the first time I tried to read this, when it was in print and the 140-character structure wasn't obvious, I didn't get much past the second sentence ("Faster than they told YouTube, people told Twitter what was happening.") because it was so meaningless and was followed by one that I fundamentally disagreed with ("In breaking news, eyewitness reports are almost always more valuable and interesting than a journalist's accounts.")<br /><br /> <br /><br /> Trying to read the whole thing now, possibly getting a better sense of the point, there are sections where I can't tell if you're supposed to read from top to bottom or bottom to top.
posted by josh at 2009-07-13 03:00:53 
I found it easier to crank the font size.
posted by Andy Baio at 2009-07-13 10:50:12
I think that this is a fascinating performance piece about the strengths and limitations of the 140-character format and the ephemerality of the medium. Taken individually, and floating on the surface of a stream of thoughts, each of these paragraphs might seem profound. In print, or in collection, many of them beg for falsification, argument, and further discourse.
posted by josh at 2009-07-13 11:51:11
<a href="http://pitchfork.com/features/poptimist/7651-poptimist-22/" target="_blank">Tom Ewing's Pitchfork column two months ago</a> did the same thing, and better.
posted by Matos W.K. at 2009-07-13 23:20:59
(I like Constant's writing plenty, but credit where due.)
posted by Matos W.K. at 2009-07-13 23:22:48
