This really isn’t news per se. Facebook made a run at them late last year but fell short in their bid. Now comes Google.
Robert Scoble has weighed in. I think Scoble raises some excellent points in this post. I have wondered lately if large corporations can really handle social computing. There is too much risk. And in the interest of full disclosure, let me say that I am a Product Manager on a social computing platform at Microsoft. I spend a lot of time thinking about risk. He is tough on IBM, Oracle, and Adobe but toughest on Microsoft. I think he is daring Microsoft to do it but daring Microsoft to do it in the right way. Take the risk, he is saying. He backs Google only to the extent that they will know how to use the technology but hints at what the future of Twitter will be if Google buys them…oblivion. They will chop the code up and use what they can to further their own initiatives but Twitter will be no more.
So, what is the risk? We cannot control community. We can only enable it. This is anathema to a corporation. It appears to work at cross purpose to the reason for a corporation to exist. We have built a business culture that is founded on the idea that control comes from the top down. We currently operate under an Industrial Information Economy as opposed to a Networked Information Economy. Yochai Benkler speaks about this in length in his book, The Wealth of Networks. The world is moving on but corporations are having trouble keeping pace. Oh, did I say it’s about the risk? It is really easier for the corporation, under the old model, to buy things and chop them up, thereby gaining the assets and eliminating the competition. Corporations know this model and can explain it to their stockholders. How long will this last? It is like sweeping back an incoming tide with a broom.
Twitter provides a wonderful window into the world. With the right infrastructure (translate no more Twitter Whales) it could be an amazing tool. What if Microsoft just bought it and let it be what it is? Wouldn’t that be amazing? Oh, and stockholders…..thar’s gold in them thar tweets.

















Get email updates
4 Comments, Comment or Ping
seanwang
The success of Twitter is largely due to its “utility” like funtion. So any attempt to alter it for the benefit of its new “owner” will undoubtedly damage it. However, it’s clearly not viable for Twitter to continue to survive on the infrastructure of one startup.
I think the best future for Twitter is to evolve into an “email like” utility. That is a system of many systems, capable of working as one through standards and protocols, but residing on many seperate infrastructures much like the way email does.
Apr 8th, 2009
ivsyd
Sean,
Google bought YouTube a couple years ago. And this fact didn’t damage YouTube’s popularity
Apr 11th, 2009
crackerbelly
Ivan,
Nice point on YouTube. I hadn’t thought about them. It does appear that they are in the minority however.
Sean,
I suppose Twitter has some potential as an “e-mail light” but I really see their influence in the area of search.
Apr 13th, 2009
traceycheng
Mark,
As much as any other search ‘engine’ right now.. I only see twitter being convenient but not necessarily factual as a search tool.. afterall there is no way to regulate the information..
Apr 25th, 2009
Reply to “Twitter on the auction block”