The Pop Culture Information Society...

These are the messages that have been posted on inthe00s over the past few years.

Check out the messageboard archive index for a complete list of topic areas.

This archive is periodically refreshed with the latest messages from the current messageboard.

The 2000's 2017 Archive: (December) (November) (October) (September) (August) (July) (June) (May) (April) (March) (February) (January)

This is a topic from the The 2000's forum on inthe00s.

Check for new replies or respond here...

Subject: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mach!ne_he@d on 01/06/17 at 11:28 am

An issue that's often discussed on this forum and others is the growth of social media during the mid-to-late '00s. I think the general consensus among most people (including me) was that social media, particularly in the form of MySpace, grew rapidly during 2005 and was already just about universally adopted by 2006.

Well, apparently I was wrong. Big time!

Pew Research has been studying social media use dating back to 2005, and it found some very interesting results. In February 2005, just 8% of Americans were using social media. Most shocking of all, by August 2006, that number was just a paltry 16%! :o

Here are the full numbers over time:

February 2005 -- 8%
August 2006 -- 16%
May 2008 -- 29%
April 2009 -- 47%
May 2010 -- 61%
August 2011 -- 64%
December 2012 -- 67%
May 2013 -- 72%
September 2013 -- 73%
January 2014 -- 74%
July 2015 -- 76%

Now, because those numbers are for adults, you might think that skews things a bit since so many teenagers use social media, but even among teens the number of social media users is lower than you would expect. In 2006, just 55% of teens used social media, meaning, obviously, that a full 45% still didn't!

Here's the study for teenagers over the years:

2006 -- 55%
2007 -- 60%
2008 -- 65%
2009 -- 73%
2011 -- 80%
2012 -- 81%

The full charts are here: http://www.pewinternet.org/data-trend/social-media/social-media-use-all-users/

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Zelek3 on 01/06/17 at 11:29 am

If that Pew chart is any indication, the growth of social media was really more of a late 00s thing than a mid 00s thing.

True, it was growing in the mid 00s, but it didn't really skyrocket until May 2008 onwards.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/06/17 at 12:36 pm

My first social media account was my Twitter in December 2008, so I guess I was right on time ;D

From my personal experience, it was like

2004 too young.

2005 Social media exploded around spring 2005. It was way more popular with girls than with guys, who thought it was girly/narcissistic.

2006 A continuation of 2005, though by late 2006 I remember some guys got social media accounts too, to keep in touch with people who were going to different high schools.

2007 Facebook started to take off. I don't know if this counts, but the hype for the public launch of Gmail was huge. When it was invite-only, @gmail.com accounts were highly sought after. Keeping a blog was pretty common.

2008 First half of the year was the same as 2007. The late part of the year is when the revolution happened. I remember my very first day of 11th Grade (September 2008), I got asked if I had a Facebook, and when I said "no", she asked "why not?", as if it was expected of me. I got my Twitter by the end of the year, but more for the blogosphere, rather than to connect with anyone at school.

2009 I got Facebook at the beginning of the year. I remember by the time I got it, 60-70% of my classmates were already there, which was shocking to me. It felt like "this whole world was hidden this whole time" :o Twitter took off too when my school got a Twitter account and started posting updates on it, I remember about 30-40% my classmates were following the school account and that's where we found each other. I started my blog this year too! MSN started to die towards the end of the year. I noticed less and less people logging on, and my group chats getting smaller :\'(

2010 I remember I still used MSN to communicate for school group projects in the early half of the year. My blog was still popular. Facebook was dominant, but in my circle of socially awkward nerds, about half of them still didn't have Facebook because they thought it was for the feeble-minded plebs. People with conservative/strict parents weren't allowed on Facebook either. 73% sounds about right. In the late part of the year, I got my first smartphone, and my main reason for getting it was literally Twitter #millennial. I also installed an ad-hoc, cumbersome MSN app, but it was all for nought, I noticed barely anyone logging on at that point, and the people that did got annoyed that I was even talking to them through MSN, like they accidentally left it on ;D

Yeah, I'd pin the absolute death of MSN at late 2010, though the writing was on the wall by mid-2009. But I used Steam to still do IM chats in the early 2010s. I got my fix! I stopped updating my blog in 2011/2012, and I noticed a lot stopped around then too. Of course they still exist, but not many people keep a personal one anymore.

Most my nerdy friends got Facebook by 2013/2014. I notice some still don't have it though. My friends didn't jump on the Instagram and Snapchat bandwagon as much as the younger millennials did, like I notice that if 30% of my friends have those services, for people only a 2-3 younger than me the rate jumps to ~80%. And I notice way more of my female friends have those than my male friends. It's like the mid-2000s never went away.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 80sfan on 01/06/17 at 12:54 pm

I remember it got really popular in 2005/2006.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: stefanvh on 01/07/17 at 5:19 am

I got my Facebook in May 2009 (when I was 13). I remember that pretty much everyone in my year had it too. This was around the time when at least from personal experience, to not have a Facebook was to be 'uncool'. I was also living in France back then, so the percentages certainly should be lower there.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Catherine91UK on 01/07/17 at 8:45 am

I started using Bebo in early 2007, by which time most of my friends were already using it, and Myspace in late 2007. I signed up for Facebook in May 2008 - about the same time as my friends - but didn't really use it until around December of that year.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Lizardmatum on 01/07/17 at 9:55 am

First time I heard about Facebook was 2009 actually when a family friend got on to it. I joined in 2011 but most people my age who were in my class joined about 2009 when they were around 13/14

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: SpyroKev on 01/07/17 at 10:38 am

That makes me happy. Social media sucked us apart in the worst way.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Looney Toon on 01/07/17 at 11:38 am

Oh wow. Didn't even past 50% of user population until the 2010s. Basically meaning that less than half of the population in the 2000s really used social media. I'm shocked about this. A very interesting discovery to me.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/07/17 at 12:03 pm

The fact that it didn't had a lot of popularity in the 2000s makes me wonder why people thought social media was big in the decade. Only Myspace, Facebook (at least in the late 2000s), Digg, and YouTube were the only social media sites that were great, but they were havens for teenagers. Come to think of it, it's no wonder why everyone used AIM so much back then. Even as a child, I knew about AIM's existence to the point where I actually talked to people on it (rarely). On the other hand, I'm really happy that social media didn't took off immensely until the 2010s started. I'm sick and tired of people saying that the mid 2000s was when everything changed in the 21st century, especially with Facebook and YouTube's establishment.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Howard on 01/07/17 at 12:52 pm

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/07/17 at 12:56 pm

The mid 2000s had a bunch of other social media sites like Nexopia and Flickr. It wasn't just MySpace and YouTube. These were popular for teens specifically. But for the general adult population, the social media explosion was in the late 00s.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/07/17 at 12:59 pm

The fact that it didn't had a lot of popularity in the 2000s makes me wonder why people thought social media was big in the decade. Only Myspace, Facebook (at least in the late 2000s), Digg, and YouTube were the only social media sites that were great, but they were havens for teenagers. Come to think of it, it's no wonder why everyone used AIM so much back then. Even as a child, I knew about AIM's existence to the point where I actually talked to people on it (rarely). On the other hand, I'm really happy that social media didn't took off immensely until the 2010s started. I'm sick and tired of people saying that the mid 2000s was when everything changed in the 21st century, especially with Facebook and YouTube's establishment.

It was big if you were under 30. It's the 30+ demographic who are skewing the 2000s statistics. They didn't jump onto social media until the 2010s.

If you go on the site, you'll see that only 8% of teens and twenties had a social media account at the beginning of 2005, but by mid-2006, the rate jumped to 50%. So if you were between 13-29 then, the social media revolution happened mostly in the mid and late 2000s, not the 2010s.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: JordanK1982 on 01/07/17 at 1:20 pm

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 80sfan on 01/07/17 at 1:20 pm

I didn't get Facebook until 2008. :o

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/07/17 at 1:28 pm

You guys are funny trying to make the 00's seem older than they are. :P For once, Mr. Pokeman2001 up there (remember that name? :P ;)) has it right. Myspace was huge back then and Facebook wasn't too far behind around 2006-2008. I never had any of that sh!t but I knew so many people who did.

I agree. I didn't get Facebook until 2008 but I had friends who had it in 2007. MySpace was huge and YouTube was too. As well as the other smaller teen social networking sites that were popular at the time. The 2000s weren't THAT old, there was still a lot of social media back then. Now before 2003, there really wasn't any social networking sites however. They certainly didn't start to get popular until 2004 with MySpace.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/07/17 at 1:30 pm

I didn't get Facebook until 2008. :o

2009 for me. :-
You guys are funny trying to make the 00's seem older than they are. :P For once, Mr. Pokeman2001 up there (remember that name? :P ;)) has it right. Myspace was huge back then and Facebook wasn't too far behind around 2006-2008. I never had any of that sh!t but I knew so many people who did.

I still have to use that name to log on ;D

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 80sfan on 01/07/17 at 1:31 pm

2009 for me. :-[

Don't feel bad, I didn't get MTV until 2008.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/07/17 at 1:32 pm

Don't feel bad, I didn't get MTV until 2008.

2009 for me. :-
I had MuchMusic in the early 2000s though

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/07/17 at 1:35 pm

Don't feel bad, I didn't get MTV until 2008.

I hated MTV but I enjoyed MuchMusic growing up.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 80sfan on 01/07/17 at 1:36 pm

I hated MTV but I enjoyed MuchMusic growing up.

Oh yeah, I never got MuchMusic. My sister did have MTV. :-X

I don't mind either channel, but MTV really stopped playing videos fully, around after 2003.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Howard on 01/07/17 at 1:37 pm

I hated MTV but I enjoyed MuchMusic growing up.

Did you enjoy MTV in the 80's?

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 80sfan on 01/07/17 at 1:37 pm

2009 for me. :-
I had MuchMusic in the early 2000s though

Oh.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mxcrashxm on 01/07/17 at 1:38 pm

Yeah, these stats are shocking; however, the problem is that it goes up to 2014 which means the data is 3 years old.

Oh, and I was checking out the cell phone ownership and it turns out in 2004, 45% of adolescents had one while 68% of adults had one. I'm not sure if this is surprising though since most people assume that teens mainly had cellphones at that time.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/07/17 at 1:41 pm

Did you enjoy MTV in the 80's?

I wasn't alive in the 80s.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/07/17 at 1:45 pm

Cause back then it was the only form of communication, at first I used AIM to chat with people but then I got rid of it and started using Skype instead.

AIM wasn't really the only form of communication on the Internet. We already had email during the 90s, but it was dominated by AOL's services (the people who made AIM).

If you go on the site, you'll see that only 8% of teens and twenties had a social media account at the beginning of 2005, but by mid-2006, the rate jumped to 50%. So if you were between 13-29 then, the social media revolution happened mostly in the mid and late 2000s, not the 2010s.

But wouldn't the social media revolution take place in the late 2000s, if a lot of young people didn't use social media until mid 2006? That's not even a whole year from the mid 2000s.

Yeah, these stats are shocking; however, the problem is that it goes up to 2014 which means the data is 3 years old.

Oh, and I was checking out the cell phone ownership and it turns out in 2004, 45% of adolescents had one while 68% of adults had one. I'm not sure if this is surprising though since most people assume that teens mainly had cellphones at that time.

I guess they were hypocrites by the time smartphones were in the mainstream. Especially when businessmen were usually generalized of having a cellphone wherever they go back in the 90s and 2000s.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: HazelBlue99 on 01/07/17 at 5:58 pm

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/07/17 at 6:13 pm

The only social media websites I was aware of back in the Mid 2000s were Myspace and MSN. I remember social media was only viewed as being an "adolescent" thing; I can't actually recall hearing of any adults who used Myspace or MSN back then. In my opinion, it was around 2008 that the general public had really adapted to social media and it's usage drastically increased. Social media was starting to become more of a presence in news stories as well. I remember this one instance back in 2008, where a 16-year-old teenager had invited everyone to a house party through Myspace and it spiraled out of control. Those type of news stories didn't happen back in 2005 or 2006. My parents both created their own Facebook accounts in 2008, but I didn't create my own until July 2011.

I didn't have a Facebook account until 2010, but I only used it to play games and friend my family. It kinda sucked, but I found YouTube to be more addicting. As for Myspace, I never really thought it was that popular compared to other social media sites. It was only around for 2003-2008, and then everyone got into Facebook around 2009 and 2010. After that, it was just an abandoned site that never got a decent legacy.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/07/17 at 6:39 pm

I didn't have a Facebook account until 2010, but I only used it to play games and friend my family. It kinda sucked, but I found YouTube to be more addicting. As for Myspace, I never really thought it was that popular compared to other social media sites. It was only around for 2003-2008, and then everyone got into Facebook around 2009 and 2010. After that, it was just an abandoned site that never got a decent legacy.

MySpace back in the day was as big as Facebook today. Even bigger actually because there were a limited amount of alternatives. MySpace was huge.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/07/17 at 6:51 pm

MySpace back in the day was as big as Facebook today. Even bigger actually because there were a limited amount of alternatives. MySpace was huge.

Well yeah, but it's not as immense as Facebook or even Twitter. Not a lot of big time celebrities used Myspace at the time, so it was just average teenagers who lived at middle class neighborhoods. Not saying that all of them are middle class, but it's the majority of them who had a Myspace account.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/07/17 at 7:18 pm

But wouldn't the social media revolution take place in the late 2000s, if a lot of young people didn't use social media until mid 2006? That's not even a whole year from the mid 2000s.

The biggest chunk of growth came from the mid-2000s, since it went from roughly 10% to 50% penetration in that time period. By the end of the 2000s, it was 75%. It grew by 40 percentage points in the mid-2000s, and a further 25 percentage points in the late 2000s as it reached saturation.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/07/17 at 7:24 pm

Well yeah, but it's not as immense as Facebook or even Twitter. Not a lot of big time celebrities used Myspace at the time, so it was just average teenagers who lived at middle class neighborhoods. Not saying that all of them are middle class, but it's the majority of them who had a Myspace account.

Actually a lot of celebrities used MySpace back then. I remember looking at some celebrities' MySpace profiles and following them. They used this to attract teens. In fact, around 2007 MySpace became more for music artists showcasing their work. It was really as immense as Facebook and Twitter today.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/07/17 at 7:29 pm

The biggest chunk of growth came from the mid-2000s, since it went from roughly 10% to 50% penetration in that time period. By the end of the 2000s, it was 75%. It grew by 40 percentage points in the mid-2000s, and a further 25 percentage points in the late 2000s as it reached saturation.

Since it went from 10 to 75% during 2006-2009, I would highly doubt that the majority of the mid 2000s was when it started. Maybe the late 2000s would, but it wasn't like everybody on the Internet had a Myspace profile.

Actually a lot of celebrities used MySpace back then. I remember looking at some celebrities' MySpace profiles and following them. They used this to attract teens. In fact, around 2007 MySpace became more for music artists showcasing their work. It was really as immense as Facebook and Twitter today.

I'm talking about everybody that has an account on Twitter and Facebook, not just musicians. The ones that are in their teens to their elderly ages.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/07/17 at 7:36 pm

Since it went from 10 to 75% during 2006-2009, I would highly doubt that the majority of the mid 2000s was when it started. Maybe the late 2000s would, but it wasn't like everybody on the Internet had a Myspace profile.

You got the numbers and the dates wrong. It was 10% at the beginning of 2005. February 2005 to be exact. By August 2006 (still the numerical mid-2000s), it hit 50%. The biggest chunk of growth came from the mid-2000s. From there, the growth rate slowed down and it grew incrementally until it hit 85% in the middle of 2010 and it reached saturation. The latest figure is 89%.

I guess a similar comparison would be the Internet revolution (although the social media revolution is focused on youth). Almost everyone agrees it occurred in the second half of the '90s, even if it didn't become virtually ubiquitous until the early 2000s. People find it strange someone would want to return to 2005 to experience a "pre-social media world" for the same reasons it would be strange to head to 1999 for a pre-Internet world.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mach!ne_he@d on 01/07/17 at 7:49 pm

Most my nerdy friends got Facebook by 2013/2014. I notice some still don't have it though. My friends didn't jump on the Instagram and Snapchat bandwagon as much as the younger millennials did, like I notice that if 30% of my friends have those services, for people only a 2-3 younger than me the rate jumps to ~80%. And I notice way more of my female friends have those than my male friends. It's like the mid-2000s never went away.

That's an interesting observation, and something I've noticed, too. Most of my closest friends are somewhere between 28-32 years old and I only know two of them who use Instagram or Snapchat with any regularity. There does seem to be a divide when it comes to social media for older millennials (those who were in high school and college when the rise of MySpace/Facebook/YouTube/Twitter occurred) and younger millennials (those in high school and college at the height of the Snapchat/Instagram/Buzzfeed/Tumblr era).

Oh, and I was checking out the cell phone ownership and it turns out in 2004, 45% of adolescents had one while 68% of adults had one. I'm not sure if this is surprising though since most people assume that teens mainly had cellphones at that time.

That caught my attention as well, and it jibes with what I remember. A lot of my friends (including me) still did not own cell phones when we were in high school, so I wasn't the least bit surprised to see cell phone ownership at only 45% among teens in 2004. It really reinforces how much things have changed since then, as today probably close to 85% of teens have smartphones or some other similar device.

Another stat that I found interesting was the one for internet usage and how it's grown over the years. As of 2014, 87% of Americans used the internet, while in 1995 it was only 14%. In fact, in 1998 only 36% used the internet showing that, despite the Dot Com boom, the medium had still not fully penetrated the American household in the late '90s.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/07/17 at 8:21 pm

That's an interesting observation, and something I've noticed, too. Most of my closest friends are somewhere between 28-32 years old and I only know two of them who use Instagram or Snapchat with any regularity. There does seem to be a divide when it comes to social media for older millennials (those who were in high school and college when the rise of MySpace/Facebook/YouTube/Twitter occurred) and younger millennials (those in high school and college at the height of the Snapchat/Instagram/Buzzfeed/Tumblr era).

That caught my attention as well, and it jibes with what I remember. A lot of my friends (including me) still did not own cell phones when we were in high school, so I wasn't the least bit surprised to see cell phone ownership at only 45% among teens in 2004. It really reinforces how much things have changed since then, as today probably close to 85% of teens have smartphones or some other similar device.

Another stat that I found interesting was the one for internet usage and how it's grown over the years. As of 2014, 87% of Americans used the internet, while in 1995 it was only 14%. In fact, in 1998 only 36% used the internet showing that, despite the Dot Com boom, the medium had still not fully penetrated the American household in the late '90s.

It found that only 37% of teens had a smartphone in late 2012 :o That somewhat resembles my experiences. It felt like it was the second year of university (2012-13) that more people had a smartphone than a dumb phone, rather than my first year. Maybe the 18-24 demographic was slightly faster in adapting than the teens ;D

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/07/17 at 8:25 pm

It found that only 37% of teens had a smartphone in late 2012 :o That somewhat resembles my experiences. It felt like it was the second year of university (2012-13) that more people had a smartphone than a dumb phone, rather than my first year. Maybe the 18-24 demographic was slightly faster in adapting than the teens ;D

I got my first smart phone in November 2012 and I was 17 years old at that time.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/07/17 at 8:28 pm

You got the numbers and the dates wrong. It was 10% at the beginning of 2005. February 2005 to be exact. By August 2006 (still the numerical mid-2000s), it hit 50%. The biggest chunk of growth came from the mid-2000s. From there, the growth rate slowed down and it grew incrementally until it hit 85% in the middle of 2010 and it reached saturation. The latest figure is 89%.

Even though August of 2006 was still the mid 2000s, the era was rather slow with social media. The late 2000s/early 2010s were immensely huge towards social media.

I guess a similar comparison would be the Internet revolution. Almost everyone agrees it occurred in the second half of the '90s, even if it didn't become virtually ubiquitous until the early 2000s.

That's because almost everyone had Internet access during the early 2000s. Especially when every company back then had a website.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mxcrashxm on 01/07/17 at 8:54 pm

That's an interesting observation, and something I've noticed, too. Most of my closest friends are somewhere between 28-32 years old and I only know two of them who use Instagram or Snapchat with any regularity. There does seem to be a divide when it comes to social media for older millennials (those who were in high school and college when the rise of MySpace/Facebook/YouTube/Twitter occurred) and younger millennials (those in high school and college at the height of the Snapchat/Instagram/Buzzfeed/Tumblr era).

That caught my attention as well, and it jibes with what I remember. A lot of my friends (including me) still did not own cell phones when we were in high school, so I wasn't the least bit surprised to see cell phone ownership at only 45% among teens in 2004. It really reinforces how much things have changed since then, as today probably close to 85% of teens have smartphones or some other similar device.

Another stat that I found interesting was the one for internet usage and how it's grown over the years. As of 2014, 87% of Americans used the internet, while in 1995 it was only 14%. In fact, in 1998 only 36% used the internet showing that, despite the Dot Com boom, the medium had still not fully penetrated the American household in the late '90s.
If you want to know, there was a study on Millennials regarding social media usage and it were some surprising results. I'll link the data here

https://www.battery.com/powered/survey-millennials-social-media/

Same here. Even when I was in middle school at the time, not many people had one either. I think it's the cellphones at the time were not as advanced as the ones today. Most folks still had either the cell with snake or the one that was flipped, but didn't have a screen.

As for the Internet, yeah I saw that fascinating fact as well as few years back. It actually didn't reach 50% until 2001, so that means it was still a luxury despite the huge increase throughout the late 90s.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/07/17 at 9:09 pm

Even though August of 2006 was still the mid 2000s, the era was rather slow with social media. The late 2000s/early 2010s were immensely huge towards social media.

That's because almost everyone had Internet access during the early 2000s. Especially when every company back then had a website.

I get what you're trying to say. You're saying that social media wasn't as popular in the mid-2000s as in the late 2000s or early 2010s. You're right. However, you're also saying that the claim that "the social media revolution occurred in the mid-2000s" is false, when it isn't. The fact of the matter is that social media made its biggest gains in the youth market in the mid-2000s, not in the 2010s. The mid-2000s is when most youth started using social media. By 2009, social media was already a long established trend, there was no more "revolution" (except the migration to Facebook).

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/07/17 at 9:55 pm

I get what you're trying to say. You're saying that social media wasn't as popular in the mid-2000s as in the late 2000s or early 2010s. You're right. However, you're also saying that the claim that "the social media revolution occurred in the mid-2000s" is false, when it isn't. The fact of the matter is that social media made its biggest gains in the youth market in the mid-2000s, not in the 2010s. The mid-2000s is when most youth started using social media. By 2009, social media was already a long established trend, there was no more "revolution" (except the migration to Facebook).

Let's just say that 2006 was the social media revolution. I don't wanna keep this argument for so long.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: JordanK1982 on 01/07/17 at 10:02 pm

You know, it's funny because my social media experience probably goes further back than most people, even my age, due to being involved in the Pop Punk and Emo scenes. In 1999, I remember this site MakeOutClub starting up. It was sort of a dating site meshed with a social media site centered on Emo kids; it was so stupid at the time but little did any of us realize how forward thinking it was. It pioneered a new form of social media that wouldn't even gain traction until the mid 00's. In the early 00's so many clones popped up like LipstickClub, OnlyUndiesClub and SceneFashion (not Scene like the modern context) which followed the exact same MakeOutClub style. LiveJournal is another one but that was also used a lot but was way more mainstream and not as on the fringe. I'd say 1999-2002 is a very early era of social media: while it didn't have the influence on teens nor was it very common to find it's where the roots and the modern form got started. These sites were very niche and only appealed to little cliques in the scene from specific areas (like your state or suburb). Emo kids were early adapters of social media and they really pushed it as a way of communication. If you asked me what I thought way back when I first discovered those stupid little sites in 1999 then I would tell you it never, ever would go past the point of being a fringe culture of dumb nerdy emo kids trying to hook up with one another.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mxcrashxm on 01/08/17 at 11:09 am

AIM wasn't really the only form of communication on the Internet. We already had email during the 90s, but it was dominated by AOL's services (the people who made AIM).

I guess they were hypocrites by the time smartphones were in the mainstream. Especially when businessmen were usually generalized of having a cellphone wherever they go back in the 90s and 2000s.
That's true! In fact, more people had email than AIM since there was Yahoo, Hotmail, and even Cox.

Agreed! Up until about 2004, the only folks who had cellphones were business people. They were still expensive for the average person to buy one.

You know, it's funny because my social media experience probably goes further back than most people, even my age, due to being involved in the Pop Punk and Emo scenes. In 1999, I remember this site MakeOutClub starting up. It was sort of a dating site meshed with a social media site centered on Emo kids; it was so stupid at the time but little did any of us realize how forward thinking it was. It pioneered a new form of social media that wouldn't even gain traction until the mid 00's. In the early 00's so many clones popped up like LipstickClub, OnlyUndiesClub and SceneFashion (not Scene like the modern context) which followed the exact same MakeOutClub style. LiveJournal is another one but that was also used a lot but was way more mainstream and not as on the fringe. I'd say 1999-2002 is a very early era of social media: while it didn't have the influence on teens nor was it very common to find it's where the roots and the modern form got started. These sites were very niche and only appealed to little cliques in the scene from specific areas (like your state or suburb). Emo kids were early adapters of social media and they really pushed it as a way of communication. If you asked me what I thought way back when I first discovered those stupid little sites in 1999 then I would tell you it never, ever would go past the point of being a fringe culture of dumb nerdy emo kids trying to hook up with one another.
I would put 2003 as part of that era as well considering it was just those sites (along with AOL and Friendster) that were the early social media. Yeah, MySpace began that year I mentioned, but it wasn't dominant until 2005.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mqg96 on 01/08/17 at 11:22 am

You got the numbers and the dates wrong. It was 10% at the beginning of 2005. February 2005 to be exact. By August 2006 (still the numerical mid-2000s), it hit 50%. The biggest chunk of growth came from the mid-2000s. From there, the growth rate slowed down and it grew incrementally until it hit 85% in the middle of 2010 and it reached saturation. The latest figure is 89%.

I guess a similar comparison would be the Internet revolution (although the social media revolution is focused on youth). Almost everyone agrees it occurred in the second half of the '90s, even if it didn't become virtually ubiquitous until the early 2000s. People find it strange someone would want to return to 2005 to experience a "pre-social media world" for the same reasons it would be strange to head to 1999 for a pre-Internet world.

Yep, I've always said it as long as I've been on this site, the MID 2000's was the building blocks of the social media era we see today. The late 2000's is just when it was in full effect.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mqg96 on 01/08/17 at 11:25 am

Let's just say that 2006 was the social media revolution. I don't wanna keep this argument for so long.

Nope, the social media revolution was from 2004-2006. Myspace in 2003, Facebook in 2004, Youtube in 2005, and Twitter in 2006. That was the transition right there, and Myspace was the first major social media site used by the majority of teens throughout the mid 2000's, and then by the late 2000's it became Youtube and eventually Facebook. Twitter, despite opening in 2006, didn't become mainstream popular until the early 2010's.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/08/17 at 12:15 pm

Twitter, despite opening in 2006, didn't become mainstream popular until the early 2010's.

That is incorrect. Twitter became huge in 2009. Don't you remember Michael Jackson's death in 09' and the twitter frenzy at the time? Heck even I opened a Twitter in 2009 and I never use Twitter anyway. 2008 - 2009 is when Twitter was exploding in popularity, so it is a late 00s thing.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/08/17 at 12:17 pm

Yeah, MySpace began that year I mentioned, but it wasn't dominant until 2005.

MySpace was already popular in 2004. Not as big as later years, but definitely popular. My sister had her first MySpace in summer of 04'.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Looney Toon on 01/08/17 at 12:45 pm

MySpace back in the day was as big as Facebook today. Even bigger actually because there were a limited amount of alternatives. MySpace was huge.

Actually that isn't true according to statistics. Myspace at its peak has never reached the same level as Facebook at its peak.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-P-0M1BriRFo/TgmlBD2qwxI/AAAAAAAAXUY/CCpuCkTxHs0/s1600/facebook-myspace-us-trend.jpg

Now keep in mind that this chart only shows the US, but I doubt that if you add in the rest of the world of users to the stats that there would be much of a difference. Now Myspace was big during its peak of 2005-2008, but it was mainly used by Preteens/teens. Facebook is used by pretty much everyone.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Looney Toon on 01/08/17 at 12:48 pm

MySpace was already popular in 2004. Not as big as later years, but definitely popular. My sister had her first MySpace in summer of 04'.

Hm, it was growing in popularity, but it didn't reach mainstream popular status until 2005-2008 according to what I read online.

That is incorrect. Twitter became huge in 2009. Don't you remember Michael Jackson's death in 09' and the twitter frenzy at the time? Heck even I opened a Twitter in 2009 and I never use Twitter anyway. 2008 - 2009 is when Twitter was exploding in popularity, so it is a late 00s thing.

This is true, however, most call it a 2010s thing due to it only being popular in 2009. When something is popular for a longer period of time in a specific decade then it's seen as belonging to that decade. Twitter was only big in 2009 which is 1 out of the 10 years of the 2000s. Meanwhile by 2010 to present day Twitter is something people can't stop talking about. I don't see Twitter as a late 00s thing due to not really being big for most of the late 2000s.

A chart on Twitter's growth.
http://dstevenwhite.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Twitter-2006-to-2012.jpg

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/08/17 at 2:25 pm

Toon smacking everyone down with da factz :o

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/08/17 at 2:28 pm

That's true! In fact, more people had email than AIM since there was Yahoo, Hotmail, and even Cox.

It was mostly teenagers and young adults who used AIM throughout the late 90s and early-mid 2000s. I never really known about over the age of 25 who actually had one back then.

Agreed! Up until about 2004, the only folks who had cellphones were business people. They were still expensive for the average person to buy one.

Especially with the service plans back then. Although, it was around the time payphones started to dissolve to obscurity. Unless you lived in a rural area.

Nope, the social media revolution was from 2004-2006. Myspace in 2003, Facebook in 2004, Youtube in 2005, and Twitter in 2006. That was the transition right there, and Myspace was the first major social media site used by the majority of teens throughout the mid 2000's, and then by the late 2000's it became Youtube and eventually Facebook. Twitter, despite opening in 2006, didn't become mainstream popular until the early 2010's.

Except that was when those websites were established. Nobody had ever heard of those websites, except for Myspace in the mid 2000s. Especially when the mid 2000s was mostly known as the Myspace Era. After 2006, YouTube took over as the dominant social haven and became mainstream towards everybody, regardless of age.

That is incorrect. Twitter became huge in 2009. Don't you remember Michael Jackson's death in 09' and the twitter frenzy at the time? Heck even I opened a Twitter in 2009 and I never use Twitter anyway. 2008 - 2009 is when Twitter was exploding in popularity, so it is a late 00s thing.

Just because Michael Jackson's death sparked a lot of internet traffic in 2009, that doesn't mean it was popular during the majority of the late 2000s. Twitter started to become popular within the early 2010s, as the hashtag started to grow in popularity, especially with preteens.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: JordanK1982 on 01/08/17 at 2:43 pm

Toon smacking everyone down with da factz :o

I know right? The dude's back with his charts to show da foolz! 8)

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/08/17 at 2:56 pm

I know right? The dude's back with his charts to show da foolz! 8)

Especially Slim95. 8)

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/08/17 at 2:58 pm

Especially Slim95. 8)

Are you in a bad mood today? Too much naming names. :o

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/08/17 at 2:59 pm

Are you in a bad mood today? Too many naming names. :o

https://media4.giphy.com/media/dLz79GhXPtZN6/200.gif#8

No...

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/08/17 at 3:30 pm

Actually that isn't true according to statistics. Myspace at its peak has never reached the same level as Facebook at its peak.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-P-0M1BriRFo/TgmlBD2qwxI/AAAAAAAAXUY/CCpuCkTxHs0/s1600/facebook-myspace-us-trend.jpg

Now keep in mind that this chart only shows the US, but I doubt that if you add in the rest of the world of users to the stats that there would be much of a difference. Now Myspace was big during its peak of 2005-2008, but it was mainly used by Preteens/teens. Facebook is used by pretty much everyone.

I didn't mean it in terms of numbers, I meant relative to its time compared to other social media sites. Like Facebook is number 1 today, MySpace was number 1 before.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/08/17 at 3:34 pm

Just because Michael Jackson's death sparked a lot of internet traffic in 2009, that doesn't mean it was popular during the majority of the late 2000s. Twitter started to become popular within the early 2010s, as the hashtag started to grow in popularity, especially with preteens.

I was using his death as an example to jog the memory of how popular Twitter is... Twitter was still very popular in 2009. There were many people who were on it by then.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/08/17 at 3:55 pm

I was using his death as an example to jog the memory of how popular Twitter is... Twitter was still very popular in 2009. There were many people who were on it by then.

Twitter wasn't as popular as it is now, compared to 2009. Hell, I didn't even knew what Twitter was until 2010 when they started to make hashtags.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/08/17 at 3:57 pm

Twitter wasn't as popular as it is now, compared to 2009. Hell, I didn't even knew what Twitter was until 2010 when they started to make hashtags.

Well of course it isn't as popular now, all social media sites grow each year. But Twitter was very popular in 2009 for everyone. I honestly don't know how you didn't hear about it in 2009, but you were 10 years so maybe you were just too young. Twitter was aimed for teens and celebrities.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/08/17 at 5:15 pm

Well of course it isn't as popular now, all social media sites grow each year. But Twitter was very popular in 2009 for everyone. I honestly don't know how you didn't hear about it in 2009, but you were 10 years so maybe you were just too young. Twitter was aimed for teens and celebrities.

I've heard of Twitter when I was 10 and a half years old in 2010. I was still a kid at the time. Just because it was popular BY 2009, that doesn't mean everyone has heard of it. I don't even think I've even heard anyone mention Twitter throughout the entire 2000s. Not even YouTube even gave a crap until the early 2010s.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/08/17 at 5:50 pm

I've heard of Twitter when I was 10 and a half years old in 2010. I was still a kid at the time. Just because it was popular BY 2009, that doesn't mean everyone has heard of it. I don't even think I've even heard anyone mention Twitter throughout the entire 2000s.

But they did though... Twitter was a big social media site in 2009 where people followed celebrities. Everybody has heard about it..

Not even YouTube even gave a crap until the early 2010s.
Thiese videos were uploaded in early 2009. You were saying? ;)

J0xbjIE8cPM

6WPVWDkF7U8

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/08/17 at 5:57 pm

I've heard of Twitter when I was 10 and a half years old in 2010. I was still a kid at the time. Just because it was popular BY 2009, that doesn't mean everyone has heard of it. I don't even think I've even heard anyone mention Twitter throughout the entire 2000s. Not even YouTube even gave a crap until the early 2010s.

Twitter, despite opening in 2006, didn't become mainstream popular until the early 2010's.

This song came out in 2009. A song by a famous singer singing specifically about Twitter. Can you guys honestly still say Twitter wasn't big/mainstream in 2009 now?

eh5lF3YY3Ek

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: HazelBlue99 on 01/08/17 at 6:18 pm

Twitter may have started to become mainstream in 2009, but I believe it didn't reach it's peak of popularity until 2011. In the US alone, Twitter only had 18 million active users back in 2009, which is remarkably short of Facebook's 250 million. When you take into account America's population and the fact that 71% of the population had internet access at the time, the statistics prove that Twitter still wasn't entirely popular among the general population.

http://mashable.com/2009/09/14/twitter-2009-stats/#3FKnLUMdHSqc

Also, take a look at this chart. It shows the increase in the number of monthly active Twitter users worldwide from 2010-2016. It wasn't until 2011-2012 that Twitter had really become big/mainstream.

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

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/08/17 at 6:20 pm

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/08/17 at 6:22 pm

But they did though... Twitter was a big social media site in 2009 where people followed celebrities. Everybody has heard about it..

But not every celebrity had a Twitter account by 2009. I mean, it's not like every single one of them had a Twitter by the late 2000s.

Thiese videos were uploaded in early 2009. You were saying? ;)

J0xbjIE8cPM

6WPVWDkF7U8

That doesn't mean everyone has heard of Twitter. Besides, they used YouTube as a way to advertise themselves until they were big by the early 2010s.

http://www.statista.com/graphic/1/282087/number-of-monthly-active-twitter-users.jpg

This chart shows otherwise.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/08/17 at 6:36 pm

This song came out in 2009. A song by a famous singer singing specifically about Twitter. Can you guys honestly still say Twitter wasn't big/mainstream in 2009 now?

eh5lF3YY3Ek

I don't really think it's that popular. Especially when it only had 140,000 views on YouTube. Keep in mind that 2009 was when Vevo started to rise up, and their music videos got millions of views compared to that one. Even if it was popular in 2009, it wouldn't be popular throughout most of the year, as it was released in December.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/08/17 at 6:50 pm

Twitter became popular in 2008-09 school year. Like I said in my spoiler tag, in early 2009 when my school started posting updates on a Twitter account is when I found my classmates on there. About 25-35% had a Twitter, compared to about 70% having a Facebook (guesstimates). Of course, it's become more popular as time has moved on. It was never as popular Facebook.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/08/17 at 6:57 pm

Not only was Twitter name-dropped in songs, I remember following the 2009 Iran Presidential election protests on Twitter. It was dubbed the first "Twitter revolution", and protestors used Twitter to communicate with each other and the outside world. When there was a media blackout in Iran, the protestors used Twitter to communicate with Western journalists.

Also, back when scheduled maintenance on Twitter was still a thing (and the site would go down for a few hours), there was a huge pushback from the users to delay the maintenance, because critical updates on the Iran protests could be posted at those times, and Twitter relented.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Iranian_presidential_election_protests

The creation of the Iranian Green Movement was developed during these protests. The events have also been nicknamed the "Twitter Revolution" because of the protesters' reliance on Twitter and other social-networking Internet sites to communicate with each other.

Washington Post: Iran's Twitter Revolution (June 18, 2009)

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mqg96 on 01/09/17 at 8:07 am

This is true, however, most call it a 2010s thing due to it only being popular in 2009. When something is popular for a longer period of time in a specific decade then it's seen as belonging to that decade. Twitter was only big in 2009 which is 1 out of the 10 years of the 2000s. Meanwhile by 2010 to present day Twitter is something people can't stop talking about. I don't see Twitter as a late 00s thing due to not really being big for most of the late 2000s.

A chart on Twitter's growth.
http://dstevenwhite.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Twitter-2006-to-2012.jpg

Please tell this Slim dude that the early 2010's is when Twitter hit its peak, NOT late 2000's. I'm not going to confront him again. Twitter was NOT big at all during the late 2000's, even in 2009 it was definitely not as big as Facebook at the time. I don't count that. Even Myspace despite dying out was still more common than Twitter during the end of the 2000's.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mqg96 on 01/09/17 at 8:08 am

Twitter may have started to become mainstream in 2009, but I believe it didn't reach it's peak of popularity until 2011. In the US alone, Twitter only had 18 million active users back in 2009, which is remarkably short of Facebook's 250 million. When you take into account America's population and the fact that 71% of the population had internet access at the time, the statistics prove that Twitter still wasn't entirely popular among the general population.

http://mashable.com/2009/09/14/twitter-2009-stats/#3FKnLUMdHSqc

Also, take a look at this chart. It shows the increase in the number of monthly active Twitter users worldwide from 2010-2016. It wasn't until 2011-2012 that Twitter had really become big/mainstream.

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

Exactly. It's about the percentage of the population, not when a group of people started using it. When I was in high school, spring 2012 is when the majority of my friends started getting Twitter accounts, which was the 2011-12 school year, and most people had already gotten Facebook accounts since two years back in 8th grade (2009-10). Facebook had already became mainstream popular by the majority of people well before Twitter.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mqg96 on 01/09/17 at 8:13 am

I've heard of Twitter when I was 10 and a half years old in 2010. I was still a kid at the time. Just because it was popular BY 2009, that doesn't mean everyone has heard of it. I don't even think I've even heard anyone mention Twitter throughout the entire 2000s. Not even YouTube even gave a crap until the early 2010s.

Twitter may have become popular in general in 2009, but Twitter by any means did NOT reach 2006/2007 Youtube mainstream popular or 2009/2010 Facebook mainstream popular. For Twitter, that didn't happen until 2011/2012.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mqg96 on 01/09/17 at 8:18 am

Google Search: when did twitter become popular

Twitter was created in March 2006 by Jack Dorsey, Noah Glass, Biz Stone, and Evan Williams and launched in July, whereby the service rapidly gained worldwide popularity. In 2012, more than 100 million users posted 340 million tweets a day, and the service handled an average of 1.6 billion search queries per day.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mxcrashxm on 01/09/17 at 9:20 am

While we're at it, check out the interesting facts about the instagram user base and social media in general. Despite so many sites at once, Facebook is still #1.

http://mediakix.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Instagram-Monthly-User-Growth-500-Million.jpg

http://mediakix.com/2016/09/13-impressive-instagram-demographics-user-statistics-to-see/#gs.aZuDtTg

http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/08/19/the-demographics-of-social-media-users/

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/09/17 at 9:34 am

Twitter may have become popular in general in 2009, but Twitter by any means did NOT reach 2006/2007 Youtube mainstream popular or 2009/2010 Facebook mainstream popular. For Twitter, that didn't happen until 2011/2012.

No, Twitter hit its peak growth in 2011 (still growing but this is when it spiked the highest), not 2012. And it was still popular in 2009. Just because you haven't heard about it, doesn't mean it wasn't popular.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mxcrashxm on 01/09/17 at 9:38 am

No, Twitter hit its peak growth in 2011 (still growing but this is when it spiked the highest), not 2012. And it was still popular in 2009. Just because you haven't heard about it, doesn't mean it wasn't popular.
Was it huge in Canada and the rest of the world first? Most people here in America didn't hear about it until sometime in 2011.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/09/17 at 9:47 am

Was it huge in Canada and the rest of the world first? Most people here in America didn't hear about it until sometime in 2011.

It got popular here in 2008-09 school year and t became popular in third world countries in Iran and Tunisia in 2009/2010 because they had their revolutions because of Twitter. I don't understand why it took Americans so long to even hear about it lol.

It was more popular in the early-mid 2010s, sure, but that doesn't mean it wasn't popular at all in 2009. It was definitely a relevant cultural force that year. It's like YouTube in 2005/6.

Anyway, we're probably just splitting hairs here. I can understand why it took some people until 2010 to hear about it. 2011 to even hear about it sounds very late though lol.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/09/17 at 9:55 am

Was it huge in Canada and the rest of the world first? Most people here in America didn't hear about it until sometime in 2011.

If nobody has heard about it in the U.S. until 2011, then why would Sean Kingston (an American) make this song in 2009? That wouldn't make any sense. ???

eh5lF3YY3Ek

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/09/17 at 9:59 am

Anyway, we're probably just splitting hairs here. I can understand why it took some people until 2010 to hear about it. 2011 to even hear about it sounds very late though lol.

Yeah that's what I think too. Hearing about it in 2011 or 2012 sounds super late to me. 2010 I understand though.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/09/17 at 10:08 am

Yeah that's what I think too. Hearing about it in 2011 or 2012 sounds super late to me. 2010 I understand though.

In 2010, literal revolutions were organized over Twitter. Everyone must have heard of it by then if they follow the news. By then, it was your civic duty to at least know what it was xD

2012 is not even on the table. Occupy Wall Street was 2011, if you somehow missed the Arab Spring of 2010/2011. ;D

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mqg96 on 01/09/17 at 11:07 am

No, Twitter hit its peak growth in 2011 (still growing but this is when it spiked the highest), not 2012. And it was still popular in 2009. Just because you haven't heard about it, doesn't mean it wasn't popular.

Did I not say Twitter reached its peak growth 2011/2012 in my previous comment? Or are you blind? I heard about Twitter in 2009, in fact, I knew about it since 2008 including a lot of other Americans, but it doesn't mean it was as popular as Youtube or Facebook at the time. Remember, this has NOTHING to do with when the website was first heard. Twitter may have first been heard in the late 2000's, like Facebook being first heard in the mid 2000's or Youtube being first heard in 2005, but we're talking about when the website hit its peak. Youtube and Facebook had already reached its peak by 2009, Twitter had not yet. Case closed.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/09/17 at 2:09 pm

Twitter may have become popular in general in 2009, but Twitter by any means did NOT reach 2006/2007 Youtube mainstream popular or 2009/2010 Facebook mainstream popular. For Twitter, that didn't happen until 2011/2012.

Exactly. It wasn't common for somebody to have a Twitter account in every location, especially outside of North America before the early 2010s. Just because it was known by 2009, that doesn't exactly mean it was mainstream popular.

No, Twitter hit its peak growth in 2011 (still growing but this is when it spiked the highest), not 2012. And it was still popular in 2009. Just because you haven't heard about it, doesn't mean it wasn't popular.

He (mqg96) actually heard about it in 2009. It's just that Twitter wasn't very popular during the late 2000s. Why do you keep telling us that, when nobody gave a single crap about it in the late 2000s?

It got popular here in 2008-09 school year and t became popular in third world countries in Iran and Tunisia in 2009/2010 because they had their revolutions because of Twitter. I don't understand why it took Americans so long to even hear about it lol.

Because we didn't have anything to do with the song until the early 2010s?

In 2010, literal revolutions were organized over Twitter. Everyone must have heard of it by then if they follow the news. By then, it was your civic duty to at least know what it was xD

2012 is not even on the table. Occupy Wall Street was 2011, if you somehow missed the Arab Spring of 2010/2011. ;D

My grandparents were in their early 70s by the time Occupy Wall Street happened. Maybe the American media didn't care about mentioning Twitter, because it was not like they were gonna sign up for an account.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Howard on 01/09/17 at 2:46 pm

Twitter wasn't as popular as it is now, compared to 2009. Hell, I didn't even knew what Twitter was until 2010 when they started to make hashtags.

me neither, I didn't know what Twitter was.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/09/17 at 3:08 pm

Exactly. It wasn't common for somebody to have a Twitter account in every location, especially outside of North America before the early 2010s. Just because it was known by 2009, that doesn't exactly mean it was mainstream popular.

Twitter has never been as popular as Facebook or Youtube, not even today. It's a high signal to noise ratio social network. The important people all have Twitter, so Twitter has a huge cultural impact whether regular people have it or not. This was true in 2009 when it was used for political protests and used by politicians to make huge announcements. Twitter was a very relevant cultural force in 2009.

He (mqg96) actually heard about it in 2009. It's just that Twitter wasn't very popular during the late 2000s. Why do you keep telling us that, when nobody gave a single crap about it in the late 2000s?

Well, the entire post that started this whole kerfuffle was Slim saying that Twitter became popular in 2009 because that's when most people heard of it, and Slim agreed that it didn't hit its peak growth until 2011. So I honestly don't see where the disagreement is.

Because we didn't have anything to do with the song until the early 2010s?

The song came out in 2009, not the early '10s. Not sure why you quoted me about that anyway, I don't care about the song lol.

My grandparents were in their early 70s by the time Occupy Wall Street happened. Maybe the American media didn't care about mentioning Twitter, because it was not like they were gonna sign up for an account.

The media did mention Twitter. They mentioned it in 2010 too with the Arab Spring. They mentioned it too in 2009 with the Iran Election. They mentioned it in 2009 with Michael Jackson's death.

Anyway, as long as people can agree it became popular sometime in 2009/2010, there's no point in splitting hairs over a year's difference. It definitely had its peak growth in 2011/2012, but pretending like you can understand a year like 2009 or 2010 without the knowledge of Twitter is untrue. Twitter was very relevant, and yes, popular, in those years.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/09/17 at 4:10 pm

Anyway, as long as people can agree it became popular sometime in 2009/2010, there's no point in splitting hairs over a year's difference. It definitely had its peak growth in 2011/2012, but pretending like you can understand a year like 2009 or 2010 without the knowledge of Twitter is untrue. Twitter was very relevant, and yes, popular, in those years.

So basically, you have to know what Twitter is by 2009? Even though it's not like I cared about Twitter entirely until 2015. Why the hell are you expecting that I should have cared about Twitter in 2009, even though I was still in elementary school by that year? Sure, I heard about it in 2010, but it's not like I actually cared about the site.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/09/17 at 5:40 pm

So basically, you have to know what Twitter is by 2009? Even though it's not like I cared about Twitter entirely until 2015. Why the hell are you expecting that I should have cared about Twitter in 2009, even though I was still in elementary school by that year? Sure, I heard about it in 2010, but it's not like I actually cared about the site.

So where is the lie? Slim said you hadn't heard of Twitter in 2009 because you were a kid, and now you basically admitted it. Discussion over. ;D

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/09/17 at 5:58 pm

So where is the lie? Slim said you hadn't heard of Twitter in 2009 because you were a kid, and now you basically admitted it. Discussion over. ;D

So why were you saying that it's impossible to not know what Twitter is by 2009? Which is implying to everybody, when I read it.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/09/17 at 6:08 pm

So why were you saying that it's impossible to not know what Twitter is by 2009? Which is implying to everybody, when I read it.

Dude, you were a kid in 2009. That isn't what I said, but even if I did say that everyone knew it by 2009, I obviously wouldn't be including kids or babies lol.

But that isn't what I said. What I actually said was you can't understand a year like 2009 without taking Twitter into account.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/09/17 at 6:29 pm

Dude, you were a kid in 2009. That isn't what I said, but even if I did say that everyone knew it by 2009, I obviously wouldn't be including kids or babies lol.

Yeah so? I already knew what YouTube was in 2007, but it's not like I gave a f*ck about Twitter back then.

But that isn't what I said. What I actually said was you can't understand a year like 2009 without taking Twitter into account.

So I can like YouTube in 2007 and watch videos from it ever since, but I had to give a f*ck about Twitter when I was only 9 and a half years old?

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: JordanK1982 on 01/09/17 at 6:31 pm

Just like Youtube and Facebook, Twitter was an integral part of 2009's culture and if you don't understand how or why then you really don't understand what 2009 was all about. ;)

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/09/17 at 7:03 pm

Yeah so? I already knew what YouTube was in 2007, but it's not like I gave a f*ck about Twitter back then.

So I can like YouTube in 2007 and watch videos from it ever since, but I had to give a f*ck about Twitter when I was only 9 and a half years old?

Twitter is strictly for 13+, YouTube is kid-friendly.

Just like Youtube and Facebook, Twitter was an integral part of 2009's culture and if you don't understand how or why then you really don't understand what 2009 was all about. ;)

Spill it!!

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/09/17 at 7:23 pm

Twitter is strictly for 13+, YouTube is kid-friendly.

Even though kids from today already know what Twitter. Plus, they could make accounts from themselves while hiding their ages.

Just like Youtube and Facebook, Twitter was an integral part of 2009's culture and if you don't understand how or why then you really don't understand what 2009 was all about. ;)

In all seriousness, any site, aside from Twitter, can be part of 2009's culture. Even though it's not like hundreds of millions of people had an account on Twitter, compared to just 13 million. Even with that, YouTube was more dominant in the late 2000s.

The fact that you guys are taking Slim's word seriously makes me lose faith in this site.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: JordanK1982 on 01/09/17 at 7:50 pm

Even though kids from today already know what Twitter. Plus, they could make accounts from themselves while hiding their ages.

In all seriousness, any site, aside from Twitter, can be part of 2009's culture. Even though it's not like hundreds of millions of people had an account on Twitter, compared to just 13 million. Even with that, YouTube was more dominant in the late 2000s.

The fact that you guys are taking Slim's word seriously makes me lose faith in this site.

How does it make you lose faith in the site because we have a different opinion than you? Not everyone's gonna agree with what you say all the time. And it's not even an opinion really either because it's been proven that Twitter was a major force in 2009 and contributed to a lot of popular culture. Any site can be apart of the overall culture of all things that exist during the time but it's not going to be a part of the mainstream popular culture. Twitter, however, was a big part of 2009's overall identity.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/09/17 at 7:52 pm

Even though kids from today already know what Twitter. Plus, they could make accounts from themselves while hiding their ages.

You said you didn't expect yourself to hear of Twitter in 2009 exactly because you were a kid. These were your own words, not mine.

So basically, you have to know what Twitter is by 2009? Even though it's not like I cared about Twitter entirely until 2015. Why the hell are you expecting that I should have cared about Twitter in 2009, even though I was still in elementary school by that year? Sure, I heard about it in 2010, but it's not like I actually cared about the site.

Honestly, that should have been the end of this long drawn-out topic. ;D

In all seriousness, any site, aside from Twitter, can be part of 2009's culture. Even though it's not like hundreds of millions of people had an account on Twitter, compared to just 13 million. Even with that, YouTube was more dominant in the late 2000s.

No one was comparing YouTube and Twitter's dominance, where did you even get that from? YouTube and Twitter can both be popular in 2009, they're not mutually exclusive and not even directly competing services.

The fact that you guys are taking Slim's word seriously makes me lose faith in this site.

It's not about who said it, it's about what was said. Slim brought the T. Tea is delicious and we shall drink it.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: JordanK1982 on 01/09/17 at 7:53 pm

Here's a 2009 tech article about how Twitter was a major force in the social media and pop culture world: http://mashable.com/2009/12/25/twitter-2009/#RgNI3AWGHmqQ

"Furthermore, Twitter became a great way to run charity events, break news, promote your work and connect with your fans. Events like Michael Jackson's death were followed on Twitter first, and major media outlets second, simply because Twitter's tiny chunks of information travel faster than professionally written news stories. And when the Iran election results started a wave of riots across the country and protests worldwide, Twitter was the glue that held bits and pieces of the story together.

The result? You couldn't watch TV for one day without Twitter being mentioned somewhere. Dana White, UFC's head honcho, Tweets like crazy during every UFC event. CNN's Don Lemon is also a very active user. Twitter hasn't paid these folks to promote their service. They're just using it because it's valuable to them, because it's simple, and because they like it. You can't get better promotion than that. For a while, Twitter was on top of the world, and the founders could afford to shrug off monetization questions as if money was of no importance to them."

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/09/17 at 8:01 pm

Here's a 2009 tech article about how Twitter was a major force in the social media and pop culture world: http://mashable.com/2009/12/25/twitter-2009/#RgNI3AWGHmqQ

"Furthermore, Twitter became a great way to run charity events, break news, promote your work and connect with your fans. Events like Michael Jackson's death were followed on Twitter first, and major media outlets second, simply because Twitter's tiny chunks of information travel faster than professionally written news stories. And when the Iran election results started a wave of riots across the country and protests worldwide, Twitter was the glue that held bits and pieces of the story together.

The result? You couldn't watch TV for one day without Twitter being mentioned somewhere. Dana White, UFC's head honcho, Tweets like crazy during every UFC event. CNN's Don Lemon is also a very active user. Twitter hasn't paid these folks to promote their service. They're just using it because it's valuable to them, because it's simple, and because they like it. You can't get better promotion than that. For a while, Twitter was on top of the world, and the founders could afford to shrug off monetization questions as if money was of no importance to them."

That article made me nostalgic for 2009 Twitter :\'( ;D

(is it just me or have all the emoticons been replaced by the 2008 Obama logo... more 2008-09 school year nostalgia. Chucky knows what's up)

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: JordanK1982 on 01/09/17 at 8:03 pm

That article made me nostalgic for 2009 Twitter :\'( ;D

All the symbols have been changed to Obama's logo... I thought you did that on purpose for 2009 nostalgia but no... What the hell??

I'm not nostalgic for anything of this time! Well, ok, I am but not for pop culture!

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/09/17 at 8:07 pm

The fact that you guys are taking Slim's word seriously makes me lose faith in this site.

So people having a different opinion than you makes you lose faith in a site? ??? Come on man I thought we were having a respectful debate. It's not about me and no one is taking sides we are just explaining the facts on why people knew about Twitter in 2009 and why it had an influence on the year. Why is that such an atrocity for you?

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/09/17 at 8:07 pm

All the symbols have been changed to Obama's logo... I thought you did that on purpose for 2009 nostalgia but no... What the hell??

I'm not nostalgic for anything of this time! Well, ok, I am but not for pop culture!

Not even the Hotel Room song?

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: JordanK1982 on 01/09/17 at 8:11 pm

Not even the Hotel Room song?

Except for Pitbull Starring in Rebelution and The Boatlift I'm not nostalgic for any other music. Those are good 2007-2009 albums!

So people having a different opinion than you makes you lose faith in a site? ??? Come on man I thought we were having a respectful debate. It's not about me and no one is taking sides we are just explaining the facts on why people knew about Twitter in 2009 and why it had an influence on the year. Why is that such an atrocity for you?

Exactly. I don't get it, either. We've put the facts on the table, right there nicely and New York Eagle doesn't wanna have it so he goes all John Cena on us: "I don't see them".

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 80sfan on 01/09/17 at 8:12 pm

I remember Twitter became popular pretty fast, like in a year it was pretty well known. I'm pretty sheltered, so for me to know about it is a miracle. :o

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/09/17 at 8:19 pm

Except for Pitbull Starring in Rebelution and The Boatlift I'm not nostalgic for any other music. Those are good 2007-2009 albums!

Exactly. I don't get it, either. We've put the facts on the table, right there nicely and New York Eagle doesn't wanna have it so he goes all John Cena on us: "I don't see them".

Not even Sean da Paul's Temperature?? Shame.

And not mid-2000s John Cena nostalgia!! I remember my cousin having a meltdown when John Cena deleted his MySpace :-X

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: JordanK1982 on 01/09/17 at 8:22 pm

Not even Sean da Paul's Temperature?? Shame.

And not mid-2000s John Cena nostalgia!! I remember my cousin having a meltdown when John Cena deleted his MySpace :-X

Man, I hate "Sean da Paul"! Temperature is one of the worst songs of 2006! I'm still sick of it!!

Yuck! It's not me who's nostalgic for John Cena.

You know what I noticed, though? Boy George and John Cena both do the stupid "You Can't See Me" thing! Look:
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/7Tq4KjiGxM8/maxresdefault.jpghttp://www.cultureclub.co.uk/images/design2.jpg

I didn't know he was so into The Culture Club!

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Zelek3 on 01/09/17 at 8:24 pm

All the symbols have been changed to Obama's logo... I thought you did that on purpose for 2009 nostalgia but no... What the hell??

I'm not nostalgic for anything of this time! Well, ok, I am but not for pop culture!

Thanks Obama. :) ;) :D ;D >:( :( :o 8) ??? ::) :P :-[ :-X :-\\ :-* :\'( 8-P

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: JordanK1982 on 01/09/17 at 8:25 pm

Thanks Obama. :) ;) :D ;D >:( :( :o 8) ??? ::) :P :-:) ;) :( ::) :-[ :-\\ :-*

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/09/17 at 8:27 pm

Man, I hate "Sean da Paul"! Temperature is one of the worst songs of 2006! I'm still sick of it!!

Yuck! It's not me who's nostalgic for John Cena.

You know what I noticed, though? Boy George and John Cena both do the stupid "You Can't See Me" thing! Look:

I didn't know he was so into The Culture Club!

Those are different though? Cena has all five fingers stretched out, the Culture Club has the middle finger and the finger pulled further apart. >_>

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: JordanK1982 on 01/09/17 at 8:27 pm

Those are different though? Cena has all five fingers stretched out, the Culture Club has the middle finger and the finger pulled further apart. >_>

No, it's the same thing.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/09/17 at 8:31 pm

Maybe it's a sign that Obama will still be your president!!! :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-*

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: JordanK1982 on 01/09/17 at 8:32 pm

Maybe it's a sign that Obama will still be your president!!! :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-* :-*

It's gonna be like Celebrity Death-Match on January 20th. Trump vs. Obama. Who ever wins takes office.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/09/17 at 8:33 pm

It's gonna be like Celebrity Death-Match on January 20th. Trump vs. Obama. Who ever wins takes office.

Will the Undertaker AKA Hillary Clinton make an appearance? ^_^

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: JordanK1982 on 01/09/17 at 8:34 pm

Will the Undertaker AKA Hillary Clinton make an appearance? ^_^

No, just John Cena.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/09/17 at 8:35 pm

No, just John Cena.

Sad! T_T

Would Tramp really win though. He'd pull some Rikishi moves. O_O

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: JordanK1982 on 01/09/17 at 8:36 pm

Sad! T_T

It's ok, you can't see him anyway.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/09/17 at 8:39 pm

It's ok, you can't see him anyway.

Errr, I searched Obama Trump John Cena on Google and the results are not pretty. >_>;;;;;;;

edit: nvm, reading it, it's pretty funny ;D

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: JordanK1982 on 01/09/17 at 8:41 pm

Errr, I searched Obama Trump John Cena on Google and the results are not pretty. >_>;;;;;;;

HAHAHAHA! WTF!

hhTzWxRHoQI

A lot of neat fan faction. The next fifty shades maybe?

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/09/17 at 8:42 pm

You said you didn't expect yourself to hear of Twitter in 2009 exactly because you were a kid. These were your own words, not mine.

Honestly, that should have been the end of this long drawn-out topic. ;D

No one was comparing YouTube and Twitter's dominance, where did you even get that from? YouTube and Twitter can both be popular in 2009, they're not mutually exclusive and not even directly competing services.

It's not about who said it, it's about what was said. Slim brought the T. Tea is delicious and we shall drink it.

Except Slim took it seriously, while you guys tried to think it's a joke.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/09/17 at 8:52 pm

Except Slim took it seriously, while you guys tried to think it's a joke.

Take what as a joke and take what seriously? We were all on the same page. I'm not sure what you mean by this.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/09/17 at 8:59 pm

Take what as a joke and take what seriously? We were all on the same page. I'm not sure what you mean by this.

When you were talking about how Twitter was popular in 2009, and then Slowpoke and Jordan f*cked me over with it.

You know, what the hell happened when we talked about 90s and 2000s culture, and you didn't started stupid arguments with me? It really disinterests me on this godforsaken site.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: JordanK1982 on 01/09/17 at 9:02 pm

I f*cked you over with it? Huh!?

And why are you so upset over people having discussions with you?

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/09/17 at 9:05 pm

When you were talking about how Twitter was popular in 2009, and then Slowpoke and Jordan f*cked me over with it.

You know, what the hell happened when we talked about 90s and 2000s culture, and you didn't started stupid arguments with me? It really disinterests me on this godforsaken site.

Calm down NYE, we're simply having discussions on here with different opinions. I wasn't taking anything too seriously, I was just stating my opinion along with everyone else.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/09/17 at 9:06 pm

https://68.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lu3whtrzYr1qby2i8o1_250.gif

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: JordanK1982 on 01/09/17 at 9:11 pm

I still don't get what's going on here. Lemme get this straight: New York Eagle made a point about Twitter not being big in 2009 and Slim debated that point saying Twitter had a huge prescence. They went back and forth and then Trollypoke and I stepped in and defended Slim's point and now New York Eagle is upset because we proved him wrong? I think I got the gist of it.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/09/17 at 9:16 pm

Calm down NYE, we're simply having discussions on here with different opinions. I wasn't taking anything too seriously, I was just stating my opinion along with everyone else.

You know what, you're right? There's no way in hell you could stop arguing with me if I just shut up about it.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/09/17 at 9:25 pm

You know what, you're right? There's no way in hell you could stop arguing with me if I just shut up about it.

No it was not my mission to argue with you. Don't take it personally, I was just expressing my opinion on why I think something just like you did as well and doing it through a respectful discussion. You didn't hear about Twitter in 2009? No big deal. You are also correct that Twitter's peak growth was in the early 10s. No hard feelings.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/09/17 at 9:57 pm

Except Slim took it seriously, while you guys tried to think it's a joke.

Err, I always lace my posts with jokes, that's just my thing, no need to take it personally, and I actually wrote it to calm you down since you sounded like you were taking it too seriously. It wasn't even a potshot at you though, it was actually a joke about Slim's post, so I'm not sure why you're upset. :o

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mxcrashxm on 01/09/17 at 10:58 pm

It got popular here in 2008-09 school year and t became popular in third world countries in Iran and Tunisia in 2009/2010 because they had their revolutions because of Twitter. I don't understand why it took Americans so long to even hear about it lol.

It was more popular in the early-mid 2010s, sure, but that doesn't mean it wasn't popular at all in 2009. It was definitely a relevant cultural force that year. It's like YouTube in 2005/6.

Anyway, we're probably just splitting hairs here. I can understand why it took some people until 2010 to hear about it. 2011 to even hear about it sounds very late though lol.

If nobody has heard about it in the U.S. until 2011, then why would Sean Kingston (an American) make this song in 2009? That wouldn't make any sense. ???

eh5lF3YY3Ek
Maybe it depends on your region. None of my friends, people I knew and I were aware of twitter until sometime in 2011-12.

Twitter may have been huge in 2009, but most people wouldn't know about it due to Facebook overshadowing it which was much bigger at the time.

The song mentioned was stated by someone that was it released in December of that year; therefore, the majority wouldn't have known about it until in 2011-12. Besides, the userbase in 2009 was UNDER 100 million and in 2010, it was barely 150 million. Then again, the chart provided was towards the U.S., so it probably skewed the stats of worldwide use.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: HazelBlue99 on 01/10/17 at 2:54 am

Even though Twitter had already entered the mainstream by 2009, NewYorkEagle does have a point. Twitter largely appealed for a niche' market back in the Late 2000's, and while people would have been aware of the website at the time, a large proportion of people wouldn't have been. You wouldn't have been able to walk up to people on the street and automatically expect them to know what Twitter is or what it's like. I personally didn't become aware of Twitter until Late 2009/Early 2010, but even then it wasn't entirely popular among the general public. It wasn't until 2011 when someone could be bagged out for not knowing what Twitter is.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 80sfan on 01/10/17 at 4:20 am

https://68.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lu3whtrzYr1qby2i8o1_250.gif

That random girl in the Mean Girls movie was pretty funny, LOL.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Howard on 01/10/17 at 2:39 pm

Man, I hate "Sean da Paul"! Temperature is one of the worst songs of 2006! I'm still sick of it!!

Yuck! It's not me who's nostalgic for John Cena.

You know what I noticed, though? Boy George and John Cena both do the stupid "You Can't See Me" thing! Look:
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/7Tq4KjiGxM8/maxresdefault.jpghttp://www.cultureclub.co.uk/images/design2.jpg

I didn't know he was so into The Culture Club!

I'm not nostalgic for John Cena. :P

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Howard on 01/10/17 at 2:40 pm

No, just John Cena.

Where? ???

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Howard on 01/10/17 at 2:43 pm

It's ok, you can't see him anyway.

I don't want to see him.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: nintieskid999 on 01/10/17 at 3:20 pm

Twitter used to be known as a website only people who followed Celebrities got into and the celebs posted very mundane things. Now the site's a lot more interesting.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/10/17 at 3:31 pm

Twitter used to be known as a website only people who followed Celebrities got into and the celebs posted very mundane things. Now the site's a lot more interesting.

THIS!

I just have to agree with this. I don't think a lot of people back then had a Twitter account, unless it was a big-time celebrity.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Looney Toon on 01/10/17 at 3:34 pm

A lot of people DIDN'T have Twitter back then. I don't see the point in arguing otherwise when charts/data shows this. Me saying that Twitter/Facebook/Whatever wasn't popular during a certain amount of time isn't my opinion. It's something that I see again and again on statistics which are factual data.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/10/17 at 3:47 pm

A lot of people DIDN'T have Twitter back then. I don't see the point in arguing otherwise when charts/data shows this. Me saying that Twitter/Facebook/Whatever wasn't popular during a certain amount of time isn't my opinion. It's something that I see again and again on statistics which are factual data.

Well if Slim, Slowpoke, and even Jordan of all people could argue against that, I don't know why you could've said that in the first place.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/10/17 at 4:00 pm

A lot of people DIDN'T have Twitter back then. I don't see the point in arguing otherwise when charts/data shows this. Me saying that Twitter/Facebook/Whatever wasn't popular during a certain amount of time isn't my opinion. It's something that I see again and again on statistics which are factual data.

Didn't you already say it was popular in 2009? xD

This is true, however, most call it a 2010s thing due to it only being popular in 2009. When something is popular for a longer period of time in a specific decade then it's seen as belonging to that decade. Twitter was only big in 2009 which is 1 out of the 10 years of the 2000s.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Looney Toon on 01/10/17 at 4:01 pm

Well if Slim, Slowpoke, and even Jordan of all people could argue against that, I don't know why you could've said that in the first place.

Can a person really argue against facts? Now I can understand if statistics were inconsistent depending on where you went, but nearly all articles and charts I run into show similar results. Comes to a point where arguing your opinion doesn't do much against factual answers, right? Even if you were to say things like "I know people who used at the time" the people that you know does not cover an ENTIRE country/region of people.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Looney Toon on 01/10/17 at 4:02 pm

Didn't you already say it was popular in 2009? xD

My post wasn't targeted towards you, Slowpoke. Yeah, I did say that it was popular in 2009. The charts show that. Can't deny with what them stats say. Who said that it wasn't popular in 2009? Only Social media that hit mainstream Popularity before that was Myspace from 2005-2008. 2009 and after is when Facebook and Twitter ruled this world.

Curious on when the next set of years will give us.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/10/17 at 4:03 pm

My post wasn't targeted towards you, Slowpoke. Yeah, I did say that it was popular in 2009. The charts show that. Can't deny with what them stats say. Who said that it wasn't popular in 2009? Only Social media that hit mainstream Popularity before that was Myspace from 2005-2008. 2009 and after is when Facebook and Twitter ruled this world.

Curious on when the next set of years will give us.

Oh, my bad. :-[

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mqg96 on 01/10/17 at 4:05 pm

Eric, if you're reading this comment right now. We all need you! Your opinion on this Twitter debate on when it hit its peak like late 2000's Youtube or the end of the 2000's Facebook. That type of peak in popularity. When did you start going to school, going to your job, or hanging out with family & friends and start hearing people say "Hey you have a Twitter, go follow me and I'll follow you back!" in your everyday lives. Not just celebrities only. The final jury comes down to you bro!

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/10/17 at 4:08 pm

Eric, if you're reading this comment right now. We all need you! Your opinion on this Twitter debate on when it hit its peak like late 2000's Youtube or the end of the 2000's Facebook. That type of peak in popularity. When did you start going to school, going to your job, or hanging out with family & friends and start hearing people say "Hey you have a Twitter, go follow me and I'll follow you back!" in your everyday lives. Not just celebrities only. The final jury comes down to you bro!

Wouldn't that just be anecdotal evidence? Why use that when you can use the numbers? :(

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Looney Toon on 01/10/17 at 4:13 pm

I think something is wrong with my eyes or something. The emote faces on this board all look the same!

:) ;) :D ;D >:( :( 8) ??? :P :-https://m.popkey.co/9515d1/WLzq_f-maxage-0.gif

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/10/17 at 4:34 pm

I think something is wrong with my eyes or something. The emote faces on this board all look the same!

:) ;) :D ;D >:( :( 8) ??? :P :-https://m.popkey.co/9515d1/WLzq_f-maxage-0.gif

We all love Obama!! :D

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: HazelBlue99 on 01/10/17 at 4:37 pm

The final jury comes down to you bro!

Why should the belief of whether Twitter was popular back in the Late 2000s all depend on what Eric thinks (no offense Eric, but the discussion shouldn't end just based on what one person thinks)? That's one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard on this website. Seriously, you don't realise how silly that sounds?

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/10/17 at 5:02 pm

Didn't you already say it was popular in 2009? xD

He was saying it was only popular in 2009, which was the only year in the 2000s that Twitter was known by a group of people.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/10/17 at 5:16 pm

Wouldn't that just be anecdotal evidence? Why use that when you can use the numbers? :(

Why does it matter when it only charted on a certain amount of people who knew about it in 2009? It's not like every person, including teenagers and adults, knew what Twitter was back then.

Why should the belief of whether Twitter was popular back in the Late 2000s all depend on what Eric thinks (no offense Eric, but the discussion shouldn't end just based on what one person thinks)? That's one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard on this website. Seriously, you don't realise how silly that sounds?

You should've said that to when Slim and Slowpoke said that everybody in the entire world knew what Twitter was back in 2009. Especially when they now have to involve Eric with this sh*t.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/10/17 at 5:24 pm

You know what, you're right? There's no way in hell you could stop arguing with me if I just shut up about it.

I just realized that everybody can't shut the hell up about Twitter being f*cking popular in 2009, which is quite minor.

I've been into this website for a year and a half and for the fact sh*t like this is happening, it makes me lose faith in this site's community.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mqg96 on 01/10/17 at 5:34 pm

Why should the belief of whether Twitter was popular back in the Late 2000s all depend on what Eric thinks (no offense Eric, but the discussion shouldn't end just based on what one person thinks)? That's one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard on this website. Seriously, you don't realize how silly that sounds?

To answer your question, no I don't, it's not silly at all. Stop taking my comments seriously dude. You've been doing that a lot lately here. Sometimes people are going to joke around or have some fun. Just chill out and relax. He's a good bud of mine on here, and no, it's not based off what one person thinks, it's that I finally want to see his opinion on this, since I've already seen Toon using FACTS based off charts to support his opinion, NewYorkEagle's, and UltraGameDog's on here, and Eric hasn't posted on this thread yet or given his opinion about Twitter. While I haven't agreed with everything Slowpoke or Jordan have said, I highly respect their opinions and viewpoints on why they might think Twitter may had become mainstream popular in the late 2000's, especially Jordan's because he remembers the prehistoric social media sites from the early 2000's so from his viewpoint he might think social media sites like Facebook or Twitter had become popular as soon as it launched, wouldn't be surprised.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Eazy-EMAN1995 on 01/10/17 at 5:41 pm

Eric, if you're reading this comment right now. We all need you! Your opinion on this Twitter debate on when it hit its peak like late 2000's Youtube or the end of the 2000's Facebook. That type of peak in popularity. When did you start going to school, going to your job, or hanging out with family & friends and start hearing people say "Hey you have a Twitter, go follow me and I'll follow you back!" in your everyday lives. Not just celebrities only. The final jury comes down to you bro!

I think 2010. That was when Twitter peaked IMO. That's when I started to have people come up to me and ask me do I have one.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Eazy-EMAN1995 on 01/10/17 at 5:43 pm

To answer your question, no I don't, it's not silly at all. Stop taking my comments seriously dude. You've been doing that a lot lately here. Sometimes people are going to joke around or have some fun. Just chill out and relax. He's a good bud of mine on here, and no, it's not based off what one person thinks, it's that I finally want to see his opinion on this, since I've already seen Toon using FACTS based off charts to support his opinion, NewYorkEagle's, and UltraGameDog's on here, and Eric hasn't posted on this thread yet or given his opinion about Twitter. While I haven't agreed with everything Slowpoke or Jordan have said, I highly respect their opinions and viewpoints on why they might think Twitter may had become mainstream popular in the late 2000's, especially Jordan's because he remembers the prehistoric social media sites from the early 2000's so from his viewpoint he might think social media sites like Facebook or Twitter had become popular as soon as it launched, wouldn't be surprised.

Nicely put Marquis, sharksfan is trippin...
Anyways I associate Twitter more with the early 10s than late 2000s.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mqg96 on 01/10/17 at 5:44 pm

I think 2010. That was when Twitter peaked IMO. That's when I started to have people come up to me and ask me do I have one.

In the 2010 calendar year, would you lean towards your 8th grade year or freshman year of high school when you started noticing the majority of your friends or acquaintances asking each other to follow each other on Twitter? Kinda like when people started sending people friend requests on Facebook.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/10/17 at 5:51 pm

I think 2010. That was when Twitter peaked IMO. That's when I started to have people come up to me and ask me do I have one.

This

I wish people can just realize that and end the discussion already.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mxcrashxm on 01/10/17 at 5:55 pm

This

I wish people can just realize that and end the discussion already.
Agreed with you, Toon, Eric and Mqg. Yeah, Twitter may have had a force in 2009, but it was overshadowed by Facebook that the majority didn't know about the site until around 2011-12.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/10/17 at 6:11 pm

To answer your question, no I don't, it's not silly at all. Stop taking my comments seriously dude. You've been doing that a lot lately here. Sometimes people are going to joke around or have some fun. Just chill out and relax. He's a good bud of mine on here, and no, it's not based off what one person thinks, it's that I finally want to see his opinion on this, since I've already seen Toon using FACTS based off charts to support his opinion, NewYorkEagle's, and UltraGameDog's on here, and Eric hasn't posted on this thread yet or given his opinion about Twitter. While I haven't agreed with everything Slowpoke or Jordan have said, I highly respect their opinions and viewpoints on why they might think Twitter may had become mainstream popular in the late 2000's, especially Jordan's because he remembers the prehistoric social media sites from the early 2000's so from his viewpoint he might think social media sites like Facebook or Twitter had become popular as soon as it launched, wouldn't be surprised.

But you don't respect my opinion? What did I ever do to you? You like everyone except me, interesting.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Eazy-EMAN1995 on 01/10/17 at 6:15 pm

In the 2010 calendar year, would you lean towards your 8th grade year or freshman year of high school when you started noticing the majority of your friends or acquaintances asking each other to follow each other on Twitter? Kinda like when people started sending people friend requests on Facebook.

The end of 8th grade and beginning of high school.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mqg96 on 01/10/17 at 6:30 pm

But you don't respect my opinion? What did I ever do to you? You like everyone except, interesting.

http://cdn.crunchify.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Twitter-Failed-Whale.png

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/10/17 at 6:44 pm

But you don't respect my opinion?

Why does it matter? You and Slowpoke treated our opinions like sh*t, in which you said that 2009 was when Twitter became popular as it is now.

What did I ever do to you? You like everyone except, interesting.

Well, you tried to say that 2009 was clearly a Twitter year, even though it wasn't even as popular as Facebook back then. In which I said COUNTLESS times.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: JordanK1982 on 01/10/17 at 6:51 pm

Why does it matter? You and Slowpoke treated our opinions like sh*t, in which you said that 2009 was when Twitter became popular as it is now.

Well, you tried to say that 2009 was clearly a Twitter year, even though it wasn't even as popular as Facebook back then. In which I said COUNTLESS times.

Dude, why are you so upset? Nobody was being rude or disrespectful during the course of this discussion at any time. I don't know what Slim did but I read over the messages and he was debating his points without any hostility. Slowpoke was being a dick as usual and should be banned from the planet for thinking Broadside is a good band was just making his usual harmless jokes. How's debating a point treating your opinion like sh*t?

Honestly, both sides have a point. Twitter was a major cultural force in 2009, you can't deny that but it's true Twitter's peak happened later on during the early 2010's, around 2011-2012. Nobody was arguing that, though. All of us acknowledged that Twitter peaked later, we just stated it's grasp on popular culture happened around 2009.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/10/17 at 6:56 pm

http://cdn.crunchify.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Twitter-Failed-Whale.png

;D ;D Good times.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 80sfan on 01/10/17 at 7:01 pm

I remember taking Xanax before I tweeted something. Ahh, legal over-the-counter medications! ;D

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/10/17 at 7:02 pm

http://cdn.crunchify.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Twitter-Failed-Whale.png

Hmm well it would help if I knew what I did wrong besides disagreeing with you like some others did. You're just picking on me if we others agree with me Twitter was popular in 2009. You respect their opinion but not mine. But whatever. Can't please everyone I guess. ???

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 80sfan on 01/10/17 at 7:02 pm

Dude, why are you so upset? Nobody was being rude or disrespectful during the course of this discussion at any time. I don't know what Slim did but I read over the messages and he was debating his points without any hostility. Slowpoke was being a dick as usual and should be banned from the planet for thinking Broadside is a good band was just making his usual harmless jokes. How's debating a point treating your opinion like sh*t?

Honestly, both sides have a point. Twitter was a major cultural force in 2009, you can't deny that but it's true Twitter's peak happened later on during the early 2010's, around 2011-2012. Nobody was arguing that, though. All of us acknowledged that Twitter peaked later, we just stated it's grasp on popular culture happened around 2009.

The Pink one is harmless, JordanCool1982. ;) ;)

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: JordanK1982 on 01/10/17 at 7:04 pm

The Pink one is harmless, JordanCool1982. ;) ;)

Not when he's blasting Broadside from his radio. ::) Did you know he's got like 20 copies of John Cena's rap CD? Crazy!

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 80sfan on 01/10/17 at 7:05 pm

Not when he's blasting Broadside from his radio. ::) Did you know he's got like 20 copies of John Cena's rap CD? Crazy!

I heard them pink ones can spit out venom when you least expect it. So I would expect it.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/a2/11/af/a211af9d4a7b17d14454f40eee17e656.jpg

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: JordanK1982 on 01/10/17 at 7:07 pm

I heard them pink ones can spit out venom when you least expect it. So I would expect it.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/a2/11/af/a211af9d4a7b17d14454f40eee17e656.jpg

All he spits out are Hawthorne Heights lyrics. ::)

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/10/17 at 7:09 pm

Why does it matter? You and Slowpoke treated our opinions like sh*t, in which you said that 2009 was when Twitter became popular as it is now.

Well, you tried to say that 2009 was clearly a Twitter year, even though it wasn't even as popular as Facebook back then. In which I said COUNTLESS times.

Why are you so mad about this? Who cares if I said Twitter was popular in 2009? It was and other people agree with me. I never said on the same level as Facebook and YouTube... And I always said it peaked in the early 10s.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 80sfan on 01/10/17 at 7:10 pm

it's kind of nice and comforting to see someone have an angry, or bad day, on inthe00s, instead of me. :.ducks:.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/10/17 at 7:14 pm

Dude, why are you so upset? Nobody was being rude or disrespectful during the course of this discussion at any time. I don't know what Slim did but I read over the messages and he was debating his points without any hostility. Slowpoke was being a dick as usual and should be banned from the planet for thinking Broadside is a good band was just making his usual harmless jokes. How's debating a point treating your opinion like sh*t?

Because he expected people to think that everybody would know about Twitter in 2009, even though it's not like the entire world knew about it.

Honestly, both sides have a point. Twitter was a major cultural force in 2009, you can't deny that but it's true Twitter's peak happened later on during the early 2010's, around 2011-2012. Nobody was arguing that, though. All of us acknowledged that Twitter peaked later, we just stated it's grasp on popular culture happened around 2009.

In all honesty, when was it major enough to be considered as big in 2009. Especially when it wasn't even mentioned by anybody that I knew at school back then. I knew about Twitter in 2010, but it's not like I gave one single f*ck about it a year earlier. I was already busy watching YouTube videos, while playing old Super Nintendo and Nintendo 64 games at the time. That's how much I didn't really gave a f*ck by then.

Why are you so mad about this? Who cares if I said Twitter was popular in 2009? It was and other people agree with me. I never said on the same level as Facebook and YouTube... And I always said it peaked in the early 10s.

You kept saying it like a fact over and over again though. You kept saying it peaked in 2009, while I just can't stand giving a sh*t.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: JordanK1982 on 01/10/17 at 7:19 pm

Because he expected people to think that everybody would know about Twitter in 2009, even though it's not like the entire world knew about it.

In all honesty, when was it major enough to be considered as big in 2009. Especially when it wasn't even mentioned by anybody that I knew at school back then. I knew about Twitter in 2010, but it's not like I gave one single f*ck about it a year earlier. I was already busy watching YouTube videos, while playing old Super Nintendo and Nintendo 64 games at the time. That's how much I didn't really gave a f*ck by then.

You kept saying it like a fact over and over again though. You kept saying it peaked in 2009, while I just can't stand giving a sh*t.

"Everybody" is a figure of speech meaning that a large amount of people knew about the site. Of course they didn't mean literally, how did you get to that conclusion? And dude, no offense, but you were a kid back then. We're not talking about you specifically and your demographic at the time which honestly wasn't important, anyway. Twitter is for teens and young adults who are old enough to use and full comprehend it's uses and functions. It's not about how much of "a f*ck" you gave because you're not the rest of the world. How can you say it wasn't important or doesn't matter when it was used to push forward an entire political revolution? It wasn't as big as Facebook and it hadn't peaked yet but that doesn't mean it wasn't already a big deal.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/10/17 at 7:23 pm

Not when he's blasting Broadside from his radio. ::) Did you know he's got like 20 copies of John Cena's rap CD? Crazy!

All these lies and slanders!! >:(

The crazy thing about these emoticons is you can never tell what's behind them :-*

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: JordanK1982 on 01/10/17 at 7:24 pm

All these lies and slanders!! >:(

The crazy thing about these emoticons is you can never tell what's behind them :-*

Until you quote. ;)

But it's true. You do that hand thing while you listen to Broadside as if people can't see you. ::)

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 80sfan on 01/10/17 at 7:26 pm

All these lies and slanders!! >:(

The crazy thing about these emoticons is you can never tell what's behind them :-*

Sometimes there are sinister influences, and beings, behind the scenes.

http://www.scaryforkids.com/pics/scary-doll.jpg

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/10/17 at 7:32 pm

"Everybody" is a figure of speech meaning that a large amount of people knew about the site. Of course they didn't mean literally, how did you get to that conclusion? And dude, no offense, but you were a kid back then. We're not talking about you specifically and your demographic at the time which honestly wasn't important, anyway. Twitter is for teens and young adults who are old enough to use and full comprehend it's uses and functions. It's not about how much of "a f*ck" you gave because you're not the rest of the world. How can you say it wasn't important or doesn't matter when it was used to push forward an entire political revolution? It wasn't as big as Facebook and it hadn't peaked yet but that doesn't mean it wasn't already a big deal.

Maybe I didn't know there was a political revolution that involved Twitter in 2009, since it's not like I was informed on politics as a kid. I may sound like a narcissistic douche just by saying that, but I just didn't know.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/10/17 at 7:37 pm

Until you quote. ;)

But it's true. You do that hand thing while you listen to Broadside as if people can't see you. ::)

Stop quoting me! Don't talk to me!

Coffee Talk is a a dope song.
Sometimes there are sinister influences, and beings, behind the scenes.

http://www.scaryforkids.com/pics/scary-doll.jpg

Delete this bad pic of me!! I only just woke up.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: JordanK1982 on 01/10/17 at 7:37 pm

Maybe I didn't know there was a political revolution that involved Twitter in 2009, since it's not like I was informed on politics as a kid. I may sound like a narcissistic douche just by saying that, but I just didn't know.

Nobody's saying that. Listen, our point was this: Twitter was in many ways a major force in 2009 that was used for things like spreading the word about Michael Jackson's death and helping out with both the 2009 Iran election protests and civil unrest in Moldova. These aren't little things. No, it did not hit it's peak but by this point it was already a certified and important part of pop culture that the majority of teens and young adults were aware of. Just turning on a news station in 2009 you would hear about twitter.

Stop quoting me! Don't talk to me!

Coffee Talk is a a dope song.

Coffee Talks is so bad. Why do the kids still eat up this scene kid sh!t? ::)

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/10/17 at 7:52 pm

Nobody's saying that. Listen, our point was this: Twitter was in many ways a major force in 2009 that was used for things like spreading the word about Michael Jackson's death and helping out with both the 2009 Iran election protests and civil unrest in Moldova. These aren't little things. No, it did not hit it's peak but by this point it was already a certified and important part of pop culture that the majority of teens and young adults were aware of. Just turning on a news station in 2009 you would hear about twitter.

Okay. I get it. Twitter was used for political events since 2009. I'm pretty sure it was used because it was around the time 2010s culture started to rise. Just stop with this already.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: JordanK1982 on 01/10/17 at 8:17 pm

Okay. I get it. Twitter was used for political events since 2009. I'm pretty sure it was used because it was around the time 2010s culture started to rise. Just stop with this already.

Ok?? Nobodies trying to mess with you or anything. Why are you getting so upset about a respectful discussion?

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/10/17 at 8:23 pm

Ok?? Nobodies trying to mess with you or anything. Why are you getting so upset about a respectful discussion?

I just feel like I'm in a bad mood today. It might have to deal with this thread, but I feel like I'm starting to become less nostalgic because of this forum already.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 80sfan on 01/10/17 at 8:27 pm

Stop quoting me! Don't talk to me!

Coffee Talk is a a dope song.
Delete this bad pic of me!! I only just woke up.

Social media makes people look that way.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/10/17 at 8:47 pm

Social media makes people look that way.

Gurl, you need to apply an Instagram filter before you post your pics online!

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mqg96 on 01/10/17 at 9:33 pm

Sometimes there are sinister influences, and beings, behind the scenes.

http://www.scaryforkids.com/pics/scary-doll.jpg

I do NOT like doll pictures or doll scenes with blood coming out! It's disturbing to me, just as disturbing as falling off a 10,000 mile cliff to your death. There was an episode of Arrow where this mastermind villain was murdering random girls and turning them into dolls with white stuff coming out of their mouths. It gives me chills when I have to explain about it on here too.

https://s3.amazonaws.com/kdia/emojis/emoji-tear_.png

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Fearsword on 01/10/17 at 9:34 pm

I already thought at the time in 2009 that Twitter was quite popular and I remember hearing in the media as Twitter being "rapidly growing new social media tool". I created an account on November 10, 2009 that I cforgot the password to.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mqg96 on 01/10/17 at 9:42 pm

I already thought at the time in 2009 that Twitter was quite popular and I remember hearing in the media as Twitter being "rapidly growing new social media tool". I created an account on November 10, 2009 that I cforgot the password to.

Interesting story that I never revealed to anybody on here, I created a Twitter in 2009 too, at age 13! But it got so boring really fast maybe because of how dry the older format was to me back then, or the fact that it was just celebrities and stars on there and nobody I knew personally cared about getting Twitters yet. I still know my old account username but I forgot my password though. I made one again in early 2012 and it was a lot more fun since the format was better and much improved, plus more friends from school started getting one instead of just having Facebook. I've used Twitter on a consistent basis ever since but I don't tweet much anymore like I did when I was in high school. Another thing I realized though, in the media whether it's on CNN, ABC, ESPN, etc. you always see #Hashtag this, follow the news reporter, sportscaster, or celebrity @BLABLABLA everywhere you go and see on the channels. We've seen this on a regular basis throughout the 2010's pretty much, but back in the 2000's, you didn't see this at all. It wasn't required for everybody to follow the celebrity on Twitter like it has become now. This same argument goes for going on cereal boxes or food products in the stores, and always seeing #hashtags and following me @, or (thumbs up) like me on Facebook. EVERYWHERE you go! This has become a mandatory part of our pop culture since the 2010's began.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: JordanK1982 on 01/10/17 at 10:57 pm

I just feel like I'm in a bad mood today. It might have to deal with this thread, but I feel like I'm starting to become less nostalgic because of this forum already.

But why is that? What was said here that put you in a bad mood and made you feel less nostalgic?

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/10/17 at 11:12 pm

You kept saying it like a fact over and over again though. You kept saying it peaked in 2009, while I just can't stand giving a sh*t.

I absolutely never said it "peaked in 2009". I said it was "a late 00s thing" meaning it started in 2008 - 2009, not peaked. I made it clear that I agreed it peaked around 2011. All I said was that Twitter was popular in 2009, yet for some reason this sparked a big debate. Remember just because something was popular does not mean it was mandatory to hear about it. You didn't hear about it? No problem. But I still believe it was a cultural force in 2009. That's all I'm saying. And if you think it was popular later on it 2010 or whatever? No problem too. Everyone says stuff on here like they are facts. No need to get upset and worked up over this (both you and mqg96), they are just different opinions in a discussion forum.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/10/17 at 11:15 pm

Interesting story that I never revealed to anybody on here, I created a Twitter in 2009 too, at age 13! But it got so boring really fast maybe because of how dry the older format was to me back then, or the fact that it was just celebrities and stars on there and nobody I knew personally cared about getting Twitters yet. I still know my old account username but I forgot my password though. I made one again in early 2012 and it was a lot more fun since the format was better and much improved, plus more friends from school started getting one instead of just having Facebook. I've used Twitter on a consistent basis ever since but I don't tweet much anymore like I did when I was in high school. Another thing I realized though, in the media whether it's on CNN, ABC, ESPN, etc. you always see #Hashtag this, follow the news reporter, sportscaster, or celebrity @BLABLABLA everywhere you go and see on the channels. We've seen this on a regular basis throughout the 2010's pretty much, but back in the 2000's, you didn't see this at all. It wasn't required for everybody to follow the celebrity on Twitter like it has become now. This same argument goes for going on cereal boxes or food products in the stores, and always seeing #hashtags and following me @, or (thumbs up) like me on Facebook. EVERYWHERE you go! This has become a mandatory part of our pop culture since the 2010's began.

If even you created a Twitter account in 2009, why were so offended that I said it was popular in 2009? You still didn't answer my question on why you don't respect my opinions and what I ever did to you. Disagreeing with people's opinions should not make you treat them like crap.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mqg96 on 01/10/17 at 11:35 pm

If even you created a Twitter account in 2009, why were so offended that I said it was popular in 2009? You still didn't answer my question on why you don't respect my opinions and what I ever did to you. Disagreeing with people's opinions should not make you treat them like crap.

There was nothing you said for me to feel offensive at all. I've always been smiling with tears of joy throughout this comedy show. My reasons are based off my personal experiences from where I live, and I've been asking other people's opinions on this debate to support my point. Just let the conversation go and move on dude.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mqg96 on 01/10/17 at 11:37 pm

I absolutely never said it "peaked in 2009". I said it was "a late 00s thing" meaning it started in 2008 - 2009, not peaked. I made it clear that I agreed it peaked around 2011. All I said was that Twitter was popular in 2009, yet for some reason this sparked a big debate. Remember just because something was popular does not mean it was mandatory to hear about it. You didn't hear about it? No problem. But I still believe it was a cultural force in 2009. That's all I'm saying. And if you think it was popular later on it 2010 or whatever? No problem too. Everyone says stuff on here like they are facts. No need to get upset and worked up over this (both you and mqg96), they are just different opinions in a discussion forum.

Since when in this debate did I ever get upset or offensive over everybody this the whole time? Looks like you're putting words in my mouth that I never put out LMAO!

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/10/17 at 11:51 pm

There was nothing you said for me to feel offensive at all. I've always been smiling with tears of joy throughout this comedy show. My reasons are based off my personal experiences from where I live, and I've been asking other people's opinions on this debate to support my point. Just let the conversation go and move on dude.

Okay I agree, let's move on. Inertia is probably looking at this thread thinking "what the hell?" XD

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: HazelBlue99 on 01/11/17 at 3:30 am

To answer your question, no I don't, it's not silly at all. Stop taking my comments seriously dude. You've been doing that a lot lately here. Sometimes people are going to joke around or have some fun. Just chill out and relax. He's a good bud of mine on here, and no, it's not based off what one person thinks, it's that I finally want to see his opinion on this, since I've already seen Toon using FACTS based off charts to support his opinion, NewYorkEagle's, and UltraGameDog's on here, and Eric hasn't posted on this thread yet or given his opinion about Twitter.

I understand that. In many ways, it just shows how forum posts can be interpreted differently by people. Personally, I perceived it as you wanting Eric to voice his beliefs and whatever Eric believed in, that would be the consensus as to how popular Twitter was at the time. There were no emojis in the post either (not that there had to be, but anyway), so it didn't really appear to me that it was intended as a joke. I will make sure from now on that I re-read over your posts (or any posts, in general) and try to perceive them from different viewpoints.

However, with that said, there was no need for Eric to say that I was "tripped out". That's exactly how arguments are started and to be completely honest, when I first read his post, I was tempted to say something nasty back. I realise that my original post wasn't pleasant, but you don't imply that someone is a "drug addict". That's uncalled for.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Eazy-EMAN1995 on 01/11/17 at 10:13 am

I absolutely never said it "peaked in 2009". I said it was "a late 00s thing" meaning it started in 2008 - 2009, not peaked.

Barely... culturally it isn't really a late 00s thing.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Baltimoreian on 01/11/17 at 10:19 am

Barely... culturally it isn't really a late 00s thing.

It never seemed like a mainstream thing, unless you used it for political advertising. In which I find to be different from pop culture.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: bchris02 on 01/11/17 at 10:28 am

I have said this for a long time. People overestimate social media's early impact, especially in the mid '00s. People also tend to think that Facebook overtook MySpace much sooner than it actually did.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mxcrashxm on 01/11/17 at 11:34 am

I have said this for a long time. People overestimate social media's early impact, especially in the mid '00s. People also tend to think that Facebook overtook MySpace much sooner than it actually did.
Do they also overestimate social media and the internet's impact for the Y2K era as well?

So Facebook truly must have overtook MySpace by 2010-11 right?

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: bchris02 on 01/11/17 at 11:50 am

Do they also overestimate social media and the internet's impact for the Y2K era as well?

So Facebook truly must have overtook MySpace by 2010-11 right?

More like late 2009 for Facebook overtaking MySpace. I have seen it posted on this board numerous times that the MySpace era was over by 2008, but it was still very relevant through all of 2008 and most of 2009. MySpace usage dropped off quickly in the early '10s and by 2011 it had slid into irrelevancy.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mxcrashxm on 01/11/17 at 12:09 pm

More like late 2009 for Facebook overtaking MySpace. I have seen it posted on this board numerous times that the MySpace era was over by 2008, but it was still very relevant through all of 2008 and most of 2009. MySpace usage dropped off quickly in the early '10s and by 2011 it had slid into irrelevancy.
I agree because despite Facebook being super popularity by the end of 2009, MySpace was generally still being used.

As for my other question, do some people also overestimate social media and the internet's impact for the Y2K era as well? I mean AOL was the only one being used throughout that time period and the internet use didn't hit over 50% until 2001.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: bchris02 on 01/11/17 at 12:28 pm

I agree because despite Facebook being super popularity by the end of 2009, MySpace was generally still being used.

As for my other question, do some people also overestimate social media and the internet's impact for the Y2K era as well? I mean AOL was the only one being used throughout that time period and the internet use didn't hit over 50% until 2001.

I don't think people overestimate the Internet's impact, but they overestimate broadband's impact during that era (and therefore things such as streaming content, social media, e-commerce, etc that are difficult on a dial-up connection). Dial-up will still a huge force as late as 2003 and 2004 and much of the web wasn't all that different from the '90s. We were not in the Web 2.0 era yet. I think it was as late as 2004 that the total number of broadband users finally surpassed dial-up users.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/11/17 at 12:31 pm

More like late 2009 for Facebook overtaking MySpace. I have seen it posted on this board numerous times that the MySpace era was over by 2008, but it was still very relevant through all of 2008 and most of 2009. MySpace usage dropped off quickly in the early '10s and by 2011 it had slid into irrelevancy.

Yep, it was May 2009 when Facebook overtook Myspace in the US, according to the graph posted previously in this thread. Most MySpace users were teens, so it might have been a bit later for that demographic, but then again, teens tend to be the fastest in adopting new trends and I doubt Facebook is an exception, so May 2009 sounds like a good approximation nonetheless.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mqg96 on 01/11/17 at 12:35 pm

Yep, it was May 2009 when Facebook overtook Myspace in the US, according to the graph posted previously in this thread. Most MySpace users were teens, so it might have been a bit later for that demographic, but then again, teens tend to be the fastest in adopting new trends and I doubt Facebook is an exception, so May 2009 sounds like a good approximation nonetheless.

2008-09 season was the last time Myspace was more common than Facebook, or it may have been even. 2009-10 was definitely the first full season Facebook overtook Myspace for sure. Throughout my 8th grade year people were switching over from Myspace to Facebook, and by the time I started high school (Fall 2010) nobody cared about Myspace anymore.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/11/17 at 12:35 pm

I don't think people overestimate the Internet's impact, but they overestimate broadband's impact during that era (and therefore things such as streaming content, social media, e-commerce, etc that are difficult on a dial-up connection). Dial-up will still a huge force as late as 2003 and 2004 and much of the web wasn't all that different from the '90s. We were not in the Web 2.0 era yet. I think it was as late as 2004 that the total number of broadband users finally surpassed dial-up users.

I remember a lot of websites having "(56k warnings)" even as late as 2007/early 2008, if a page was too image heavy :o No doubt if you were a web developer, you really had to take dial up users into account, and this affected how websites were designed, unlike today where you can put as much cumbersome pinging as you like (looking at Facebook).

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 2001 on 01/11/17 at 12:44 pm

2008-09 season was the last time Myspace was more common than Facebook, or it may have been even. 2009-10 was definitely the first full season Facebook overtook Myspace for sure. Throughout my 8th grade year people were switching over from Myspace to Facebook, and by the time I started high school (Fall 2010) nobody cared about Myspace anymore.

I've got no anecdotes, I don't think Myspace was popular here as over there ;D Hmm, it must've been 2007 when Facebook overtook Myspace in Canada, but I remember MSN was still king that year.

Edit: yeah, I remember making a thread on this. Facebook was already bigger than Myspace here in February 2007

According to eMarketer, MySpace is the most popular web site in the US, ranked by market share of visits in February 2007. That was above Google – by the way. As a percentage of online Canadians, MySpace is only fourth in social networking compared to Microsoft Corp.'s Windows Live Spaces at 39%, Google’s Blogger 29% and Facebook 28%, according to comScore Canada Inc.

If you have an MSN account you have a Live Spaces account, so that was on top and king, and blogging was really popular like I said in my first post in this thread. Tbh, I like our social media history better :P

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mxcrashxm on 01/11/17 at 1:21 pm

I don't think people overestimate the Internet's impact, but they overestimate broadband's impact during that era (and therefore things such as streaming content, social media, e-commerce, etc that are difficult on a dial-up connection). Dial-up will still a huge force as late as 2003 and 2004 and much of the web wasn't all that different from the '90s. We were not in the Web 2.0 era yet. I think it was as late as 2004 that the total number of broadband users finally surpassed dial-up users.
Actually, you're right about that. In fact regarding the Web 1.0 era, most people only used the internet either for AOL or to search simple things. Yeah, there was no way those features you mentioned would have been useful with dial-up.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: 80sfan on 01/11/17 at 1:42 pm

I remember MySpace still being the 'in' thing in 2007, maybe even up to as late as 2008. But yeah, by 2009 Facebook was king!

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/11/17 at 1:42 pm

MySpace usage dropped off quickly in the early '10s and by 2011 it had slid into irrelevancy.

I agree. 2011 was the last year MySpace was slightly relevent and I even deleted my MySpace account this year too. 2010 you still had people using it but it was clearly dying off. I think Facebook overtook MySpace in 2008.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: yelimsexa on 01/11/17 at 1:45 pm

Don't forget about Blogger (and other similar blogging sites like WordPress) had a considerable growth spurt around 2003-2005, although in away that is sort of "Web 1.5" in that it's still predominately text-based, but with commenting and improved, more user-friendly layouts for both the creator and reader. Wikipedia (and other Wikis) also had a pretty big spurt in the mid-2000s, replacing the old expert-edited enyclopedias. 2007 was quite different than 2002, though anyway you put it online since many pages by that time redesigned themselves to look more "Web 2.0 friendly" instead of being just a collage of text like until recently, Craigslist has been. Unlike the great changes of the 1990s and 2000s, the 2010s biggest changes to web design is to make pages more smartphone-friendly, and I'd say a website from 2017 looks about as different from say how a 2008 website was from one in 2003.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Howard on 01/11/17 at 2:54 pm

I think something is wrong with my eyes or something. The emote faces on this board all look the same!

:) ;) :D ;D >:( :( 8) ??? :P :-https://m.popkey.co/9515d1/WLzq_f-maxage-0.gif

It has something to do with Obama.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: bchris02 on 01/11/17 at 3:51 pm

Don't forget about Blogger (and other similar blogging sites like WordPress) had a considerable growth spurt around 2003-2005, although in away that is sort of "Web 1.5" in that it's still predominately text-based, but with commenting and improved, more user-friendly layouts for both the creator and reader. Wikipedia (and other Wikis) also had a pretty big spurt in the mid-2000s, replacing the old expert-edited enyclopedias. 2007 was quite different than 2002, though anyway you put it online since many pages by that time redesigned themselves to look more "Web 2.0 friendly" instead of being just a collage of text like until recently, Craigslist has been. Unlike the great changes of the 1990s and 2000s, the 2010s biggest changes to web design is to make pages more smartphone-friendly, and I'd say a website from 2017 looks about as different from say how a 2008 website was from one in 2003.

I agree with this. I miss the way websites were formatted in the late 2000s. They were interactive, but they weren't yet "dumbed down" for phones and tablets. As somebody that still uses a desktop computer, it's a pet peeve of mine that so many websites are designed explicitly for touch devices and are confusing and awkward on traditional computers.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Slim95 on 01/11/17 at 5:02 pm

It has something to do with Obama.

Obama's gone in 9 days. :(

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mach!ne_he@d on 01/12/17 at 8:27 am

As for my other question, do some people also overestimate social media and the internet's impact for the Y2K era as well? I mean AOL was the only one being used throughout that time period and the internet use didn't hit over 50% until 2001.

Actually, I would say that the impact of the internet during the Y2K era does sometimes get overstated a little bit. As somebody who was in 8th grade during the year 2000, I can say form firsthand experience that the internet really didn't make all that much difference to my life at the time (in fact, we didn't even have internet access for the first few months of the year, as my parents didn't finally sign up with an ISP until March 2000). Even at school it didn't have much impact. There were maybe a few dozen kids in my school that had accounts on stuff like AIM or something, but even that wasn't all that common. Actually, I'd estimate that probably about half of the students in my 7th grade class in mid 2000 still didn't have internet access yet, and nobody thought that was strange or got made fun of because of it.

Truthfully, the internet was just so much more of a pain in the ass to deal with back then that it often wasn't worth getting online, particularly if you had a slow, unreliable ISP like we did. Even doing something as simple as trying to load a picture could take more than a minute on a good day, and you constantly got knocked offline every time somebody tried to call. It was also hard finding time to get on period. Most kids didn't have a laptop or desktop in their own rooms back in those days, so you usually had to share one online-capable device (the living room PC) with the entire family. With all of these limitations, I rarely spent more than 20 to 30 minutes a day online back in 2000-01, and some days I wouldn't get on at all.

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: Howard on 01/12/17 at 3:38 pm

Obama's gone in 9 days. :(

I'm going to miss him. :(

Subject: Re: The Growth of Social Media in the 2000's Was Slower Than You Might Think

Written By: mxcrashxm on 01/15/17 at 8:30 pm

Hey I've read this piece from time to time and while it was targeted towards those in the late 70's/early 80's group, there seems to be many myths because most of the commenters keep using anecdotal statements. You guys should check the link.

http://www.popsugar.com/tech/How-Technology-Influenced-Generation-X-37522155?slide=5

Check for new replies or respond here...