Network Solutions – Small business conversations and working together for small business success

On the Ubiquity of Twitter Handles

I’m amused at how Twitter usernames are the current de rigueur accessory on people’s name tags at tech events, as well as the default destination whenever you see someone’s name hyperlinked on a Web page.

Naturally, the fashion originates and applies to we folks in the social media community and online marketing fields, which is still a niche (albeit a growing and disproportionately loud one). Even though Twitter-awareness is crossing into the mainstream (on the backs of celebrities), I’m assuming that sticking an @ sign in front of your name amongst the general population will still evoke more questions than meaningful nods.

Of course, we’ve seen this before — going by your handle is a standard ingroup/outgroup identifier for any online community. AOL types used their screen names (which was a handy way to get both your IM and e-mail address out there); forum users, BBSes, IRC chatters, Flickrites, and other netizens routinely referred to each other by their online handles and nicks. And if you were at a Real Life, meatspace meetup, why wouldn’t you identify yourself with the name under which people knew you?

For a time, putting your e-mail address on your nametag had a kitschy cool to it, as did your Web page’s URL, though that got kind of unwieldy until more people started getting vanity domains.

But now that anyone who’s anyone in the field has their vanity domain, why are Twitter handles still  predominant? A few theories:

* They’re pretty recognizable. Put an @ in front of a word, and you know to put “twitter.com/” in front of it.

* It’s a shortcut — assuming you’re covering your social media basics, you’ve filled out your Twitter profile, or at the very least added the URL to your primary Web presence. So it’s a pointer to the rest of your “you.”

It’s a lot easier to say, “I’m [YOUR HANDLE] on Twitter”, than, say “I’m user # 3.14159 on Facebook,” and you can probably still claim your name or choice of nick on Twitter. (Act now.)

* It’s lazy — lazy in the sense that linking to a Wikipedia entry is lazy: You know that pointing to a Twitter profile page will communicate the basics of the person you’re writing about, and lead the reader to more info.

* It’s an invitation — especially given the inherently self-promotional, broadcast nature of Twitter, it’s a way to get your handle out there, and by doing so, invite people to follow you.

*  It’s still kind of cool. Flickr still has that tinge of shiny thing about it.

* Finally, and most importantly, it’s (dare I say it?) authentic. The thing about lifestreaming, is that it’s usually true. Or truthy, anyway. Sure, individual Tweets may be artfully contrived or deliberately outrageous, but if you take the long view of people’s twitterstreams, I think the banal, boring, nothing posts say a lot about a person. At the very least, you’re pointing people to who they’re trying to be, instead of what they’ve done.

Anyway, doubtlessly, Twitter will either fade, or become so insinuated into the fabric of communication that we won’t need to call it out on our nametags, and some next new thing will come along. Until then, I’ll still have my personal vanity domain to fall back on (which, in a happy, yet carefully-contrived happenstance, is the same as my Twitter handle.)

Do you find yourself identifying by your Twitter handle? If you don’t, what do you think of the people who do? Please leave a comment.

Comments are moderated and will appear shortly. See terms.