Twitter: Trivial. Beautifully So.

By Ryan Turner | Nov 11, 2008 11:18:37 AM

I wrote a post a year and a half ago on Twitter in which I identified two types of use for it. This was at the height of the initial buzz about Twitter, and while some folks were really excited to finally see an HTML / SMS / IM social application, others worried aloud that Twitter, for the same reasons it offers such a low threshold of entry, would also tend to erode the quality of social relationships online. The thoughtful anti-Twitter point of view was that it encourages triviality, and the gist of my post was that while that may be true, there are times when trivialities are useful.

Since I wrote that post, I've become an avid Twitterer, and I have to say my perspective on Twitter, and indeed on triviality, has changed. I now see triviality as maybe the critical element of truly meaningful relationships, online and off, and Twitter has accordingly become one of the cornerstone services of my personal and professional social lives.

That sounds crazy, I know, and while it may be true that I am prone to crazy-sounding declaratives, I'm actually not kidding about this. I now use Twitter at work very frequently, mostly within my team, and it has improved our functioning and, dare I say it, made us closer, more personally connected.

Let me float an assertion: The deeper the relationship, the greater the proportion of it dedicated to triviality; and beyond, say, 90% triviality, the relationship isn't a relationship at all. And likewise with meaningful interactions--if everything is meaningful, it's not a relationship, it's therapy.

So here is my Bullseye Diagram of Love, illustrating the way I'm starting to envision online social systems supporting healthy relationships:

So I'm arguing for Twitter, or an analogous triviality service (ha!) as a supplement to existing relationships, not as a full-fledged social channel in and of itself. As a social network, I actually do think it's useless, or worse. And you can take that as a caveat.

But I am saying I think triviality in general and as supported by Twitter, in both personal and professional settings, is indispensable--that we can and should deliberately design it into social systems.

New and Improved WAA Standards Definitions

By Judith Pascual | Nov 11, 2008 7:46:00 AM

For three years now, the standards committee has been working on standardizing web analytics terms.  Well, we've revamped the August 2007 release.  Besides incorporating the feedback we received last year, we've added three new terms and created the 'Ask your vendor' section.  This was done to encourage vendor involvement and eventually vendor compliance.

As a member, I have had the privilege of working with a diverse group of individuals.  As many know, the committee is made up of practitioners, consultants and vendors.  We have many interesting and informative conversations.  Our experiences and represented website types vary.  It is important to understand that we take the different site types into consideration.  Our definitions are broad enough to cross all site types and we attempt to ensure we comment when there are known exceptions.

Now, as co-chair, along with Angie Brown, WA Manager at Elsevier, I can truly appreciate the amount of work that went into making this all happen.  About 20 individuals, on a weekly basis, worked on this version of the document.  Though not all vendors are represented in our committee, actual tool experience with the top vendors is.  Everything from the weekly meetings, working with the WAA board, collaborating on researching ANSI (American National Standards Institute), experts in this matter, to having the IAB (Interactive Advertising Bureau) review, takes great effort and planning.

Even a term such as 'Hits' whereby one can expect to be done in just a few minutes took an hour.  We made an attempt to cover all possibilities.  Yes, I admit it.  I thought it would take minutes and hoped we could add a little humor to the comment section and put in Jim Sterne's definition, "Hits - How Idiots Track Sites."  - Yes, I know that would probably not hold.

In an attempt to be more transparent, we are leaving the document in draft form until early 2009 and open for public commentary.  We really do want the feedback.  We have also detailed what the document is/ is not and how we are addressing social media, etc.

We are looking forward to seeing how people will respond.  We had a Webcast last week to motivate industry involvement.  It will be interesting to see what kind of feedback we get.  Hopefully, you will be one of the people joining in the fun.

For the document and feedback click below:
http://waablog.webanalyticsassociation.com/2008/09/new-standards-d.html

If you want to know more about how we work click below:
http://waablog.webanalyticsassociation.com/2008/08/whats-with-this.html

Judith Pascual

Senior Analytics Manager - WAA Standards Co-chair