanding of the content.

Mark Federman, an expert on Mr. McLuhan from the University of Toronto, wrote: "A McLuhan message always tells us to look beyond the obvious and seek the non-obvious changes or effects that are enabled, enhanced, accelerated or extended by the new thing."

So how does this relate to Twitter? On the most basic level, it is clear that the medium itself, still in its infancy, draws the overwhelming attention from the mass media. A random sampling of Google News at any given time demonstrates that the focus of many articles is, ostensibly, on Twitter itself and not the content. For example, when San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom recently announced his intention to run for governor, the fact that he did so using Twitter arguably garnered more attention than the mere fact that he is running for statewide office.

This is not a surprise as it's been seen before. In the mid-1990s, when the World Wide Web began its infiltration into the public consciousness, newspapers and television reports noted how companies were using the incipient medium as a marketing tool. The first time that a major advertiser posted a Web address in a television commercial demanded wide attention as well.

On a deeper level, the unintended consequences of Twitter on those who use it are beginning to emerge. A recent report covered here spoke to how this new medium can affect one's morality; another as to whether our mental faculties are adjusting properly. Attention spans, always under pernicious assault, particularly since the advent of the cable channel MTV, are suffering even more from a medium whose message limit of 140 characters is strictly enforced.

Another consequence is how we interface with society on a daily basis -- Twitter has taken distraction to a whole new level. Much like a person on vacation who is more concerned with taking photographs of the scenery rather than enjoying it for its own sake, Twitter transports its users out of the moment and into the online world. Its simple question enticing one to issue a tweet is emblematic of this: What are you doing? By definition, the answer is: writing a tweet. A person must take him- or herself out of the moment, out of the human experience to answer that question. The medium truly is the message.

What does the future hold for Twitter?  A report from media tracker Nielsen Co. revealed that sixty percent of Twitter users don't revisit the site one month after they join. This number may only grow as late adopters, not the original target audience for Twitter, give the new technology a try. Regardless, much like the Web of more than a decade ago, after the hype from the mass media runs its course, the focus will move from the medium to the content. That may not bode well for Twitter.

With the Web, the public realized that this new form of communication had a profound effect on our everyday lives. How we purchase, invest, travel, and disseminate information changed forever. It became an engine of commerce for both its producers and consumers. The medium, now an accepted part of society, is no longer the message. The content matters.

As for Twitter, when the mass media turns its attention away from the spectacle and stops covering stories about athletes tweeting during games or politicians tweeting during speeches, the emphasis on the medium will recede and the content will move to the fore. At that point, a time coming soon, the public will assess the utility and necessity of Twitter. Just what are we communicating with all these tweets about the minutia of our lives? Their answers will determine Twitter's future. That doesn't mean it will go away. More likely, both the medium and the message simply won't matter so much anymore.