|Vanity Smear|

You know, I was going to stay away from adding my chime to the endless song that has erupted today due to the article that Vanity Fair posted about 6 very influential women on Twitter.

But honestly, I can’t help it. I won’t be saying anything that hasn’t already been said, but I feel the need to say it anyway. A lot of people simply don’t get Twitter. They don’t understand the purpose, they don’t understand how to engage, and this is understandable, since everything isn’t for everyone.

What irks me to no end is the author’s attitude towards not only the medium (example “For tweeple, e-mail messages are sonnets, Facebook is practically Tolstoy.” yes, she actually wrote that, in her article. ), but towards these women and what they have accomplished in their careers, and this is the real problem. We all know that journalism has taken a turn for the worse in the past 10 years, mostly, ironically, due to the internet, and instant gratification. People who call themselves journalist publish stories without confirming actual facts, and consider website hits as a mark of success, not accuracy and objectivity. So when I clicked on the link to read this article, at the very least I expected the author’s opinion to be informed regarding the people she wrote about, even if I didn’t agree with her general point.

And it wasn’t…it so wasn’t. From the start of the article, it seems as though the entire point of the author’s rant, was to discredit these ladies, and diminish what they have accomplished to this day, by comparing their Twitter popularity to the likes of someone who spends their time all day doing nothing more than being cute, and pleasing to people on Twitter to increase their followers. Of course, there are plenty of Twitter users that follow this model, there is no denying that. But anyone who can actually read and knows how to use Google, can tell that each of these ladies, including my favorite out of the group, @FeliciaDay, are all people who have that many followers and who have become so popular in their respective fields and on Twitter because *SURPRISE* they have something to offer, something worthy of offering.

Part of me found this article sexist, a bit more irony since the author is a woman, but it was more of an insult to my intellect, both as a woman and as an avid user of Twitter.

I’m not going to go into some rant about how awesome Felicia Day and the rest of the TweetHearts (sighs) are, or why they deserve more attention than some snarky article that really has no insight except someone’s opinion (I guess you could say the same thing about this article haha) but I will say this – for those of you who have no idea who any of the ladies in the picture above are, check them out, check out their websites, and honestly ask yourself if the description of “Cheerleader” is an accurate one.

By the way, I have nothing against Cheerleaders, but in the context that the word was used, I do. I seriously fracking do.

The upshot? These ladies will gain more popularity, their existing fans will become more loyal, their follower list is sure to go up, and maybe, just maybe, Vanity Fair, and the author, will re-think the tone of future articles regarding social media, and women who are smart enough to use these tools for their benefit without compromising who they are and their visions, and to connect as individuals with their fans.

Add them. NOW. @feliciaday http://feliciaday.com/, @digitalRoyalty http://www.thedigitalroyalty.com/, @juliaRoy http://juliaroy.com/, @prsarahEvans http://prsarahevans.com/, @ADVENTUREGIRL, @Pop17 http://pop17.com/.

Image courtesy of |Vanity Fair|.

|Related Posts|

• No Related Posts