Earlier today, I posted a serious rebuttal in response to a controversial article printed by the Wall Street Journal titled, “Why Email No Longer Rules.” To read this post (i.e., actual food for thought), please click here.
In this post, I will provide the alternative view, some food for naught. Here’s why the Journal got it right:
Into the River
Email vs. Twitter
WSJ: “Consider Twitter. The service allows users to send 140-character messages to people who have subscribed to see them, called followers.”
That’s right, using Twitter will turn you into a modern-day Savior: If you Twit, you will have “Followers”. On the other hand, if you send email, you will have “people who received your email.” “People who receive your email” or “Followers.” The choice is clear [says the Almighty].
Too Much Information
Email vs. Twitter and Facebook
WSJ: “In email land, consumers can often get by with a few folders, if that. But in the land of the [Twitter or Facebook] stream, some sort of more sophisticated filtering is a must.”
This is an excellent point. Email is easy to sort through. On the other hand, the vast abyss of your friends, families and colleagues’ vapid inner thoughts, Re-Twits and costume-party photos are not. In fact, they make no sense whatsoever. The brain-power required to comb through these to find useful information is exponentially greater than the brain-power used to check your email; thus, Twitter and Facebook help to keep you sharp and prevent the early onset of Alzheimer’s disease.
Winner: Twitter and Facebook
Who Are You?
Email vs. Facebook
WSJ: “Perhaps the biggest change that these email successors bring is more of a public profile for users. In the email world, you are your name followed by a “dot-com.” That’s it. In the new messaging world, you have a higher profile, packed with data you want to share and possibly some you don’t.”
What on earth could you possibly say on your Facebook page that you wouldn’t want out there?
Winner: Facebook? Okay, maybe not.
A Matter of Time
Email vs. everything else.
WSJ: “one more big question remains: Will the new services save time, or eat up even more of it?”
Procrastinating on social networking web sites is clearly more efficient than it is on email. With Facebook, for example, you can get caught up on every-person-you-ever-met-in-your-life’s life in approximately 48 — 168 hours. With email, it would have taken so long that you probably wouldn’t have even tried (because at the end of the day, come on, who really gives a shit?)
Winner: Everything else.
So there you have it folks, the Wall Street Journal was right: Everything is better than email. Now you know.