Twitter backlash by Marines, NFL, ESPN?

It had to happen. Twitter has grown too fast, and become too much of a buzzword, not to suffer some backlash. But it is happening in censorship from organizations, and that is wrong. 

This year, the blurty microblogging site has rocketed from more than 5 million users to around 23 million, a staggering increase of traffic. With that has come public attention: Google shows 121 million hits for a search of Twitter -- three times the number for today's "it-girl," Megan Fox.

And Twitter deserves to be taken down a notch. It is an annoying fad, as I blogged two weeks ago. It's growth will level off, and many will abandon accounts.

But it also represents a revolutionary change in how we communicate and live, and its contribution is both valuable and irresistible. As Time magazine said in a cover story, Twitter is changing the way we live. Twitter as we known it now is an overblown and, yes, somewhat out-of-control fad. It is also a powerful and very positive initial foray into a kind of dialogue that may prove to be as important as desktop publishing. You might not like Twitter (and sometimes I don't), but dismiss it at your peril.

It's disheartening that the unavoidable backlash is coming in the form of censorship by the Marines, the NFL and a media organization, ESPN. No, we don't want Marines getting shot while tweeting from the battlefield. But soldiers stationed overseas away from family and friends also desperately need to stay in touch to keep their morale up. No, we don't want football players tweeting from the end zone, but the NFL already has a policy against use of computers, phones and PDAs during games. No, ESPN's policy is not as restrictive as first reported, but it still constitutes a gag order at a media outlet.

The genie is out of the bottle. A clampdown on our immediate and far-reaching dialogue is not just impossible, it misses the point. Controlling the message is not the answer. Learning to use the new tools responsibly within your organization is. Opening up the dialogue finds the answers we all need. To say some information just shouldn't get out, as the Marines have said, is perfectly understandable -- as it was in World War II with the saying "Loose Lips Sink Ships." But calling social networks "proven havens for malicious actors," as the Marines did in their news release, makes Facebook and Twitter the enemy, and they are not.

The enemy of organizations is not the opinions of its employees, but the poor communication within those institutions that makes members' statements seek outside attention. "Tell us first" heads off a lot of embarrassing protest. "Use your heads" prevents a lot of dumb statements. "You may be demoted or fired for leaking sensitive information" puts the responsibility on us, not the mediums themselves.

The Marines' "malicious actors" are the same jerks who shout nasty things in public places. 140 characters haven't changed the power of harmful statements. Free speech will always be full of things that shouldn't be said. Wise leaders tell their employees not to say those things to the public, whatever the medium, and make clear that wild and irresponsible statements in any form will not be tolerated.

The most important point: This annoying fad will pass. But this historic and valuable change in the way we communicate cannot be stopped.