How Twitter Helps in a Disaster
Usage during a recent disaster highlights features that make the service so compelling.
The evidence continues to pile up that Twitter is a news service, not a social
network. Of course, Twitter only works as a news service because its news is routed according to
social connections–and that’s the secret to the service’s ability to endlessly issue, digest and re-synthesize news into actionable 140-character memoranda. This is true even–or perhaps especially–in an emergency.
A recent study on the use of Twitter during
natural disasters neatly illustrates the paradox of conversational micro-blogging. The majority of
information that was retweeted during the 2009 record flooding of the Red River in
North Dakota was news – as in, information that did not already exist on Twitter
or even the web. But a great deal of the utility of the service is demonstrated not by this new information, which constituted less than 10% of
tweets culled from a representative sample of Twitter accounts during the
disaster, but the derivative and synthetic tweets that followed in the wake of
these original tweets.
Many of these tweets were issued by local and national
news media, but a surprising number originated with disaster-specific Twitter
accounts that arose for the purpose of updating others with useful information.
This story is only available to subscribers.
Don’t settle for half the story.
Get paywall-free access to technology news for the here and now.
Subscribe now
Already a subscriber?
Sign in
You’ve read all your free stories.
MIT Technology Review provides an
intelligent and independent filter for the
flood of information about technology.
Subscribe now
Already a subscriber?
Sign in
Local and national news organizations, especially,
engaged in synthetic and derivative tweeting during the disaster, while 80% of
the original, “citizen-reported” tweets came from locals who were
living the disaster.
This complicated interplay between original reporting by
locals and synthesis by both traditional news media outlets and flood-specific
twitterers led the researchers to condlude:
“Our data indicate that Twitter activity cannot be
defined completely in terms of generative and synthetic information production.
Twitter is not simply a platform for broadcasting information, but one of
informational interaction. […] navigation of this unwieldy space is difficult.
Many of these conventions have evolved to aid this navigation, directing other
users to valuable information, placing virtual signposts within a complex
information space.”
Retweeting, the researchers argue, is what Twitter
has instead of a formal recommendation system. It’s not simply that information is syndicated: a retweet is a signal that a particular piece of
information is important. Retweeting, synthesis and the occasional
addition of local knowledge of even out-the-kitchen-window type reporting by
locals generated even more noise in the stream of millions of tweets on the disaster that, in turn, the twittersphere condensed
into actionable information:
“Through these activities, Twitterers both
self-organize and create the need for more self-organization, as they generate
even more noise that gives rise to the need for more directing and focusing
behaviors. Derivative information production is therefore a user-driven cycle
of shaping and re-shaping a shared interaction and information space.”
A natural question in disaster tweeting is whether or
not the information pouring out of Twitter on a particular event can be
processed quickly enough – either by Twitter users themselves or some
outside body – to allow decision-makers to act. A second paper by the same
researchers takes a first step toward answering that question. Sarah Vieweg and
colleagues at the University of Colorado, Boulder had to manually code
thousands of tweets to come up with a classification scheme that could be
applied to future disasters, but without automation their procedure is too slow
to be used in its current state.
Both papers illustrate that while the synthesis and analysis tweets carried
out by both journalists and citizens provides the most value for users, it is original reporting that
ultimately makes all the secondary analysis possible.
“When
individuals were the original source for the retweets, two-thirds of the time
they were local or peripheral. The interpretation of this is that locals and
peripheral Twitterers (individuals, media or flood-specific services) are the
locus of retweeted information.”
