His Twitter pieces are just the latest in an apparently incessant tirade against anything sailing under the Web 2.0 banner. For a tech writer, he’s surprisingly luddite.

First it was Wikipedia, and how it was doomed to failure. Then everyone seemed to like it, despite its faults, so he moved on to attacking blogs. They too proved surprisingly durable, so he’s shut up about them. (But it’s instructive to note that his are the only articles on The Register not open to comments.)

It seems to me that he’s doing exactly what he accuses his targets of doing: confusing the medium with the message. So what if most stuff on Twitter is banal and next to useless? Enough people seem to find it useful, so why not leave them to it?

It’s difficult to engage with Orlowski without resorting to ad hominem attacks, mostly because he comes across as an insufferable prick. QED.