"TWITTER-SITY"

Per a facebook chat with one of my besties last night, the self-realization that I live a very closed-off existence really hit home. We were discussing the latest episode of Glee - the song choices, the plot twists, who should get nominated for an Emmy. We just went on and on and on. Finally, my friend paused (yes, there can be dramatic pauses on facebook chat) and said something along the lines of:

Isn't it pathetic that we know so much and can talk so eloquently about this stupid little TV show, but when it comes to real world issues and politics, we have no clue what's going on?

This question actually really stuck with me.

Today, as I got on twitter and perused all my new tweets, I realized there's probably a reason we're oblivious and politically apathetic. Look at the people we follow on twitter -- celebs, friends, the Arts section of The New York Times...

We're not being fed any sort of substantial dose of real news. At least not in the way that older generations were fed the news -- y'know by flipping through a newspaper or turning on the TV to a national network? Unlike our parents, we're glued to our computers and smart phones. Network news? What's that? I'd wager most of us sit down and watch it maybe once a month... or less. This means our primary source of what's going on in the universe is twitter or facebook.

Theoretically, this wouldn't be such a horrible thing if we followed legitimate news sites, but the truth of the matter is that a lot of us don't. We are only in-tuned with people that share our interests and viewpoints, and for this reason, sites like twitter (if they are a person's primary source for what's going on in the world) are frankly a little dangerous.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not here to twitter-bash. Actually, I happen to be of the belief that twitter is the greatest thing since sliced cake, but...

I AM saying that our generation would do well to be a little cautious with how we use twitter and the like as our main source for news and politics.

Back in the day, if a sports fan wanted to read or find out about sports, he had to scour through a newspaper or sit through a newscast. While flipping through the paper, he was shown stories about crimes in his hometown and articles about fashion -- and even if he never read those articles, he was a better person for having been exposed to them. He was presented with ideas and thoughts that may have differed from his own. On some microcosmic level, this probably made him a little bit more open and tolerant.

These days, if a sports fan wants to know about sports, he follows ESPN and the National Football League on twitter -- and as a result -- avoids stumbling across local crime or fashion. It's all sports. All the time. No differing outlooks.

Okay. So, sports might not be the best metaphor.

But what happens if you're only exposed to and in contact with people that share your exact same viewpoints and interests ALL THE TIME? As a result, these viewpoints becomes reinforced and stronger, forming what politicos have coined an "echo chamber." Well, after so much time spent marinating in your own beliefs, how are you going to react when somebody comes at you with a differing opinion? This is one way in which extremist movements are started.

Life should be a dialogue, not a monologue. Conservative and liberal, fat and thin, rich and poor, we keep each other in check -- and it would be better if our twitter accounts reflected this more.

So, I'm going to follow my own advice -- and break out of my cloistered little universe by starting to keep up to speed with more legitimate news organizations. If you don't do it already, I urge you to do the same thing.

Maybe we'll learn something.

P.S. - This argument is not just about twitter. It also applies to specialty news channels like MSNBC and FOX's cable news. We shouldn't be plastered with THE SAME opinion all the time. We need a little bit of both for balance as there are always two sides to every story.

For now, peace and love.

And ciao.