Guest Blogger David Hudson sinks into Twitter addiction…and he kinda likes it.

"For the last couple of months, I've been bashing Twitter and saying why it was absolutely ridiculous and pointless. And then I actually went to the Twitter website. Obviously, that visit to their homepage changed my perspective on Twitter, so much so that I am the proud owner of a Twitter myself."
– Me; April 21, 2009

When I wrote that, I had been using Twitter for three days, and I thought that it was the best thing since sliced bread. But that was still during the honeymoon period.

Now, I've had it for two and a half weeks, and in that time, I've really started to get a feel for the complete Twitter experience. The good, the bad, and the ugly.

The thing that I love about Twitter is the ability to stay connected with everyone, and to stay updated on what everybody's up to. I've even gotten a few of my friends hooked on Twitter; they weren't crazy about it at first, but now they're just as hooked as I am. As I've spent more time on Twitter, however, I've found that I now, unfortunately, have an addiction to Tweeting.

Yep. My name is David Hudson, and I'm a Twitterholic.

Over the last couple of weeks, I've Tweeted about everything from waiting forever at the DMV, to having a great brunch at IHOP, and to being appalled and disgusted at sportscaster Craig Sager's wardrobe choice. (Really, any guy that would wear a jacket like this should disgust anybody with any good fashion taste whatsoever. I respect him for not being afraid to oppose society's standards of fashion, but still. That's just not necessary. Neither is this.)

I've also Tweeted sometimes, not even because of a change in what I was doing, but simply because I felt the urge to Tweet. As a result, I would Tweet about trivial things… such as my strong disdain for Craig Sager's apparel.

But wait… is this what Twitter was created for? I highly doubt it. Twitter asks its users one simple question: "What are you doing?" The purpose of the site would then seem to be to keep people updated on what others are doing. In fact, the site itself explains Twitter's origins:

"Where did the idea for Twitter come from? Jack Dorsey had grown interested in the simple idea of what his friends were doing. Specifically, Jack wondered if there might be an opportunity to build something compelling around this status concept."

Did Dorsey then expect Twitter to become what it has today? A web of not only status updates, but people's thoughts and opinions on things such as sportscaster's wardrobes? He probably didn't. But that doesn't necessarily make Twitter bad.

Except for one thing. People don't often change what they're doing every second of the day, but people do have thoughts and opinions all day long. For example, a person who goes to work from 9 to 5 will most likely stay in the workplace for that whole time (except for maybe a lunch break). While this person is in the workplace, however, the thoughts that will go through his/her brain are innumerable. Therefore, the updates that this person could post to Twitter are also innumerable, as Tweets are no longer just status updates, but random thoughts, opinions, feelings, etc., that one may have.

Because of the innumerable amount of Tweets that one could post, one might feel the need to Tweet, and Tweet, and Tweet, to the point where Tweeting becomes a status itself. (The other day, I saw someone Tweet that they were "planning their next Twitter update." Ugh.)

Twitter might as well take a page out of Facebook's book (sorry for the redundancy). Instead of asking "What are you doing?", Facebook asks its users, "What's on your mind?" And that's basically the same question that Twitter users are answering, whether or not the question is worded the same way. Twitter should probably go ahead and fix that question.

Nevertheless, people (myself included) often like to feel important. We like to feel that other people care about what we're doing, what we're thinking, and what we're feeling. And Twitter shows that other people actually do care… but not that much. They don't need to know everything that we're thinking about.

For example, one of the people I decided to follow on Twitter was Ludacris, mainly because I'm a huge fan of his music, and I love the lyrical style he employs in his raps. In a recent span of 24 hours, however, he Tweeted 31 times. Is that really necessary?

No. No matter how famous you are, you're not that important. At least not to me.

So, people, just chill out with the Tweets. Keep some of your thoughts to yourself. They might be funny, humorous, deeply philosophical… whatever. But when you're filling up my entire Twitter homepage because you just can't stop Tweeting, that's not a good look. Just keep it simple and let me know what you're doing. That is why everybody signed up for this thing, right?

P.S. Seriously, though… somebody needs to get Craig Sager a gift certificate to either Men's Wearhouse or LensCrafters, so he can buy either a nice, fashionable, classy suit, or at least some glasses to help him see how awful and atrocious his current wardrobe really is. That mess is ridiculous.

David Hudson is a third-year student at the University of Virginia. You can find him on Twitter at DHudson427. And check out his blog, Costly Speech at http://costlyspeech.blogspot.com.

I have a confession to make: Late at night, when everyone’s asleep, I feed my baby. I feed her things she shouldn’t be eating. My daughter, Zora, likes Gatorade, pizza (if there isn’t too much cheese) and a strange chocolate concoction called Ants on a Log.  What? Isn’t that what babies eat?

The truth is, my “baby” is a Facebook app.  And I’ve been feeding and clothing her since November 07. Weird, huh?

In the past year, I’ve had one friend or another refer to my Facebook activity as “addiction,” expressing frequent, and I would guess, genuine, concern about the time I spend at the site. I’ve also heard them discuss in detail other friends’ so-called addiction. I’ve heard tall tales of staged Facebook “interventions,” self-imposed exiles, and bouts of celibacy.

Some recipients of this grave concern have expressed embarrassment over the perceived time and e

nergy they spend on the site, retreating to a Facebook closet of shame.

My response? Meh.

The fact that Facebook and other social networking tools like Twitter (“you’re always on that thing”) have my attention, speaks to their ability to provide something that is valuable to me. I tend to view what’s happening as integration rather than addiction. I have found a tool that helps me do what I want to do, when I want. Here’s how I use Facebook:
1. To meet more smart people (assuming I am to be considered "smart.")
2. To learn that people I admire from afar are also human and spend quite a bit of time on Facebook, too (Imani Perry, Farah Jasmine Griffin, Lisa Woolfork)
3. To discover other interesting applications and sites that have pushed me to think and be creative
4. To engage in intellectual ly stimulating AND silly conversations
5. To discover that my “work friends” are also smart, creative  women who have voice
6. To keep up with former students and watch their social and intellectual growth
7. To post announcements for events that have attracted folks who would otherwise have missed them—and to find events I would likely have missed.
8. To introduce my smart friends to each other
9. To share news and information that will hopefully stir thoughts and produce conversations and debates
10. To have fun (so far, I’m still maintaining the Make a Baby app; and I’ve taken the “Where Should You Be Living” quiz waaay too many times to mention; but my Black Cred is a solid Erykah Badu).

The bigger question for me is this: Why do we place Facebook in the same category as addictive substances? What does a Facebook intervention look like? Does Ken Seeley appear, staring somberly at the addict, quietly pleading with puppy-dog eyes to "do it for your family?"

Further, into what are you intervening? When and how do we determine what is “too much” Facebook (or Skype, Twitter,  Jaiku, LinkedIn, for that matter)?  Why are we engaging these tools purely on the level of entertainment  that is potentially harmful?  (Do we get some guilty pleasure in associating tech with sin? What are the possibilities AND dangers of integrating our lives with technology?

As for me. I dun need no stinkin’ intervention.

And you can forget about the Facebook closet. I’m burning it down.