Why 280 Characters Won't Save Twitter


Twitter has received a spate of bad press lately. From President Trump’s “propaganda” to the suspension of Rose McGowan’s account (the actress revealed she was sexually harassed by Harvey Weinstein), some might feel that the once-popular micro-blogging site is on the way out.

And the numbers justify that assumption. Millennials make up the largest generation in the United States, yet Twitter is struggling in positioning itself as an option for them. A picture says 1,000 words, and this generation prefers selfies to short remarks. According to a recent study from Pew Research Center, almost 60% of Instagram users are between the ages of 18 and 29, compared to 36% of Twitter’s users. While more visual social networks like Facebook and Instagram make sharing photos and videos simple, crafting a witty caption in just 140 characters is considered too difficult by too many. Ironically, Twitter once owned Vine, one of the pioneers and early leaders in short-form video, but managed to drive it to the ground, creating a rift with major social influencers in the process.

In a recent bid to attract users back to the platform and alleviate the editing process associated with tweeting, Twitter announced in September that its character limit would expand from 140 to 280. But how successful does Twitter expect this change — which went into effect on Nov. 7 — to be? Company co-founder Jack Dorsey has called the original decision to limit characters to 140, “arbitrary,” and while 280 characters may make composing short-form content easier, isn’t it just as arbitrary? In a short exchange I had with Or Arbel, founder of the famous app “Yo,” he jokingly said Yo would also double its character limit from 0 to 0, to address public demand.

Continue reading at AdAge.com

No Responses to “Why 280 Characters Won't Save Twitter”

Post a Comment