I don't use my Twitter account on a regular basis, but I log in occasionally. And yes, I tweet links to my writing, sometimes, despite the fact I don't have many followers. My account isn't there for chatting with the unwashed masses, it's primarily for reading what others have to say, be it Rena Sarigianopoulos, Jason DeRusha, Keith Leventhal (who?) or "Boring" Joe Mauer.
Not so long ago Jared Allen retired from the NFL. (If this means nothing to you, it doesn't really matter.) There were a variety of posts that day, toasting the dopey goofball for his corny retirement announcement.
Dawn Mitchell, the secondary sports anchor for the local Fox affiliate, tweeted an "outtake" of some sort from an interview she did, evidently. (I didn't watch the clip, I didn't care enough to know.)
Her tweet was the first once I ran across, so I quote tweeted it, which is very different than replying to it, noting Allen was washed up, so what took so long?
Calling him washed up is harsh. He is past his prime, nobody would argue that. His playing time was reduced the past year or more, not because he couldn't do his job on defense, I suspect. My guess is that after years of pounding on the NFL gridiron he wasn't as spry as he was a decade earlier. Like most players, injuries limit minutes on the field, especially after a decade in the league.
He retired at 33, it's not as if he's about to enter a nursing home, but plenty of people don't survive 10 years in the NFL, and he played 12 seasons. I'm guessing wear and tear was taking its toll, and you can't blame a well compensated player for wanting to get out while he can still walk away on his own, especially in this day and age.
So yes, I was harsh in my criticism of his retirement. He's not really washed up. I quote tweeted Mitchell's clip, sharing it with the dozens of people who follow my account. She should appreciate that.
And what if she doesn't appreciate it? What should she do then? Ignore it. Yes, I drew her attention to my comment by quoting her tweet, but that doesn't require a response. Nowhere did I ask Mitchell to comment or respond. I made a statement. Don't like that I called Allen washed up? Ignore it and move on with your life.
But not Mitchell. She found it necessary to respond, saying that "I don't find your negativity appealing." She's well within her right to do that, but she looks foolish for doing so. Not because she gave me her opinion via a reply, but because of what she tweeted afterward.
I replied by telling her that I didn't realize I was seeking her validation. We then exchanged several comments, hers defending the honor of poor Jared Allen. I agreed with her on one point, but noted that it didn't change the fact he was not going out on top.
At that point she should not have responded and moved on with her life. Not being social media savvy, Mitchell chose otherwise.
Her next comment to me; "So?"
So I responded, by telling her that I called it like I saw it, and she drew attention to it. She noted, again, that she finds negativity unappealing.
At this point I'm confused by the lack of critical thinking on the part of Mitchell, so I replied by telling her I find music festivals unappealing. I don't care if she finds my negativity unappealing, therefore I shared with her something I find unappealing, which happened to be unrelated to our entire exchange.
Now you've gotta think that Mitchell is going to stop responding, as the exchange is clearly going nowhere, and I've made a mockery of it.
Nope, not Mitchell. She's not that savvy. Confused, she replies, "huh".
I assume her response was meant to be in the form of a question, wondering what I meant. I don't know, and it doesn't matter, as she quickly tweeted again, noting "answering a tweet sent at you is not drawing attention. Don't tweet into begin w duh."
Of course the flaw with her logic is the fact that I didn't send a tweet at her, I quote tweeted her, and never asked for a response. She gave it freely, and it did draw attention to my opinion, even if it was only my attention. Had she ignored my quote tweet I'd have forgotten I tweeted it, and today I'd still think Mitchell is smarter than she now appears, at least to me.
By the way, my final response was "tweet was not sent at you. Duh".
Splitting hairs, perhaps, but I clearly didn't ask her for a response, she unintelligently chose to do so.
You'd think a media darling who is trying to establish herself as a household name in the market, a la Mark Rosen, would be thankful her content is being retweeted in any form. I'll guarantee you most media jackals foam at the mouth when their tweets go viral.
A smart, savvy sports anchor-reporter takes every follower and retweet she can get and ignores the crap she disagrees with, especially when she's using her official station account. Trying to put people in their place, and attempting to insult them in doing so, makes you look like an amateur.
Word to the wise: Don't be a Mitchell.
No comments:
Post a Comment