When I was of younger years youth I enjoyed much of the innocence of school days. I also shared with others a similar rite of passage which meant I experienced what one may describe as 'bullying' or at least mild level of verbal debasement of the 'he said'; 'she said' variety.
Older, when I was at secondary school there again name calling etc. played to the very same type of social taunting, 'slag', 'tart', 'geek', 'goth'...
And today, the same situation - albeit via Twitter, has arisen again!
In case you have missed what commenced as a tweet-indesecration exchange this kicked off when @stephenfry (the 'most popular' man on Twitter) announced over the weekend that he was leaving Twitter, after @brumplum declared,
There’s nothing like publicly broadcasting criticism - the social media equivalent of starting a rumour in the school playground - to prise out of celebrity an off the cuff eruption. Enter Fry's chum @alandavies1. In defense of Fry he tweeted over and over and over. The overall tone was matched by Davies initial retaliation,'Anyone has a pop at your mates you stick up for them. Twittr needs to be more like Essex. If you wouldn't say it to their face then do shut up.'And so we have a social responsibility to 'stick up' for our friends. But, my Goodness! When did Twitter become such a playground for nonfeasance? At a turning point when celebrity culture has become preachy, unfunny and with tweets starting to reflect a new critical mass of ego-centric interest is it time to send in some new clowns?
Both Davies and Fry had open profiles (Fry's is now - temporarily? - closed) so it's easy to Follow such displays of discordance. Being Twitter a defence may be that it's seemingly easy to take something back. To 'un-tweet' and hit 'delete'. What is surprising is how two of the most famous presences had been so easily overwhelmed and, in the course of others tweet outrage, wrong footed.
Negative jibes took on a critical mass as @brumplum was RT'd 'poked' and prodded into submission. We are now outside of the schools playgrounds. Tellingly, however, it seems that it is easy to forget that we share a persistence of presence in the form of publicly displayed profiles and the associated exchanges.
My hope is that Fry does not remain 'closed' from Twitter. That Davies defence of his friend is taken as just that - an acknowledgement of support, rather than a public call for Twitter baiting. Somehow things quickly escalated into a grand tweet-scale of unpleasantness. Certainly not (from a read of his blog) @brumplum's intention.
From the ballyhoo that has ensued I am reminded that there exist the same social risks that we all intentionally enter into when we broadcast anything across public settings. Twitter, Facebook etc. give only a frontispiece to what is going on.
imnotobsessed.com reveals celebrity culture. The tweet hate campaign waged between Lindsey Lohan and Samantha Ronson seems incapable of tuning out of our public feeds...
'@samantharonson doesn't respond 2me b/c her family will cut her off if she contacts me...They control the one I love&im incapable of making any sort of difference.'Twitter and other modes may seep into ‘real life’, but it will be interesting to see if, like Lohan and friends, we continue with such open displays of hostility. Or turn, about-face, like Fry and chums...
