The mixer

This week we just can’t igno­re the most dis­cus­sed new ger­man twit­ter user: It’s the Secre­ta­ry-Gene­ral of the ger­man par­ty SPD, Huber­tus Heil. He used twit­ter during his visit in the United Sta­tes, whe­re he atten­ded the Oba­ma show in Den­ver. The­re are quite inte­res­t­ing nega­ti­ve and posi­ti­ve reac­tions to this new hob­by of Mr. Heil. You can find the­se reac­tions in twit­ter and in an artic­le of the ger­man life­style maga­zi­ne
Der Spie­gel.

It’s a cor­rect esti­ma­ti­on to say that some­ti­mes you’ll be cri­ti­ci­zed imme­dia­te­ly if you do some­thing for get­ting publi­ci­ty. You can see the artic­le in Der Spie­gel quite easy­ily as that of kind of cri­ti­cism. But not every cri­ti­cism that comes up quick­ly is intrin­si­cal­ly wrong.

We don’t mind poli­ti­ci­ans doing things that nor­mal citi­zens do as well. We do mind if they’­re just pre­ten­ding to do so. It’s one cha­rac­te­ristic of the poli­ti­cal stra­tegy of Oba­ma, Heil’s idol and reason to come to Den­ver, to make clear he’s not that kind of faker. Belie­ve it or not. In Ame­ri­ca the media don’t belie­ve that com­ple­te­ly and the­r­e­for they’­re tal­king about play­ing cards.

One thing that is crys­tal clear is that Heil’s show­ing up on twit­ter was plan­ned as a part of his poli­ti­cal actions. You can see that in one of the dele­ted tweets of his account:

Most irri­ta­ting this plan did not result in pre­sen­ting any own poli­ti­cal idea. It also sounds like this who­le action was­n’t his own idea. And though twit­ter is much about pre­ten­ding and the idea that the­re is no non­con­for­mi­ty of tweets, becau­se the­se belong to the sub­jec­ti­ve man­ner to descri­be rea­li­ty, Heil is defi­ni­te­ly a can­di­da­te for TMI to us.

This is so becau­se Heil con­ti­nuous­ly mixes pri­va­te, jour­na­li­stic and polit­cal stuff in his tweets. It’s not clear if he wants to be on twit­ter as a pri­va­te man, a poli­ti­ci­an or a jour­na­list. Actual­ly the­re are enough jour­na­lists and Heil’s pri­va­te life does not attract many peo­p­le.

In this week’s tweet this mixing is inher­ent:

Heil tells us that the mem­bers of the ger­man Bun­des­tag Rolf Müt­zenich and Niels Annen bought a skate­board and shoes during their visit and that they now can get back to work all tog­e­ther.

Is this a poli­ti­cal infor­ma­ti­on or a pri­va­te one? We do think it deals with pri­va­te mat­ters of Müt­zenich and Annen. And for sure the­re will be jour­na­lists to see this in a poli­ti­cal con­text. Anyhow, Heil does not make clear what rele­van­ce his tweets have and how they should be seen as.

Per­haps we should read Heil’s state­ments as the fol­lo­wing tweet should be read, whe­re he tells us how Oba­ma should call his wife:

Bull­shit. [1]

So final­ly it turns out that the twit­ter ques­ti­on to Mr. Heil has to be posed more exact­ly: “What the fuck are you doing?”

__________________________________________________

[1] fol­lo­wing Har­ry Frank­furt On bull­shit, Prince­ton Uni­ver­si­ty Press, 2005

Der japanische Zettelknicker

Es gibt der­zeit einen japa­nisch-ame­ri­ka­ni­schen Insi­der. Die Ame­ri­ka­ner ver­ste­hen nicht die Inten­ti­on die­ses klei­nen, japa­ni­schen Video­clips, fin­den ihn aber lus­tig, was den gan­zen Insi­der nun auch schon aus­macht. Hier mal das Ori­gi­nal:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCKjctTWIsw&w=425&h=355]

Was will uns die­ser Japa­ner sagen? Ich wür­de ja eine neue Oscar-Kate­go­rie vor­schla­gen. Der Oscar für die ein­dring­lichs­te neue Kör­per­hal­tungs­aus­drucks­ges­te geht an.….

The schemer

This week’s tweet is not much about fun. It’s in a way just a state­ment. IKEA paid a guy to stay in a room whe­re he’s being film­ed all day. This was pos­ted in quiet a few blogs alre­a­dy. And as Nils now turns out to be one of the top ger­man twit­ter users regar­ding coun­ted fol­lo­wers we had a short look at him.

You know, in the old days action artists did some­thing spe­cial. Some­ti­mes that was dis­tur­bing. And that kind of dis­tur­ban­ce was the essence of their art.
The art of this guy is just to sit and wait. But not in the Sid­ney Young­blood man­ner. He’s just wai­ting in a room for the new IKEA cata­lo­gue coming out in Sep­tem­ber and that’s all he does in August. And as the time runs out in August he tells us:

In the moment when he could real­ly do some­thing spe­cial, a thing he could have pre­pared hims­elf for the last cou­ple of weeks, he is not able to pre­sent it in a way that does not lea­ve ever­yo­ne bored behind: “I hope the post­man brings the new IKEA cata­louge. I’m real­ly loo­king for­ward for try­ing out my new life.”

Boy, IKEA stuff is not for life. It’s for not spen­ding much money. If that is a top­per of your old life and the start­ing point of your new, we’­ve real­ly got no clue how simp­le you are.

If this pro­ject was just a litt­le bit more intel­li­gent may­be you could see some iro­ny in it. For sure the­re are some guys in twit­ter, that sit befo­re their com­pu­ter the who­le day. Seen that way this pro­ject could be a mir­ror to them. But how numb is it to say the solu­ti­on to that pro­blem was shop­ping?

This who­le thing is an old idea with no new ele­ments and it deals only with mini­ma­lism. A mini­ma­lism that is sup­po­sed to be spe­cial due to not ful­fil­ling expec­ta­ti­ons. Dear IKEA and Nils: We had none. And that’s going to be the essen­ti­al thing con­nec­ted to you.

The clever doggie

If peo­p­le on twit­ter don’t talk about them­sel­ves or their pro­blems, they talk about news, tv, films, other peo­p­le or ani­mals. If they talk about ani­mals, quite often they talk about their pets. And if they talk about pets then they talk about things they did wrong. You can hard­ly ever read a descrip­ti­on of a real­ly rightful done action of a pet. Or may­be that’s just my per­cep­ti­on. It just seems not to be too inte­res­t­ing to talk about that.

If twit­ter users do not talk about their pets, but about ani­mals, it’s about ani­mals in their envi­ron­ment not belon­ging to them. Brittt is one of them. It does not slip her atten­ti­on what and how ani­mals act that are near to her. So she wri­tes:

The first thing I thought is some­thing, I sup­po­se none of you thought. I thought: What a cle­ver dog­gie. He comes into the room, reco­gni­zes that the win­dow is open, jumps upon the win­dows­ill and does his busi­ness out­side for not soi­ling the room. Good boy!

Too sad a second later I thought that was­n’t Brittt’s sto­ry. She in a way wan­ted to tell that a dog was shit­ting out­side her house and that she could watch him doing his busi­ness. And the open win­dow seems to be a link to me that she even smel­led that hap­pe­ning through her open win­dow.

I don’t wan­na care. I think my sto­ry is much more com­pel­ling.

The nothing

Ladies and Gents, this week’s tweet is THE tweet.

It’s the ulti­ma­te tweet.

It con­ta­ins basics any twit­ter user uses. And it’s more. It’s art.
What kind of art it is, is what we need to find out.

So here’s what the tweet of the week is all about. Doomsham­mer says? Wri­tes? Shows? This:

This is more than just a tweet. This is more than just play­ing a tiny tech­ni­cal game. This is a theo­re­ti­cal and prac­ti­cal expres­si­on of the not­hing:

On the one hand you don’t find a sin­gle viewa­ble sign to iden­ti­fy.
On the other hand and as a result of the for­mer you don’t find any abs­tract infor­ma­ti­on within this tweet apart from the author’s name, the soft­ware he uses, the star and the time the tweet was made. If you want to talk about this tweet you are urged to refer to not­hing­ness.

It was Mar­tin Heid­eg­ger clai­ming the not­hing not­hs (“Das Nichts nicht­et.”). You can object against Heid­eg­ger that his hard­ly under­stan­da­ble usa­ge of tur­ning nouns into verbs is not a pos­si­ble way to iden­ti­fy truth. But this objec­tion could fail due to just reve­al­ing yours­elf as being pig­hea­ded. The mista­ke of defi­ning how to iden­ti­fy truth could lie in your own assump­ti­ons. But wit­hout try­ing to glo­ri­fy Heid­eg­ger we have to sta­te that Doomsham­mer shows there’s still some­thing after the not­hing has left.

Lea­ve is defi­ned by Heid­eg­ger with the fol­lo­wing:

This is in eng­lish: “Lea­ve is the absen­ted arri­val of the hiding of kee­ping the pro­gress in the begin­ning.” So Doomsham­mers’ expres­si­on is both the absence of any tweet con­tent and the begin­ning of any tweet.

So do not let Doomsham­mer fool you by lin­king to his own tweet as a tweet of emp­tin­ess:

You might still want to say, we’­re miss­ing the point. We’­re over-inter­pre­ting the who­le tweet. We don’t have any inte­res­t­ing TMIs left and are urged to lift this up to one. Doomshammer’s just a nerd having fun with his iPho­ne.

So if that would be right our text would be TMI. If not we would have pro­ven the incre­di­ble kind of art of this tweet.

We actual­ly think we can pro­ve our the­sis.

We can’t do this theo­re­ti­cal­ly but within prac­ti­se, within one of the artist’s tweet. Take a look at what Doomsham­mer threw like an unsa­tis­fy­ing pain­ting into the trash bin just a second befo­re reve­al­ing his mas­ter­pie­ce:

The masturbation smiley

This week’s tweet is one you could have suspec­ted as that kind of type this pro­ject would have star­ted with. Tal­king about infor­ma­ti­on that is just too much on twit­ter is most­ly infor­ma­ti­on about sexu­al habits.
This is one of them and one that is quite com­pro­mi­sed:

The sim­pli­ci­ty of the mes­sa­ge turns out to rise a lot of ques­ti­ons:

Does Tony real­ly do that what he claims to do or is he just kid­ding? Is that an infor­ma­ti­on he real­ly wants to share with others? What kind of pro­fit would someone else have with this infor­ma­ti­on? Is the­re no one within Tony’s world that feels uncom­for­ta­ble with his?

Tony does­n’t seem to bother about tho­se ques­ti­ons. He even seems to be a rather rela­xing guy having the time to post a tweet while coming into action. But why is he adding a smi­ley to his post? Does he think: Well, you had­n’t expect I would real­ly wri­te this, he? Is he thin­king adding a smi­ley makes an action cool? Is the same con­tent bet­ter wit­hout a refe­rence to smi­ling (bes­i­des on the ava­tar) ?

Well, think about that. Or rather don’t :).