Further to my post of this morning I just read this very interesting article on the Guardian website:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/nov/06/penelope-trunk-tweet-miscarriage

For those of you who can't be bothered to click on the link it's essentially a riposte from a woman named Penelope Trunk, who last week tweeted that she was in a meeting, suffering a miscarriage "Thank goodness, because there's a fucked-up three-week hoop-jump to have an abortion in Wisconsin." Needless to say, there was a fairly horrified reaction to this when it hit the national press, courtesy of one of Trunk's 10, 135 followers.

One of the most interesting things about the article was reading the responses from readers below, which varied from justification of her actions - that anyone who signs up to someone's Twitter feed has no right to then complain about what is subsenquently tweeted to them - to disgust that anyone's reaction to a miscarriage could be so relaxed as to inform the world - or at least her "followers" - of it in less than 140 characters.

What I quite enjoyed was this one response:

"If hell is other people, then twitter is its roaring flames and freezing ice. Is everyone really so convinced that their own banalities are groundbreaking revelations?"

Which was basically what I was trying to say in that earlier post. Although at least Twitter means the Guardian can add to its features list every so often.