Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Reflections on the
Twitter-enabled backchannel (draft)
Introduction
funny how conferences now have a soundtrack - tic tic tic tic tic tic
tic
Tom Abbot, http://twitter.com/tomabbott/status/1444366047
HU U
Twitter posts, or, as they are more commonly known, ‘tweets’, are no
longer than 140 characters in length and, due to their brevity and the
varieties of language used, have much in common with the short text-
making practices associated with SMS messages, instant messaging or
Facebook status updates (Herring 2001). However, it is blog posts, albeit
in a greatly truncated form, that tweets most resemble. Lankshear and
Knobel have defined blogs as “hybrids of journal entries and annotations
or indices of links, or some mix of reflections, musings, anecdotes and the
like with embedded hyperlinks to related websites” (2006: 139) and there
is certainly much evidence to support the application of this definition to
Twitter. The tweet below (fig. 1), taken from my own Twitter public
timeline, is an example of twittering as “classic journalling” with myself,
the author “at the centre of the day-to-day matters being written about”
(Lankshear & Knobel 2006: 150). Unlike what David Silver calls ‘thin
tweets’, or “posts that convey one layer of information”, my example is of
a ‘thick tweet insofar as it “convey[s] two or more, often with help from a
hyperlink” (Silver 2009). The hyperlink, in this case, is to a picture taken
2
on my cameraphone and sent to a Twitter-related image hosting service.
Tweets, then, although not intrinsically multimodal, may link easily to
multimodal texts.
Twitter users have the option of filling in pre-set profile fields to enable
other users to find them or learn more about them. The profile template is
a space for a minimal identity performance: name, username, a self-
description of no more than 160 characters, a field for the URL of the
user’s homepage or blog and an image users select to represent
themselves. The example below (fig. 2) displays all of these features and
is characteristic of the ‘laminated’ identities performed on many Twitter
profiles The notion of ‘laminated’ identity refers to ways in which we enact
particular identities by consciously, and unconsciously, assuming or
rejecting the always/already present subject positions available to us
(Holland & Leander 2004).
Tiffini Travis, our sample twitterer, has selected the username ‘mojo_girl’
in a conscious and playful taking up of the identity position of Afro-
American woman (Nora Dean’s Mojo Girl is also the title of Tiffini’s
favourite song). On top of this, she overlays other layers; there is, for
example, a reference to her dual professional identity as librarian and
author as well as a more personal subject position, ‘mom’. Tiffini uses her
160-character bio space to list specific interests - ‘punk rock’ ‘60s reggae’,
3
‘information literacy’, ‘edupunk’, ‘educational technology’- which
constitutes an abbreviated ‘taste performance’ (Liu 2007). This ‘taste
performance’ adds additional layers but is also another of the ways in
which Tiffini projects a public identity that enables her to navigate some of
the online Twitter networks and connect with others with similar interests.
Twitter allows users to follow the updates of other users; these appear in
that users list of people they are said to be following. The people they are
following may, in turn, choose to follow those who are following them.
These physically distributed social networks form innumerable loosely
coupled communities bound, albeit fleetingly, by shared histories and
interests. Twitter’s search tool enables a user to find others with similar
interests and clicking a ‘Follow’ link adds them to that user’s list of
contacts. A less permanent way of bringing twitterers together is to add a
hashtag (e.g. #alt08) to tweets. This allows other users to search and
retrieve all tweets with the same hashtag. This is now the common
practice in conferences and workshops and allows Twitter users to interact
with others without having to add them to their list of contacts.
4
‘back’ area for the audience with seating facing the front. The model,
ecclesiastical in origin (i.e. preacher at pulpit delivering a sermon to
seated parishioners), has informed the design of most lecture theatres
from the Middle Ages to the present day. Although a shared space, the
lecture theatre provides the physical platform for an asymmetric
interaction: speaker/presenter talking to - or at - a seated audience whose
opportunity to speak is limited by social conventions dictating a small
period of time at the end for questions and comments. This spatial
arrangement ‘positions’ individuals as either speakers or listeners.
Research questions
Research Methods
Design of my survey
Participant analysis
8
2006; Davies 2008; Lankshear & Knobel 2008). The conference whose
Twitter backchannel I have chosen to analyse was one I attended as a
delegate but at which I did not present. I also took no part in the
backchannel other than as a ‘read-only participant’ or ‘lurker’. My
‘inhabitation’ of the conference and its Twitter backchannel – my
ethnographic field site – was therefore limited.
Survey responses
What’s clear from the many of the replies is that Twitter users are
engaging creatively with what Pinch and Bijker (1984) call technology’s
“interpretive flexibility”, i.e. users interpret how they want to use it in
ways meaningful to them, and producing what Grint and Woolgar (1997)
call new ‘readings’ that are very different to the intentions of its creators
as a lightweight notification service (‘What are you doing?’).
Personal, two for work, one for daughter and one for band
I have a personal Twitter account and one for both the subject areas I
manage
One is my main personal/professional one; the other is to support a
research project I'm running with students
There were often cases of different Twitter accounts for specific areas of
professional practice:
10
Ninety-six participants completed an open response question on their
attitudes to the blurring of private and professional realms. I attempted to
dimensionalise attitudes by placing participants on a continuum: at one
end were those who were comfortable with the blurring and, at the other,
those who felt uneasy. Broadly speaking participants mainly clustered at
the ‘comfortable’ end of the continuum. Some maintained that Twitter’s
relative newness means it’s still to be adopted by the mainstream making
the blurring less of an issue:
More than half the participants (61) had sent tweets during a conference,
the majority of which used the conference hashtag (49). ‘Notes to
contacts not present at the conference’ was the reason selected by most
(49) with ‘to participate in discussion with other delegates’ not far behind
(43). A little more than a quarter of conference twitterers (16) claimed to
have sent dismissive or dissenting tweets during presentations. These
included:
snarky replies and DMs [direct messages] to another person sitting near
me about content we disagreed with
sometimes speakers say something so wrong (like an assumption or
misconception held by non-experts) and you can't wait til the end to go
"wtf??"
Speaker was boring, wasted our time
Others participants objected to my survey’s use of the word ‘subversive’
and claimed that critical tweets were no different to the critical comments
they would otherwise feel comfortable articulating face-to-face:
11
am usually tweeting my thoughts of the presentation and that means both
good comments that i agree with as well as things i disagree with
to highlight frailties in argument, or to identify my position on topic
They have been critical, rather than subversive: making critical comments,
opinions or reflections about particular issues raised. They are openly
tweeted, and nothing I would normally hide from a group of critically
engaged colleagues.
The majority of respondents (46.2%) agreed with the statement that
Twitter enhances conference participation by enabling a distributed
dialogue, with over a fifth (21.5%) strongly agreeing. Twenty-one
participants took up the option of describing Twitter’s contribution in their
own words. Only one response provided an alternative description:
oh please, it's just anothe [sic] way of talking to the people you get on
with and ingnoring [sic] the people who get on your nerves. sometimes
you have to listen to the balix [sic] to hear something interesting or useful.
The others used the space instead to add caveats. Some related to the
uneven adoption of Twitter as a backchannel technology amongst higher
education practitioners and the risk of “two-tier engagement”:
I agree, but would like to see the tweets documented in some way.
Besides, twitter is still used only by a minority of people
Yes to above, but multi tasking this way is not for everyone.
Hmmm, sort of agree, but only some people twitter. Like the William
Gibson quote, "The future is here. It's just not evenly distributed yet."
Twitter can be great for confs, BUT risks having two-tier engagement,
therefore not actually inclusive. (I know people CAN all join if they want,
but they haven't yet, have they?)
One area identified by a number was the value of the backchannel to
colleagues not physically present:
12
potential for wider participation, but it is quite limited in potential unless
combined with streaming of the content itself
I fiind [sic] that I agree with this statement, but also have a comment. […]
Twitter is a poor notetakere [sic] with seriously unstable backfiles, and bad
searchbility, so i see it's [sic] use as very much "at the moment"
it also provides a record of conference impression but much less coherent
than blog postingd [sic] from people who attended the [sic] conference
The final survey question addressed the issue of good practice guidelines
for the use of Twitter conference backchannels. A slightly higher number
(49 against as opposed to 40 for) argued against the needs for such
guidelines. Of the 40 who responded to the request for suggestions, about
a quarter justified their reasons for saying good practice guidelines were
unnecessary or undesirable. Some argued this on pragmatic grounds –
“Could you imagine tryign [sic] to enforce anything??” and “they are
unlikely to suceed [sic] in being adopted by more than a minority of
participants”. Others trusted their fellow professionals and twitterers to
use the backchannel appropriately:
I want to say something about no ... I will have no part in constarined [sic]
practice ... what is good p for one is not necessarily good p for another
I would resent greatly an imposed set of best practices for this tool. It's
[sic] flexibility and personalization are outside of that, I believe
I don't think so. Rules are made to be broken imho. If you constrain me I
will buck the system just because!!
13
[not] clogging up the conference stream by using conference hashtags on
non-conference related posts
just simple guidance for the uninitiated...
Just the common sense stuff: Hash signs should be a MUST
Publicising hashtags in advance so that we can ensure use correct tags.
Full URL citation when possible - URL shorteners may not persist (lost link
over time) and may be subject to hijacking by hackers for nefarious
purposes (security)
"Do no harm", i.e., conduct the conversations with the same level of
courtesy and respect that one would expect of any professional
interchange Not publically flaming speakers!
actually exposing the twitter stream at events might have the effect
making people self moderate a bit more
Keep public tweets 'politically correct' and constructive to the
conversations, even if critical. Keep subversive, complaining tweets
private
Only Tweet what you would stand up and say publicly
To not make subversive remarks using the conference hashtag...it's
unprofessional.
Participant observation
14
interactions by changing the names of both twitterers and removing
details of the conference venue and speakers that would immediately
identify the conference.
The earliest tweets fall into the category of play-by-play summaries, i.e.
brief descriptions of the conference as it unfolds akin to live coverage of a
sporting event via a web page,. Play-by-play tweets were the main
category of conference post and many were purely descriptive:
Good morning all! At the train station to start trip to [name of location] &
[#conference hastag]
Paul Jones, from the [name of university] speaking "We're interested in the
future, and that's the semantic web"
another knife in the heart of recording 50 min lectures from Paul Jones of
[name of university]
[name of university] tends to avoid putting lecture content, instead
putting up high-quality documentary content with academic
narration/intention
Note made that lecturer's need to be trained in presentation techniques
because of limitations of webcast cameras
It was not uncommon for these types of tweets to include the url of
relevant sites or documents:
15
Another category of tweet that featured amongst the earliest
contributions related to logistics and often concerned the availability of
WiFi and details of the agreed hashtag:
so we're doing a good job collab note taking. Is there a good tool for
reversing these back to the right chron order?
We've made the Twitter trending topics list again!
articulatedesign:
Q re transcripts, access4all: credible transcription systems anyone? A: no,
no answer...
kunst:
automated transcripts are not very readable. We operate on-demand
transcription - if requested, we'll send off to a transcriber.
paterfamilias:
@kunst - another thing to keep in mind: if you have a script, you also have
a transcript
articulatedesign:
@paterfamilias re script = transcript: that's what i'm talkin about, yes yes
yes. But will put REAL pressure on workload of teachers.
articulatedesign:
I really *want* to like this talk. But I don't. Not "speaking" to me
judgng frm twts, i'm not alone in my discomfort. my neighbour's reading a
blogpost on "why i hate [name of computer manufacturer]" (cos of the
lock in!!!)
salespitch suckfest with tinkle piano
@[janefrand] mmm brains nom nom nom (note to self; sell your [name of
MP3 player], time to stand firm)
janefrand:
@vilnius @articulatedesign @rdtechie must... eat... brains... no wait...
buy... [name of computer manufacturer] ... products
The above tweets are, on one level, examples of ‘snarks’. On one level
they correspond to Guy Merchant’s (2009) observation that the Twitter-
enabled backchannel is “works well as an outlet for frustration”. However,
something more complex is occurring; the twitterers, irritated by the
frontchannel presenter’s attempt to promote a brand, turn inward toward
the backchannel and engage in forms of banter that assert shared forms
of academic identity and associated modes of conduct that the speaker
appears to be violating. Although the twitterers are having fun – the tone
17
is alternately sarcastic (“salespitch suckfest”) and silly (e.g. the zombie
brain-eating routine) – I’d argue that they are subverting the presenter’s
attempt to use an academic conference to sell a brand and are reclaiming
the conference space as their own. In the face of the presenter’s
corporate ‘strategy’, snarky tweets in the backchannel are these
participants’ preferred subversive ‘tactic’ (de Certeau 1984).
Towards the end of the conference other sorts of tweets are posted such
as follow-ups - e.g. “bookmark [url of project website]”) and expressions of
appreciation to the speakers or conference organisers – e.g. “great
conference, thanks” and “thanks for great two days everybody :-)“.
Conclusions
There is some evidence from both the survey and from the ‘telling’ case
study of one conference, that such backchannels make a contribution to a
more participatory conference culture by providing additional
opportunities for discussion, information sharing, knowledge building and
professional networking. There is also some evidence from both survey
data and participant observation that backbiting in the backchannel
features in academic conferences to some degree. However, more
18
research into this aspect of backchannel interaction in the context of a
range of academic conferences is necessary. Anecdotally, snarky tweets
were much less visible in another conference I attended where the
hashtag had been introduced early and where the conference organiser
modelled, to a degree, the tone of backchannel tweets.
19
References
boyd, d. & Ellison, N.B. (2008). Social Network Sites: Definition, History,
and Scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13
pp.210-230
twittering-and-social-reporting/U
382/paper3.pdf UH
Davies, J. & Merchant, G. (2006). Looking from the Inside Out: academic
blogging as new literacy. In C. Lankshear & M. Knobel (eds) A New
Literacies Sampler (167-198). New York: Peter Lang
graz.ac.at/~i203/ebner/publication/08_elearn01.pdf U
Grint, K & Woolgar, S. (1997). The Machine at Work: Technology, Work and
Organization. Cambridge: Polity Press.
697.1.Grosseck%20Gabriela-Can%20we%20use.pdf UH
20
Guy, M. (2009). Back in the Playground: Bitching on Twitter. Ramblings of
a Remote Worker. Retrieved May 1, 2009, from
http://remoteworker.wordpress.com/2009/03/02/back-in-the-playground-
HU
bitching-on-twitter/
UH
twitter
U
Jones, J. (2008) Life Before the Backchannel? Injenuity. Retrieved April 26,
2009, from http://injenuity.com/archives/153
HU UH
amplified-conference UH
21
http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/2009/04/20/twitterfall-youre-my-
HU
wonder-wall/UH
&dl=GUIDE&CFID=33036168&CFTOKEN=25384362 UH
20 Nov. 2008).
Lankshear, C. & Knobel, M. (2006 2nd Edition). New Literacies: Everyday
Practices and Classroom Learning. Buckingham: Open University Press.
18 Nov. 2008).
nel_queen.php UH
he_backchannel.php UH
22
Liu, H. (2008). Social Network Profiles as Taste Performances. Journal of
Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1): 252-275. Retrieved April 29,
from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol13/issue1/liu.html
HU U
backchannel/ U
mccarthy.pdf?key1=1056986&key2=8487861421&coll=GUIDE&dl=GUIDE
&CFID=34611421&CFTOKEN=42490139 UH
presentations/ UH
conferenc.html UH
Pinch, T.J. & Bijker, W.E. (1984). The Social Construction of Facts and
Artefacts: Or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of
Technology Might Benefit Each Other. Social Studies of Science 14(3): 399-
441.
23
Association of Applied Linguistics (AAAL) Conference. Retrieved April 26,
2009, from https://netfiles.uiuc.edu/pprior/Prior/PriorAAAL03.pdf
HU U
graz.ac.at/~i203/ebner/publication/09_edumedia.pdf UH
events.html U
uses-of-back-channels/ U
Silver, D. (2009). The difference between thin and thick tweets. Silver in
SF: Teaching and learning in a city called San Francisco. Retrieved April
26, 2009, from http://silverinsf.blogspot.com/2009/02/difference-between-
HU
thin-and-thick.html UH
Stevens, V. (2008). ‘Trial by Twitter: The Rise and Slide of the Year's Most
Viral Microblogging Platform’. TESL-EJ, 12(1). Retrieved April 26, 2009,
from http://www.tesl-ej.org/ej45/int.html
HU UH
Turkle, S. (1995). Life on the Screen: identity in the Age of the Internet.
New York and Toronto. Simon and Schuster.
wheeler.blogspot.com/2009/05/twittering-at-conferences.html UH
Young, Y.R. (2009). Forget E-Mail: New Messaging Service Has Students
and Professors Atwitter. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved May
8, 2009, from http://chronicle.com/free/v54/i25/25a01501.htm
HU UH
24