Twitter: enjoying the silence

I like Twitter. I like it because it’s the perfect environment for smartarse one-liners; and smartarse one-liners make me laugh. I don’t buy the argument that it’s a symptom of shortened attention spans; as Pascal said, “I’m sorry to weary you with such a long letter, but I didn’t have time to write a short one.” And in any case, suggesting that a fondness for short, punchy things precludes an appreciation of more sustained efforts is like saying you can’t enjoy the Ramones and Shostakovich.

This is not to say that Twitter is perfect, of course. In recent weeks, some users of the service have said some downright vile things about certain high-profile women; wherever we might draw the line in limits on free speech, direct threats to kill or rape individuals fall on the wrong side of it. OK, Twitter has been lackadaisical in its attitude to such abuses and has now been shamed into some sort of action. But surely the main blame for such activities lies with the perpetrators rather than with any particular social media platform; we may as well demand the English language be called to account.

So I don’t agree with Caitlin Moran’s campaign to make today a day of #twittersilence, although I appreciate the anger that lies behind it. Apart from anything, what with The Archers omnibus, a crucial day in the Test Match and the revelation of the new Doctor, it’s a bloody silly time to do it. And I suppose there’s a sound argument that, as a man, I can’t properly appreciate the true impact of the misogynistic bile that the likes of Caroline Criado-Perez and Mary Beard have had to face. It’s all about the patriarchy, innit.

Well, fair enough. But if we’re talking about inequalities of power, it does seem a little rum that #twittersilence has come from individuals, such as Moran, who have plenty of other avenues through which they can communicate to the wider public. She uses Twitter, and uses it well, but she doesn’t need it, what with her Times column and best-selling book and TV and radio appearances and all that. The same goes for India Knight, who demonstrated just how little she needs it by closing her account yesterday. But not before leaving the following message (and thanks to Mic Wright for flagging this one up).

Well, yes. I suppose that means if I say something horrid about India Knight she wouldn’t even notice it, what with this being a mere, forelock-tugging blog and all. Which leads us to the fundamental question raised by Moran’s boycott; if someone takes to Twitter to say something revolting about Criado-Perez or Beard, Moran or Knight or any other man, woman or blogger and nobody notices because everyone else is boycotting Twitter, does that person automatically become the new Doctor?

PS: In the Standard, Sam Leith says: 

Twitter is the Pub. It’s a private space where the landlord’s rules go. No principles are at stake, and your best hope of persuading the landlord to chuck out the obnoxious drunks is to persuade him that he’ll lose more customers if he doesn’t. Twittersilence is a consumer boycott in which, technically, we’re the drinks rather than the customers.