I left this comment on David Armano's excellent post regarding the "Oprah Effect" on Twitter:
What interests me - beyond how Oprah will impact Twitter's growth - is how the self-described early adopters have taken her presence as a full frontal assault on their sandbox.
It reminds you of high school a bit, no? The jocks and cheerleaders have discovered the 'underground' hangout favored by the punks. In protest the punks are going to take their fun elsewhere (with scowls on their faces as they go). Which is a huge shame as far as I'm concerned ... I always thought (and still do) the most fun parties were when different cliques came together.
Furthermore, nobody 'owns' Twitter. Just because my first Tweet was in 2007 doesn't make me more entitled to the service than someone who joined yesterday. That's plain ridiculous, and anyone who thinks otherwise needs to think about what it means to be a part of a community. Not a cult. A community.
Same goes for FaceBook. If hear one more person bemoan their parents joining FaceBook ... don't accept their request if it bothers you so much. I just don't get the drama. And actually, I appreciate that my mom joined FaceBook - it shows she's got a thirst for knowledge and new experiences despite the incredibly fulfilling life she's already lived.
As has been pointed out repeatedly, no one is forcing anyone to follow Oprah or Ashton or me for that matter (or my mother). In fact I've managed to pretty much ignore all this Oprah/Ashton stuff over the past week. How? By not following them. What Ashton and Oprah do is their business. And if people didn't care, they wouldn't be so popular - despite the protests from the punks.
Pretty simple from where I sit. But then again, I never felt a blind allegiance to any one clique, preferring instead to mingle with all sorts of people.