Skip to main content

Buying into hashtags

If I'm honest, I didn't get the point of hashtags to begin with. These aren't some strange aid for substance abuse, but those little features of Twitter posts (and hence Facebook status lines) that start with a "#" symbol - known as hash to its friends.

The idea of hashtags is to make it easy to pull together a stream of tweets on a linked topic. So, for instance, when there was the recent business over Scientology and the attack on a councillor for making a humorous tweet about them, the associated hashtag was #StupidScientology. Anyone wanting to follow comments on this matter could search for this particular hashtag.

Initially I really couldn't see the point. Twitter doesn't use # as a special symbol - it would work just as well if everyone just put StupidScientology in their post. But in practice it was useful to avoid confusion in a short message by having a word or phrase intended as a search term that didn't necessarily fit with the rest of the text. However, more recently I have come to see that the hashtag is more than this - it can be used as a shorthand explanation of what is happening.

I've done a couple of tweets lately using the hashtag #teenlogic - the idea being that these tweets were demonstrating occasions when teenagers had come up with an argument that didn't work in real world logic, but worked to the teen mind. One of my posts was this:

Whose shoes are these? Emily's. So how did she get home? She wore mine. Doh! #teenlogic

What I realized is that the hashtag does more than act as a search tool here - it explains what's going on. Without it, I seem to be suggesting that Emily has taken my shoes. But the #teenlogic tag tells us this is a conversation with a teenager, putting the whole tweet into context. This is really remarkably powerful, allowing a lot to be condensed into a few letters. Go hashtag!

Comments

  1. I did see this on twitter and, to be honest, I didn't understand what was going on because I still hadn't -- up til now -- understood the whole hashtag thing. But now my world is that much clearer....Thanks :-)

    ReplyDelete
  2. I don't think my brain works in the way you are suggesting it should. Even with this label and explanation I still think it suggests that Emily took your shoes. Perhaps I don't speak to enough teenagers...

    ReplyDelete
  3. John - no means of communication is perfect, and as Sue suggests, in this case involves learning a convention.

    The convention is that the hashtag qualifies what comes before it. In this case, it says "This is an example of teen logic". Now I admit this only is useful if you know me enough to know that I'm not a teenager, but I think this is true of most of my readers.

    Does that help? It's not that your brain doesn't work the right way, just that you aren't familiar with and/or comfortable with the convention.

    ReplyDelete
  4. No - it doesn't help.

    I understand the convention, it's just that I don't understand the tweet, even in the light of the hashtag. Don't worry. I expect you got the shoes back!

    ReplyDelete
  5. #I_wonder_what_can_be_said_in_any_tweet_that_references_a_hash_tag_that_is_so_long_that_it_leaves_only_some_very_small_n_of_spare_space?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why I hate opera

If I'm honest, the title of this post is an exaggeration to make a point. I don't really hate opera. There are a couple of operas - notably Monteverdi's Incoranazione di Poppea and Purcell's Dido & Aeneas - that I quite like. But what I do find truly sickening is the reverence with which opera is treated, as if it were some particularly great art form. Nowhere was this more obvious than in ITV's 2010 gut-wrenchingly awful series Pop Star to Opera Star , where the likes of Alan Tichmarsh treated the real opera singers as if they were fragile pieces on Antiques Roadshow, and the music as if it were a gift of the gods. In my opinion - and I know not everyone agrees - opera is: Mediocre music Melodramatic plots Amateurishly hammy acting A forced and unpleasant singing style Ridiculously over-supported by public funds I won't even bother to go into any detail on the plots and the acting - this is just self-evident. But the other aspects need some exp...

Murder by Candlelight - Ed. Cecily Gayford ***

Nothing seems to suit Christmas reading better than either ghost stories or Christmas-set novels. For some this means a fluffy romance in the snow, but for those of us with darker preferences, it's hard to beat a good Christmas murder. An annual event for me over the last few years has been getting the excellent series of classic murderous Christmas short stories pulled together by Cecily Gayford, starting with the 2016 Murder under the Christmas Tree . This featured seasonal output from the likes of Margery Allingham, Arthur Conan Doyle, Ellis Peters and Dorothy L. Sayers, laced with a few more modern authors such as Ian Rankin and Val McDermid, in some shiny Christmassy twisty tales. I actually thought while purchasing this year's addition 'Surely she is going to run out of classic stories soon' - and sadly, to a degree, Gayford has. The first half of Murder by Candlelight is up to the usual standard with some good seasonal tales from the likes of Catherine Aird, Car...

Is 5x3 the same as 3x5?

The Internet has gone mildly bonkers over a child in America who was marked down in a test because when asked to work out 5x3 by repeated addition he/she used 5+5+5 instead of 3+3+3+3+3. Those who support the teacher say that 5x3 means 'five lots of 3' where the complainants say that 'times' is commutative (reversible) so the distinction is meaningless as 5x3 and 3x5 are indistinguishable. It's certainly true that not all mathematical operations are commutative. I think we are all comfortable that 5-3 is not the same as 3-5.  However. This not true of multiplication (of numbers). And so if there is to be any distinction, it has to be in the use of English to interpret the 'x' sign. Unfortunately, even here there is no logical way of coming up with a definitive answer. I suspect most primary school teachers would expands 'times' as 'lots of' as mentioned above. So we get 5 x 3 as '5 lots of 3'. Unfortunately that only wor...