What Do Darth Vader and Bieber Have in Common?

REPLAY VIDEO
Your next video will start in
Pause

Recommended Videos

  • Info

  • Comments

  • VIDEO TEXT

Dec. 3 (Bloomberg) -- Bloomberg Contributor David Kirkpatrick discusses the rise of the "selfie" with Emily Chang on Bloomberg Television's "Bloomberg West." (Source: Bloomberg)

I thought it was just teenagers and camp kardashian -- and him card issue 00 and kim -- and kim kardashian.

People love it.

What does it mean?

They are taking it so they can connect with their audience.

In makes people seem more human.

It does.

Cell phones we now.

Are such good owns and the cameras that face us are so easy to use.

The technology to take a photo is so easy.

Photos are not a communication.

That is a new change.

A number of companies, they spec, twitter -- facebook, twitter, have developed a simple means to distribute.

It is a national -- natural convergence.

We talked about whether snapchat is a fad.

Do you think the "selfie" is a f ad?

Calling it is probably a fad.

It is probably not a fad to take pictures of yourself.

It is a little bit narcissistic.

It is a little bit exhibitionistic.

That has been a pair of us burst of terms that have been applied to facebook and social media from the beginning.

They are criticisms of the way we behave.

I do not think it is a fad.

I think people want to convey who they are and where they are going, . people want to be seen.

They will continue to want to be seen.

We will probably have a new word for it.

How important is the selfie to the business of facebook, twitter?

I do not think it is particularly important.

Facebook may profile pictures.

That is a good point.

The original selfie was a facebook rope off photo.

-- was the facebook profile photo.

I guess they are important to that way.

It is just a way of identifying ourselves.

I do think that snapchat is the service to watch.

Instagram has a much wider range of purposes.

Unfortunately, a lot of the snapchat selfies include more adjust the phase.

Turning down multimillion dollar offers, was that a mistake?

I do think that was a mistake.

I do not see them having the kind of growing business that would justify that sort of long- term confidence in their business potential so they can be worth so much more.

I think they are crazy to turn it down.

I want to talk to you quickly about twitter.

The first analyst reports to come back do not have a lot of optimism.

It will not go up much at all for at least a year.

What do you think about that?

Don't think that i am somebody who says we are in a bubble.

We can talk about the second company.

I agree that twitter does not have any business fundamentals that even really justifies current stock price.

Certainly not to justify an assumption that it would continue heading toward the heavens.

Until twitter shows a series of really impressive quarterly earnings like facebook has done with its ipo, the stock will not move.

It is not have any profit.

When comparing it to facebook, facebook started subtly showing profitable growth using mobile which is the one thing people were watching for.

They delivered it.

Twitter is a company whose losses are growing even though it's uses and revenues are growing.

Until they show some profit growth, i do not see where the stock will be going anywhere from here but down.

All right.

We will be watching it.

Thank you as always for weighing

This text has been automatically generated. It may not be 100% accurate.

Advertisement

BTV Channel Finder

Channel_finder_loader

ZIP is required for U.S. locations

Bloomberg Television in   change