Christian Science Monitor opinion columnist Mark Pfeifle gives an interesting pitch for Twitter getting the Nobel Peace Prize for its impact on the Iran Election protests.
I am a big Twitter fan but think the Peace Prize is a bit of a stretch - why not a science based prize when they work out how to seriously compete with Google.
"When traditional journalists were forced to leave the country, Twitter became a window for the world to view hope, heroism, and horror. It became the assignment desk, the reporter, and the producer. And, because of this, Twitter and its creators are worthy of being considered for the Nobel Peace Prize," Pfeifie wrote.
I am writing this just after the Michael Jackson memorial which also has had a large impact over at Twitter. Social media really has jumped into the public psyche. MySpace and Facebook made us aware of them, but it was Twitter that focused its use in ways many others did not.
The piece makes an argument:
"Without Twitter, the world might have known little more than a losing candidate accusing the powers that be of alleged fraud. Without Twitter, the people of Iran would not have felt empowered and confident to stand up for freedom and democracy. They did so because they knew the world was watching. With Twitter, they now shout hope with a passion and dedication that resonates not just with those on their street, but with millions across the globe."
Good article overall, but I doubt the Nobel Prize selection committee are not following the tweets about nominating it. But then again who knows?