And why it will stay there.
The simple answer is, network effect. Yes, I am stating the overly obvious answer that Twitter is surviving because of it’s network. But not just any network, the fact that Twitter, like the rest of the Web is a scale-free network, is saving it.
For background on this episode of drama, Marco and Louis have some excelent posts about the most recent Twitter drama.
In the book Linked: the New Science of Networks by Albert-Laszlo Barabasi he points out that scale-free networks can survive a full scale assault because the connections are shared across so many hubs.
Where scale-free networks fall apart is when a handful of key hubs fail.
When the entire west coast went dark back in 1996, it was because a few key hubs went out and the other hubs were not able to support it.
No matter how hard Twitter tries they have been unable to unseat Scoble, Arrington, Calacanis, Owyang and others. If the hubs (these and others) would really leave and not just talk about it, their networks would leave with them.
Basically no matter how many of us *average* people leave, Twitter will stay #1.
FriendFeed saved Twitter
Despite all the talk about FriendFeed killing Twitter it actually saved it.
Because FriendFeed is not actually a replacement for Twitter but instead supplements it, when Twitter has issues the hubs go over to FriendFeed (everyone else actually gets some work done) and when Twitter’s up everyone finds their way back.
If FriendFeed hadn’t come along when it had and a handful of the Silicon Valley A listers had really left for Pownce or Plurk, Twitter would have been the next Friendster.
Why Twitters Problems are probably helping it?
I think one of the reasons Twitter is still doing as well as it is is because of it’s problems. It gives everyone something to post about. It keeps things interesting. It’s like the crazy girlfriend. You like being with her because she’s hot but you really love telling your friends the crazy stories.
Marco has an updated post about this last topic.
Technorati Tags: Twitter, FriendFeed, A List, Louis Gray, Robert Scoble, Jason Calacanis, Jeremiah Owyang, Marco Nunez,
Print this post
Great points, I believe they all contribute to Twitter’s overall success. However, I firmly believe that Twitter’s primary reason for success can be directly tied to Disruptive Innovation (inc. theory).
Tac,
THIS post is EXACTLY why I love social media so much.
I had never heard of Barabasi or his book before your post but your analysis and application of his Scale-free concept is DEAD ON (and a much more intellectual exposition of my corn cob pipe discussions!).
On a purely surface level I love: “No matter how hard Twitter tries they have been unable to unseat Scoble, Arrington, Calacanis, Owyang and others.” and “t’s like the crazy girlfriend. You like being with her because she’s hot but you really love telling your friends the crazy stories.”
Good stuff…
Joshua,
I agree, If they weren’t a disruptive technology with first mover advantage they wouldn’t even be in this situation.
Thanks Marco,
We’re all just standing on the shoulders of giants here.
Through all of his latest “snafu” I really didn’t feel like I was missing out on anything. All of the normal twitterers I follow and look for, where still twittering. Aside from the “numbers” being down - everything seemed normal.
Could it be that Twitter just messed with the following/follower numbers on purpose just to get things stirred up and give everybody something to hype up?