<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Smells like tweet spirit</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.technollama.co.uk/smells-like-teen-spirit/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.technollama.co.uk/smells-like-teen-spirit?utm_source=rss&amp;utm_medium=rss&amp;utm_campaign=smells-like-teen-spirit</link>
	<description>Yet Another Technology Law Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Sep 2010 20:35:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nicolas Holzapfel</title>
		<link>http://www.technollama.co.uk/smells-like-teen-spirit/comment-page-1#comment-2123</link>
		<dc:creator>Nicolas Holzapfel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 13:15:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.technollama.co.uk/?p=2168#comment-2123</guid>
		<description>Well this post provides a nice rebuttal to the argument that the decline of mainstream media = decline of considered, tempered journalism!

Despite this report&#039;s lack of meaningfulness, it does seem plausible that Twitter is less popular amongst teens than amongst adults. Twitter seems to work best for with a *professional* commitment to publicising or acquiring lots of information about a particular subject. When compared to sites like Facebook, Twitter is poor at facilitating frequent, direct interaction and feedback, which I think is what teens tend to be more interested in. Hmm, I just made a sweeping anecdotal observation, I&#039;ll look out for my headline in The Times)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well this post provides a nice rebuttal to the argument that the decline of mainstream media = decline of considered, tempered journalism!</p>
<p>Despite this report&#8217;s lack of meaningfulness, it does seem plausible that Twitter is less popular amongst teens than amongst adults. Twitter seems to work best for with a *professional* commitment to publicising or acquiring lots of information about a particular subject. When compared to sites like Facebook, Twitter is poor at facilitating frequent, direct interaction and feedback, which I think is what teens tend to be more interested in. Hmm, I just made a sweeping anecdotal observation, I&#8217;ll look out for my headline in The Times)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Suw</title>
		<link>http://www.technollama.co.uk/smells-like-teen-spirit/comment-page-1#comment-2121</link>
		<dc:creator>Suw</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 06:44:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.technollama.co.uk/?p=2168#comment-2121</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t think that *proper* social media types, i.e. people who actually work with social media on a regular basis, were at all surprised. The fact that few teens use Twitter is something we already knew. My other half linked to the sources that had told us the demographic of Twitter users here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/pda/2009/jul/14/twitter-teens-facebook

I think the only people who were surprised were media types who haven&#039;t been paying attention.

Of course the more interesting question is, why does the media think what teens do is so important? The growing demographic section for online is the over 55s, and they have a lot more disposable income than anyone in their teens. But the assumption that teens&#039; habits are important is a legacy of the misapprehension that teens act as a bellwether for the rest of the population. Given the vast wealth of tools available, the idea that one age-group could be a bellwether for all the others is stupid. If it were true, Saga Zone would be sitting about thinking it&#039;s doomed...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t think that *proper* social media types, i.e. people who actually work with social media on a regular basis, were at all surprised. The fact that few teens use Twitter is something we already knew. My other half linked to the sources that had told us the demographic of Twitter users here: <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/pda/2009/jul/14/twitter-teens-facebook" rel="nofollow">http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/pda/2009/jul/14/twitter-teens-facebook</a></p>
<p>I think the only people who were surprised were media types who haven&#8217;t been paying attention.</p>
<p>Of course the more interesting question is, why does the media think what teens do is so important? The growing demographic section for online is the over 55s, and they have a lot more disposable income than anyone in their teens. But the assumption that teens&#8217; habits are important is a legacy of the misapprehension that teens act as a bellwether for the rest of the population. Given the vast wealth of tools available, the idea that one age-group could be a bellwether for all the others is stupid. If it were true, Saga Zone would be sitting about thinking it&#8217;s doomed&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
