“To Twitter or Not to Twitter”: Critique of Robert’s W. Lucky Article

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Summary of the Article
Strengths of the Article
Weakness of the Article
Conclusion
Reference

Introduction

“To Twitter or not to Twitter” article by Robert W. Lucky addresses the problem faced by the old generation in the usage of the internet. It aims main point of reference is that age is a determining factor in the usage of Twitter.

The author tries to elaborate his point of view through sharing his dilemma on whether to join Twitter. The article relates well with Lucky colleagues i.e. the old generation as it reveals issues they are struggling with. On the other hand, the youth understand the old generation perspective of the use of the social network.

Summary of the Article

The article begins with Lucky describing twitter and how it operates. This serves to inform all his audiences of Twitter in order to foster common understanding. Lucky refers to the young generation as “digital natives” (Lucky, 2010, p. 245), which implies that they are knowledgeable and experienced with technology. On the other hand, the older generations are termed as “digital immigrants” meaning they have adapted technology recently (Lucky, 2010, p. 245).

The author goes on to share his dilemma with technology in regard as to whether to use or not to use Twitter. Moreover, the author extends to share experiences with the youth and how they have changed his thoughts. It concludes by inquiring the importance of Twitter to the old people logically, but again leaves a room for personal judgments and opinions in regard Twitter usage. The article is generally interesting and intriguing.

Strengths of the Article

One of the articles strength is that the author is able to communicate effectively to broad spectra of audience i.e. both the old and the young are involved in the articles’ discussion. Despite the article dealing with the dilemma of the older generation in relation to technology it narrates incidences that they are conversant with.

Lucky is very cautious in usage of technical terms and goes to explain their meaning if he happens to use any. This is clearly seen when he defines Twitter and how it works in the introduction, descriptions of terms “digital native” and “digital immigrant” (Lucky, 2010, p. 245). This leads to greater understanding of this article by the audience. In addition, it makes the article informative to the older generation,and on the other hand entertaining to the younger generation.

Secondly, the article clearly illustrates how age is a determining factor in Twitter usage. It goes on to portray how both the old and young generations use Twitter differently. The youth use it for social networking while the old people search for professional usage of Twitter. Old people usage is supported by the author when points out that there is no need of posting that someone is awake as it is of no importance to the person reading the twit.

Contrary, a colleague of the author after twitting for a week felt connected to the network reflected when he said that he experienced “a sense of connectedness” which illustrates the author point, which is that Twitter serves a social purpose. Author portrays cultural element in technology when the old generation is part of online culture through the phrase inhabiting multiple identities, living a culture of sharing and by peer collaboration”(Lucky, 2010, p. 245).

Weakness of the Article

The authors fails to communicate effectively to global audience , as he struggles to maintain the balance of diversity involved and tends to be biased to the old generation opinions. This is evident when he has a personal disagreement with a young speaker in a conference hence indicating a communication barrier and alienation between the old and young generations.

The speaker, as an agent of the digital natives in article context, seems outrageous when he refers the digital immigrants, “pencil pushers” (Lucky, 2010, p. 246). In addition, when the author disguises the essence of twitting to indicate that someone is awake makes the young speaker who tweets every morning insignificant.

These illustrations go to reveal the potential of the author secluding the young generations. In contrast, Twitter works differently for the different generations the choice of examples for the article paints younger users as irrational and implicates them in “pointless, incessant barking” (Lucky, 2010, p. 246). This weakness is brought about by the authors desire to communicate to wide audience while he is relating to the old generation dilemma in Twitter usage.

Conclusion

The author in the “To Twitter or not to Twitter” article succeeds in portraying that there is a generational gap in the usage of Twitter.

The choice of illustrations though risks alienating the younger readers’ interest of a wide audience and despite being of old generational group keeps the voice of the article balanced. Consequently, this appeals and actively engages both the young and old in the articles discussion. The inquisitive nature and impartiality of the article makes its readers reflective of the way in which they use Twitter, rendering the article to be more of a reflective and an informative article.

Reference

Lucky, R. W. (2010). To Twitter Or Not to Twitter? In L. G. Kirszner, & S. R. Mandell, The Blair Reader: Exploring Issues and Ideas (pp. 244-246). Canada: Pearson Education.

Click Here To Order Now!