Truemors
is reporting from
Member
NP Rank:
NP Rank:
Harvard: The Twitterverse is Vain and Ego-Driven
Share: 
by Truemorist | June 2, 2009 at 01:06 pm
877 views | 0 Recommendations | 4 comments
Harvard Business Review did a study on Twitter and came to the conclusion that Twitterverse is over-run with rampant self-obsessed ego-driven males.
Harvard Business Review has found, "The top 10% of prolific Twitter users accounted for over 90% of tweets. On a typical online social network, the top 10% of users account for 30% of all production." And a separate study shows that Twitter's about the only social network where men are more likely to be "followed" by both other men and by women. That's in contrast to other social networks, where "most of the activity is focused around women."
Seriously, I know, it's shocking. No, not that Twitter is a veritable ego-strokin' playground but the fact that Harvard, the world's bastion of erudition, dropped bank on a study telling us what we all already knew.
Remember a while back the news that Harvard's endowment dropped by 22%? That's $8 billion. C'est la vie apparently; a bombastic study to give scientific weight to Twitter was necessary.
So now we all know: the Twitteratti aren't doing what they do for the peeps, the followers, or the mere hoi polloi of the twitterverse, they're doing it to indulge in all their glory. Kudos Harvard!
What is NowPublic?
NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.
Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (4)
at 13:28 on June 2nd, 2009
" over-run with rampant self-obsessed ego-driven males. "
You say that like it's a BAD thing! I guess that's why Realtors (women too) like it so much.... -Blair
at 14:04 on June 2nd, 2009
The article was basically researched and written by a Harvard b-school student who hasn't even graduated yet. I would hardly consider this a major research undertaking by the university.
at 14:22 on June 2nd, 2009
So did the study mentioned that all the Tweeters were Harvard grads? Sure fit the profile.
at 03:48 on June 3rd, 2009
We take a closer look at some of these numbers here this morning: http://bit.ly/7J9o3. Easy to reach different conclusions, hard to reach the same. Let us know what you think!