Twitter nothing but nonsense

Did you know Miley Cyrus adores her fans? Did you know that Brooke Hogan can’t wait to see the new “Saw” film? If you didn’t know either of those, then you at least followed Ryan Seacrest’s fascinating and intricate play-by-play breakdown of the Yankee’s game. Right?

Wait, you didn’t catch any of those? Why not?

All of this completely worthless information is accessible to the world because of Twitter.com. The newest social network to control the Internet (and world), Twitter is even more superficial and time-consuming than its predecessors.

There is no substance in the Web site. Rather, it serves only shallow celebrity adulators and Internet-driven socialites.

Masters of the tweet claim Twitter is a more mature social networking site intended for a generation that has outgrown Facebook.com. Facebook has many problems, but at least it gives users a broad base to express themselves. Through its many information sub-headings and pictures, Facebook offers a much greater breadth of creative possibilities than Twitter’s 140-character limit.

Tweets are condensed through excruciating grammar leaving followers an uneven view of the person’s personality or viewpoints. Of course, users overcome this obstacle by posting multiple tweets consecutively. Yet, personally, I don’t want to know what my friends are doing or thinking every five minutes.

Also, users can offer only their thesis regarding any issue of substance. It neither allocates enough space to back up any claim nor allows others to refute or agree with the claim.

President Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize ignited many thought-provoking Facebook statuses which attracted equally intellectual responses. Can Twitter do that?

Apart from the social networking, Twitter really thrives from human’s inherent obsession with celebrities. Tabloids and TMZ.com will always attract those masses who scoff at celebrities misdeeds.

However, Twitter makes people slaves to these celebrities. It supplies unintelligent and usually uninteresting celebrities a tool which allows them to post their irrational comments, which are then happily devoured by the rabid mob.

Via text, celebrities can make known to the world all their irrelevant and asinine thoughts seconds after they think them.

There are numerous occasions where celebs posted provocative, but senseless tweets. Courtney Love bashed her former fashion designer on her Twitter and is now being sued for malicious libel. According to the Kansas City Star, Larry Johnson, the Kansas City Chiefs running back, posted a homophobic slur within a tweet that lambasted his coach.

I would rather watch a vicious, but pointless, reality show dispute than read stories about celebrities who make character assassinations through Twitter. At least the former is slightly entertaining.

Even K-State’s own savior Michael Beasley fell into the Twitter quagmire when he, for reasons unknown to anyone with common sense, posted a picture of himself with a suspicious-looking plastic bag in the background.

Granted, Twitter may serve as a convenient and efficient professional networking tool, but it also is another website to become a slave to. It is nothing more than a glorified Facebook status with a couple of neat search tricks included in it.

Hopefully, another social networking website will evolve with a better design to cultivate self-expression. Right now, we are a society of 140 characters.