{"id":501,"date":"2011-08-01T11:52:54","date_gmt":"2011-08-01T18:52:54","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.nadynerichmond.com\/blog\/?p=501"},"modified":"2011-08-01T15:12:47","modified_gmt":"2011-08-01T22:12:47","slug":"why-is-twitter-spam-so-obnoxious","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.nadynerichmond.com\/blog\/2011\/08\/01\/why-is-twitter-spam-so-obnoxious\/","title":{"rendered":"why is Twitter spam so obnoxious?"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Twitter spam seems to raise our collective hackles more than any other kind of spam. I admit it: I whinge when I get Twitter spam. \u00a0But I observed last week, after engaging in such a whinge, that I&#8217;d never dream of doing the same every time I get email spam. \u00a0I&#8217;ve even asked here <a title=\"do you think this is Twitter spam?\" href=\"http:\/\/www.nadynerichmond.com\/blog\/2011\/05\/20\/do-you-think-this-is-twitter-spam\/\">whether a particular behavior was Twitter spam<\/a><sup class='footnote'><a href='#fn-501-1' id='fnref-501-1' onclick='return fdfootnote_show(501)'>1<\/a><\/sup>.<\/p>\n<p>Every time I get Twitter spam, I dutifully report it. \u00a0I&#8217;m never sure if it does any good, but I do it anyway. \u00a0Last week, Marco Arment commented on <a href=\"http:\/\/www.marco.org\/2011\/07\/18\/twitter-spam\">Twitter spam and motivation to report it<\/a>, concluding that he&#8217;s not going to bother to report it any longer because it just seems like a waste of time. \u00a0I don&#8217;t share his assumption that Twitter isn&#8217;t doing anything (or isn&#8217;t doing enough), so I still report. \u00a0His post is one example of a perception that Twitter spam is a big problem, and that it&#8217;s only getting worse.<\/p>\n<p>I don&#8217;t have numbers about Twitter spam, so I&#8217;m not sure whether it actually is a big problem, let alone one that&#8217;s getting worse. \u00a0The perception of the problem is one that I find fascinating. \u00a0Why is it that Twitter spam bothers us so much? \u00a0My theory<sup class='footnote'><a href='#fn-501-2' id='fnref-501-2' onclick='return fdfootnote_show(501)'>2<\/a><\/sup> is that there are several aspects of it that, together, make it bloody obnoxious.<\/p>\n<p>A lot of Twitter spam is keyword spam. \u00a0There are some keywords that are guaranteed to get you spam responses: iPad, iPhone, laptop, etc. \u00a0It&#8217;s really galling to know that I&#8217;m going to tweet something and be entirely (and often accurately) convinced that I&#8217;m going to get spammed in response. \u00a0Compare this to email spam: there&#8217;s no obvious link between my action and the spam. \u00a0The spam that I get in email has nothing to do with anything I&#8217;ve ever done, it&#8217;s just an indiscriminate firehose. \u00a0I&#8217;ve been getting a bunch of Viagra spam on my blog post about <a title=\"guest appearance on the Angry Mac Bastards podcast\" href=\"http:\/\/www.nadynerichmond.com\/blog\/2011\/06\/16\/guest-appearance-on-the-angry-mac-bastards-podcast\/\">appearing on the Angry Mac Bastard podcast<\/a>, but while I find that amusing, it&#8217;s probably coincidence.<\/p>\n<p>Twitter spam is addressed directly to me, and mentions\/replies to <a href=\"http:\/\/twitter.com\/nadyne\/\">@nadyne<\/a> are designed to get my attention. \u00a0They&#8217;re supposed to be so important that they get their own stream, and I never skip reading @nadyne references. \u00a0I&#8217;ve seen people get testy when there&#8217;s some kind of contest or promotion that asks people to tweet something, but that&#8217;s rare, and I haven&#8217;t observed the same level of vitriol about that behavior as I have for the usual Twitter spam. \u00a0Email spam, while it might be addressed directly to me, isn&#8217;t highlighted in the same way, it&#8217;s just part of my inbox.<\/p>\n<p>I can&#8217;t really scan past Twitter spam because it&#8217;s identical to everything else. \u00a0When I read my email, I scan my inbox to see what I can immediately delete. \u00a0Email spam is often, although not always, obvious enough that I can just read the sender\/subject and delete it without wasting any more attention on it. \u00a0On the other hand, Twitter spam is roughly identical to the rest of Twitter. \u00a0While I&#8217;m probably not devoting any more time to reading Twitter spam than I am reading the subject line of email spam, I don&#8217;t feel as annoyed by email spam because the time spent on the subject of the email is much less than the time that I&#8217;d spend actually reading the email.<\/p>\n<p>Are there other aspects of Twitter spam that make it feel so much more obnoxious than other forms of spam?<\/p>\n<div class='footnotes' id='footnotes-501'>\n<div class='footnotedivider'><\/div>\n<ol>\n<li id='fn-501-1'> And, for the record, the overwhelming agreement was that it was spam. Most of the responses came in via Twitter, which isn&#8217;t surprising. <span class='footnotereverse'><a href='#fnref-501-1'>&#8617;<\/a><\/span><\/li>\n<li id='fn-501-2'> As a researcher, I must point out that I have no data whatsoever to back up this theory. <span class='footnotereverse'><a href='#fnref-501-2'>&#8617;<\/a><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Twitter spam seems to raise our collective hackles more than any other kind of spam. I admit it: I whinge when I get Twitter spam. \u00a0But I observed last week, after engaging in such a whinge, that I&#8217;d never dream of doing the same every time I get email spam. \u00a0I&#8217;ve even asked here whether &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/www.nadynerichmond.com\/blog\/2011\/08\/01\/why-is-twitter-spam-so-obnoxious\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading <span class=\"screen-reader-text\">why is Twitter spam so obnoxious?<\/span> <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-501","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-nadyne"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nadynerichmond.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/501","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nadynerichmond.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nadynerichmond.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nadynerichmond.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nadynerichmond.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=501"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.nadynerichmond.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/501\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":503,"href":"https:\/\/www.nadynerichmond.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/501\/revisions\/503"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nadynerichmond.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=501"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nadynerichmond.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=501"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nadynerichmond.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=501"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}