Editor’s note (April 2026): This article is part of the Blog Herald’s editorial archives. Originally published in 2008revised and updated to ensure accuracy and relevance for today’s readers.
There was a moment around 2008 and 2009 when bloggers didn’t really know what Twitter was. Not in the way we use the phrase now—as in bragging about being early adopters—but in a sincere, structured sense. Was this a blog? A bait? A microblogging platform? News wire? A conversation tool? No one was entirely convinced, and the platforms themselves were trying to figure it out in real time.
Technorati, then the dominant blog search and indexing engine, made a decision that crystallized the confusion: It began indexing Twitter. You can claim your Twitter profile just like you claim your blog. Your tweets—including those that say “brb, need a coffee”—will be indexed along with long-form posts and editorial content.
It almost seems strange now. But that moment revealed a tension that still hasn’t gone away. If anything, it has deepened.
What Technorati was actually trying to solve
Technorati’s main function was to map what was being talked about on the internet. To do that, he needed signals: tags, outbound links, follows, categories—the rich metadata that blogs naturally generate. That metadata was the connective tissue of the blogosphere. This allows Technorati to track how the story is going, who’s responding to whom, and which voices carry weight.
Twitter offered almost none. In 2009, a tweet consisted of 140 characters, no categories, no traces, and minimal metadata. There was talk, but breadcrumbs were scarce.
However, conversations on Twitter were real, fast, and increasingly where the latest news was experienced first. Technorati couldn’t ignore it without becoming irrelevant. So he adopted Twitter in an imperfect, somewhat desperate way, rather than building something purposefully built for what social media really is.
The lesson here isn’t that Technorati made a bad call. It’s the tools we use to measure and organize content that often lag behind the formats that content takes. This gap has consequences.
A deeper question about what a blog is
Original discussion – Is Twitter a form of blogging? – not really resolved. This became irrelevant as the categories themselves were resolved.
At the time, Google Blog Search defined the blogosphere broadly: anything that published and syndicated a site feed counted. With this logic, Twitter has adapted. Podcasts are appropriate. YouTube channels will then be eligible. The definition was technically imprecise and practically useless because it lumped really different formats into one category.
It’s important for bloggers today because the same definition blur happens again only on different platforms. Is the Substack newsletter a blog? Is it a LinkedIn article? Is it a long-form Threads post? Platforms resist pure tags, in part by design—they want creators to think of them as a category, not a subsection of a blog.
The bloggers who did well in 2008-2010 weren’t the ones with the best taxonomy. They were the ones who understood what each format was actually for and used it accordingly. Twitter was for real-time signaling. Blogs were for depth, argument, and lasting value. These are not competing things. They are complementary.
Why Technorati’s Crash Still Matters
Technorati eventually pulled back from blog indexing altogether. By the mid-2010s, it had moved to a digital ad network and largely abandoned the directory and search functions that made it useful. The infrastructure was never built to handle the volume it took, even as commentators pointed out in 2009. The addition of Twitter’s firehose exacerbated the problem.
Here’s a wider model worth sitting on. Centralized discovery platforms—those that promise to be the single source of truth for what’s happening on the web—have consistently failed to scale alongside the content they’re supposed to index. Digg, Delicious, StumbleUpon, Google Reader: each offered a version of “how do you find good content,” and each eventually collapsed or was swallowed up.
It was not a better centralized discovery that replaced them. It was algorithmic feeds on social platforms that solved the problem of volume by personalizing it – but introduced a different distortion. Reach has become more dependent on engagement signals than quality signals. Metadata (links, trackbacks, intentional curation) that Technorati values has given way to likes, shares, and watch time.
Bloggers who built their audience on the assumption that discovery platforms would do the trick found themselves exposed when those platforms changed or disappeared. Those who invested in direct relationships—email lists, RSS subscribers, repeat visitors who bookmarked the site—had something saved from links.
That’s what this old story is really about
It’s tempting to read the Technorati-Twitter moment as a footnote. Two platforms that no longer exist as it were are arguing over a question no one is asking anymore.
But the main dynamic is alive. Every time a new content format emerges—short-form video, AI-generated summaries, audio content, social newsletters—the same questions come up again. How is it detected? How is it indexed? What metadata does it produce and who controls that metadata? Does the new format enrich the broader content ecosystem or fragment it further?
Bloggers who watched Twitter enter Technorati’s index in 2009 were unknowingly watching the beginning of a much longer story about who controlled its distribution and under what conditions.
That story is still being written. Platforms vary; no structural questions.
Practical speech
If you’re blogging in 2026, the lesson from this date is not to be nostalgic for RSS and trackbacks. The difference between leased distribution and owned infrastructure should be clearly seen.
Twitter — now X — has gone through ownership changes, API restrictions, and algorithmic overhauls that have made it significantly less useful as a discovery channel for many creators. Substack has become a real platform competitor. Insights into AI are reshaping how Google displays content. The scene moves again as usual.
What Technorati tried and failed to do in 2009—to embrace a new format without the infrastructure or conceptual framework to do it well—is a useful mirror for how we think about our own content strategies today. Build for your platform first. Understand what each distribution channel is really for. Don’t confuse index presence with having an audience.
The blogosphere survived Twitter. Whatever happens next will survive—but only for writers who understand what they’re building.
