Are "Tweets" for "Twits"?

  I don't seem to get the hang of tweeting. I made an account late last summer, mainly out of curiosity. Granted my followers are few, but I still don't see the point.

  I went through the list of people to follow and selected some authors. actors, chefs, news, and even the president. Surely these notable celebrities would have interesting things to tweet....umm..NOT. Even Obama tweets are boring.

  One author (who shall remain nameless) is someone whose writings I've enjoyed for years. I was excited to find her on Twitter and hoped for news of upcoming projects or links to enticing passages from a new book. Well after several months all she has tweeted is links to daily newspaper articles. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised I haven't seen any clues to a new book...she hasn't had time to write anything because she's addicted to the daily news...

  Seems everyone else uses it to post their next talk show appearance, or else uses it to talk in some alien code to people we are deemed to never know. Charlie Sheen was interesting for....ohh....maybe 48 hrs. then he just got sort of sad and pathetic.

  Maybe I just don't get the attraction. Chat and messengers I understand. Email I understand. Sending a short blurb into cyberspace for anyone and their pet to read, I don't get. It could be because I'm not phone obsessed. I actually despise phones, and have been following Twitter from my computer. That could be the problem..Tweeting might be only truly appreciated for it's instant human cyber-contact via the phone.

  So to those of you who enjoy Twitter...Tweet On!  I think I'll stick with email and the Facebook chat box........