Posted by: kegill on: 20 April 2008
In concert with developing a page of Twitter resources, I’ve started (in-work!) identifying message genres (types). Note that some follow traditional genre style (eg, fiction, nonfiction, science fiction, romance) and some are “types of people” (politics, organizations, reporters):
So. What do you think?
Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)
2 | Elaine
22 April 2008 at 3:21 pm
Two more variants on personal/professional:
Asking Qs of a professional network: http://twitter.com/wnalyd/statuses/793906227 or http://twitter.com/CUWarrior/statuses/794622989
Organizing groups: don’t have a specific at my fingertips but SXSW was crazy with them.
3 | kegill
28 April 2008 at 3:19 am
Thanks, both of you! I can only imagine what SxSW was like. =:-0
5 | Conducting Polls on Twitter « WiredPen
30 April 2008 at 10:31 am
[...] are using (can use) Twitter. Of course, as I wrote earlier this month, I’m working on Twitter genres (another way to analyze how people are using the tool). Possibly related posts: (automatically [...]
6 | Social Networks & Social Research « WiredPen
2 May 2008 at 8:05 pm
[...] 1 Hanson suggested I talk about Twitter genres, something I blogged about last month. Read the post and tell me what you [...]
7 | what’s the deal with… #hashtags on twitter? : Andrea Hill writes about accessibility, social media, user experience and front end development at afhill.com
25 June 2008 at 5:35 pm
[...] third party apps that build off twitter. Kathy Gill actually drafted up an interesting article on twitter genres. There is no “right” or “wrong” way to [...]
8 | Social Networks & Social Research « WiredPen
5 November 2008 at 6:38 pm
[...] Twitter genres [...]
9 | Why Some Folks Love Twitter « WiredPen
30 May 2009 at 7:35 pm
[...] my post on Twitter genres (looking for input!) as well as my Twitter resources page (a work in progress: next how-to is how [...]
Albeo theme by Design Disease
21 April 2008 at 5:11 pm
Kathy –
What a splendid job! I think this moves the discussion ahead quite a bit and really blunts any attempt at one-dimensional definition.
Looking forward to sharing/discussing this more …