Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Communications Twitter Social Networks The Internet Technology

Twitter Will Extend Its 140 Character Limit On September 19th (theverge.com) 135

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Verge: Beginning September 19th, [Twitter] will cut down on exactly which types of content count toward the platform's 140-character limit. Media attachments (images, GIFs, videos, polls, etc.) and quoted tweets will no longer reduce the count. The extra room for text will give users more flexibility in composing their messages. Twitter first announced plans to stop counting extras like photos, videos, and user polls toward the limit back in May, but gave no firm date on when the shift would occur. A Twitter spokesperson declined to comment when contacted by The Verge. The date comes from two sources familiar with the company's business, but plans for the rollout could change. Another new adjustment to the character limit is that usernames will no longer count when they're at the beginning of replies, giving users additional room for discussion. It's unclear whether all of these changes will occur simultaneously; certain content types may gradually stop counting against the character limit in stages. But the company will at least kick off the move next Monday.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Twitter Will Extend Its 140 Character Limit On September 19th

Comments Filter:
  • Proverbial (Score:5, Interesting)

    by vikingpower ( 768921 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2016 @05:01AM (#52877521) Homepage Journal

    As the Dutch proverb goes, "a cat in a tight corner can make odd jumps". Twitter is in a tight place, to which this move may IMHO be a witness.

    • by goombah99 ( 560566 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2016 @08:18AM (#52878225)

      "I didn't have time to write a short letter so I wrote a long one", is an old aphorism. Writing tightly and editing concisely takes skill and wit. Hemingway once wrote the shortest novel on a dare: "For Sale: Baby shoes, Never worn."

      • by vikingpower ( 768921 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2016 @08:25AM (#52878283) Homepage Journal

        Good point. Conciseness was / is one of Twitter USPs, so to say, and now they ditch it. Diary of an announced catastrophe, this is going to be.

        • At the same time, Twitter forces everything to be reduced to a soundbite. Something we could use less of.

          • Was your comment in less than 140 chars?

            Nice.

          • At the same time, Twitter forces everything to be reduced to a soundbite. Something we could use less of.

            Yes, but the world is full of soundbites. Arguably, almost all news is really just extended soundbites (or things of similar depth). Unless you're doing a 15-minute+ extended feature story on something or a 10,000-word essay, you're often not really getting into any complexity around an issue. The 5 or 6 paragraphs typically devoted to a "story" often oversimplify to such an extent that perhaps a 140-character summary would be preferable, along with a link to an actual extended essay on the topic.

            Twitt

      • by AvitarX ( 172628 )

        This change seems reasonable though.

        Being able to quote a full tweet for context and reply makes sense to me, not counting media does to a point too (though it looks like people just post text of longer posts frequently).

        Note: I don't use twitter, but it seems reasonable to define content as actual text and allow that to be 140 characters on the face of it.

      • For sale: web site, never profitable.

  • It's about time... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by geekmux ( 1040042 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2016 @05:12AM (#52877541)

    ...that a company with an online service stops acting like a cellular texting service.

    Limits are even worse to deal with when they are artificial.

    Then again, so are people.

    • A-MEN to that!
    • by Richard_at_work ( 517087 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2016 @06:02AM (#52877681)

      No. No thank you. We don't need another blogging service - Twitter is unique in its tight limits and those limits do provoke some good discussion while cutting down on the meaningless waffle. I can't count the number of Medium.com posts I have read which could be summed up in a couple of sentences, and thats what Twitter excels at.

      You can still have meaningful discussions, but you do NOT get to post a wall of text and walk away - it takes effort to post a wall of tweets, during which time people may reply to individual tweets, and that is awesome.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        It will slowly and surely turn in to a facebook clone.

      • by Entrope ( 68843 )

        Most people post drivel instead of taking advantage of the short limit. Hardly anyone can clearly say something novel in 140 characters. Instead, we get whines about Awful Politico-X, screenshots of longer Facebook rants, and hip-fired rants about ambiguous tweet two-in-a-series-of-ten. Twitter's limit has driven waves of people trying to devise clever soundbites, but largely just beating tribal-affiliation drums.

        • by Anonymous Coward

          You might want to consider following less terrible people on Twitter.

          • You incorrectly assume that I follow anyone on Twitter. My exposure to it is pretty much exclusively what other people find good enough to link to, plus the flood of garbage sent in response to those messages.

            • You incorrectly assume that I follow anyone on Twitter. My exposure to it is pretty much exclusively what other people find good enough to link to

              Then you are in fact following said "other people", even if said following is through a mechanism other than Twitter's follow button.

              • What on earth are you going on about? I consume non-Twitter media, therefore I should stop following the horrible people on Twitter that I don't follow, and instead use my non-existent Twitter account to follow better people?

                • by tepples ( 727027 )

                  I consume non-Twitter media

                  Nothing is being consumed [gnu.org].

                  use my non-existent Twitter account to follow better people

                  The word "follow" existed before Twitter. You view media published by particular people. Therefore, you follow those people.

                  • What part of "follow[] on Twitter" is unclear to you, you obnoxious idiot?

                    • by tepples ( 727027 )

                      I accept that you don't follow people on Twitter. I was pointing out that you still follow people without doing so specifically on Twitter. If the people you follow off Twitter link you to garbage on Twitter, and you don't want to read that kind of garbage, then perhaps you could stop following them off Twitter.

                      So to rephrase Anonymous Coward: You might want to consider following less terrible people on and off Twitter.

                    • by Entrope ( 68843 )

                      I'll take your suggestion that I stop following CNN and BBC under advisement.

      • Odd; I thought Twitter's business model was being the Internet's primary source for meaningless waffle.

        • Odd; I thought Twitter's business model was being the Internet's primary source for meaningless waffle.

          Exactly.

        • by mwvdlee ( 775178 )

          They have a business model?

          • Odd; I thought Twitter's business model was being the Internet's primary source for meaningless waffle.

            They have a business model?

            More importantly: They have waffles?

      • by Alomex ( 148003 )

        Having a limit makes sense, even a rather small one, but 140 is just too small. They should go up to 300 or so.

        • by gfxguy ( 98788 )
          Having a small limit is what made it viable to start including people's tweets on television (I do graphics, sometimes involving social media, for live TV). I can tell you our social media people will probably be shying away from longer tweets to show on air... we would have to leave the graphic up far too long, and we'll have to rework our graphics that maximize the font size to make tweets more legible to be read in a short period of time - the font size will be smaller, it'll be harder to read in the 5
          • by OhPlz ( 168413 )

            I can tell you our social media people will probably be shying away from longer tweets to show on air...

            How about not showing any tweets on TV? It's useless clutter blocking the content that viewers actually want to see.

            • by gfxguy ( 98788 )
              It's Nielsen's fault - they started including social media mentions to come up with an overall "presence" stat, so every network jumped on trying to get people to talk about their shows on social media - and what better enticement than to dangle the possibility of having your tweet actually shown on the air for your five seconds of fame?
      • I agree with this, generally, but I think 140 is a little too tight. I find myself with thoughts that end up in the 160 - 200 character range, and it's annoying to break them up.

        Of course there are numerous "tweet longer" services that will turn a longer post into an image, so it's not hard to work around if you choose to
      • Speak only for yourself. One of the biggest reasons I ignore Twitter is the inability to be able to write any comment minimally useful because of size limitations. It is like a conversation between brats.
      • That was my impression: the 140 character limit is defining of Twitter. It was good to have messages condensed to a certain specification when attention of users became so in demand. That led to the use of link shorteners in tweets, though. This change partly addresses that.
      • I can't count the number of Medium.com posts I have read which could be summed up in a couple of sentences

        Medium.com should start Small.com and encourage users to create an abstract of each article. Then Small.com would just have the abstracts.

    • Yep. A service where the signal to noise ratio is only envied by SETI will become slightly less useless. Now hipsters can use full spelling to describe their outrage at Urban Outfitters being sold out of that perfect frumpy sweater that they wanted to buy!

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Please take a moment to reconsider.

      Having limits is one thing (along others), which make art interesting.

      Games, and computer games even more so, are based around artificial limits.

      As for people, well, at least you got a nice punchline.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    So what's the difference between twitter and any other blog site?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 13, 2016 @05:19AM (#52877559)

    The genius of the 140 character limit is that you always finish reading a tweet before your brain has time to fully process how utterly boring and trivial the bullshit you just read was. If you give users the ability to pad out their vapid brain farts into essays that take actual time to read, people might finally start grasping what a monumental heap of pointlessness twitter really is.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      If you give users the ability to pad out their vapid brain farts into essays...

      That's called Facebook.

  • Growing pains (Score:4, Insightful)

    by OpenSourced ( 323149 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2016 @05:20AM (#52877563) Journal

    It's curious how many big companies, when they reach a certain age, think that it's a good idea to take whatever make them big, and change it. It's probably the human instinctive rejection of simple inaction.

    Twitter is famous because it forces people to be concise. Tweets are cited in news outlets because they are concise and so provide the short text bite that is easy to digest by the public. Nobody is going to cite a tweet that is longer than the article.

    So basically, what they are doing is giving a step to get closer to a mailing list service. Way to go!

    • by idji ( 984038 )
      They have no choice. they have to change or die. Look it up, Twitter is not going well at all.
      • In my meaningless opinion, this is because Twitter made the horrible decision to sell stock. A stock company needs a continuous, profitable, growth model to survive. Sure Twitter can try to make money by advertising but I can't see how it could have gotten any bigger than it was before selling stocks. Google expanded but by diversifying as a company, not by somehow making being a search engine more profitable.

        • by Entrope ( 68843 )

          It's almost impossible to grow to "Internet scale" through organic growth -- you won't be able to provision ahead of demand. Companies that want to be the Next Big Thing seek venture capital, and VCs want an exit strategy, which means an IPO. Google was no exception in that regard.

      • That sounds like investor/share holder FUD...

        Twitter is fine. They just aren't growing at some exponential rate that is demanded by those... people.

        • by Khyber ( 864651 )

          Twitter is NOT fine. If you look at a 5 year history, they've been doing nothing but falling.

          • Not true.

            www.statista.com/statistics/282087/number-of-monthly-active-twitter-users/

            Unless you have better stats.

            • by Khyber ( 864651 )

              I do have better stats - it's called THEIR STOCK NUMBERS.

              • That's not a valid argument for the number of users.

                The stock is going down because the RATE of users is going down.

                That's not the same thing. If you need an explanation as to why, go ask someone else.

    • companies have to change. You see once you hit your growth wall you stop growing, which makes you unattractive to wall street, which trashes your company.

      wall street demands unlimited growth in all businesses. if your company stops growing you will pay for it.

      • That might be true for companies that don't actually produce value, like Twitter. Twitter exists as a conduit for delivering eyeballs to advertisers, and must continue to grow and stay in the forefront, or those eyeballs go to the new guy that is in the forefront and the company shrivels like a piece of fruit left on the counter too long. See: Myspace.

        Companies that actually produce goods of some kind don't necessarily have the same pressures.

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      It's only stuff like links that are excluded, the message still has to be short. The headline is wrong.

    • This is simply the result of so-called professional management taking the reins, feeling the need to "do something" to be relevant and try to justify their extravagant compensation.
    • by T.E.D. ( 34228 )

      Nobody is going to cite a tweet that is longer than the article.

      It doesn't really surprise me any more that some /. users don't even bother to fully read the summary. What is sad is how the preponderance of moderators don't seem to be reading the summaries either.

    • by Rinikusu ( 28164 )

      Kinda like /. ? I swear when I load /., i can feel the javascript shuddering through my system.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Couldn't they make that available on other days too?

  • The more time goes on, the more all the messaging services are becoming the same. Even today the differences between Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, Snapchat and Co. is already rather slim, as they are all essentially used for the same things: post text, images or video to a group of people or the public. Even that fundamental 140 character limit on Twitter is constantly worked around by posting images of text or linking to sites like Twitlonger. The only real difference is the client, some client make it rea

    • What we are seeing here is essentially see the slow and painful reinvention of email with broadcast functionality. I could even see that turning into an open standard in another few years, as it's rather pointless to have so many apps doing the same thing and be incompatible with each other.

      Dude, you got yourself a start-up idea there, do you realize that ? Contact me if you do .

    • by Entrope ( 68843 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2016 @06:56AM (#52877813) Homepage

      Hmm. Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

    • If you cannot see a huge difference between Twitter and Facebook you're not looking hard enough. But drama sells.
      • Where is the huge difference? You have a linear news feed where you can post messages and others can comment on your messages. It's the same as everything else. Back when Twitter started it was a different thing, the 140 characters were all that you got and there was no integration of pictures, but that has been eroded for years, pictures, video and Co. are now all normal on Twitter and natively supported. Even the page layout is mostly the same with friends and photo boxes on the left and news feed on the

  • September 19th is International Talk Like a Pirate Day. The extra characters in Twitter should really move the needle on human progress starting immediately.

  • by coofercat ( 719737 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2016 @07:15AM (#52877887) Homepage Journal

    Other hot Social Media news:

    Twitter is planning to change their blue colour from #63aeee to #63aeed - date to be confirmed, but two sources claim it'll be October 12th.

  • by ThatsNotPudding ( 1045640 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2016 @07:15AM (#52877891)
    The gigantism trend of phones accelerates.
    Maybe that's one silver lining of prevalent obesity; it will make our phones look smaller.
  • Most people are missing the point. The 140 limit is still there. You will just no longer be penalized for including other content. As a heavy user, currently this was a big bugaboo because you never know how much a picture or link is going to reduce your count. I try to budget about 6, and sometimes it hits that, sometimes it goes clear up into the teens instead for no apparent reason. Its really annoying to have to change your message to make it look like it came from a 1337 D00D just to squeeze 5 characte

  • Forget human conversations... With the 140 limit gone now I'm wondering if it will now be more usable as a public MQTT broker [wikipedia.org] or other communication bus.

    Security and performance concerns aside, of course....
  • Twitter is desperate to preserve itself as the premier platform for social signaling, manufactured outrage, and trolling; a platform where a character limit ensures that no rational argument or thoughtful analysis is possible. Keep going, Twitter, you're doing great!

  • How about coming up with a business model?
    I've run a few businesses and figuring out how to make some money was usually something we did.

  • This is just another culture-shattering consequence of piracy!

  • give users more flexibility

    I, for one, look forward to someone bending and twisting a few of these new, flexible twits.

  • Now they limit your messages based on politics and not on length.
  • With Twitter, I almost always try to have a tweet with correct English spelling, grammar and punctuation, and which takes up exactly 140 characters, using at most 3-4 hash tags. (Yes, I'm on the spectrum.)

    What am I going to do now? I hope I don't get Twittagoraphobia with all the space it will shower me with.

  • leaving Twitter for good
    goin' back to Baudot on paper tape
    shoulda stayed on the farm
    shoulda listened to my old man
    back to the howlin' old owl in the woods
    huntin' the horny back toad

  • Eventually the message body won't count either. C'mon guys, give it up. It's 2016. Can we afford maybe 300 characters, when the payload of a tweet's metadata is already several kilobytes?

Keep up the good work! But please don't ask me to help.

Working...