Aggers, a much-loved fixture on British radio, didn't like the suggestion that writer Will Buckley had made, suggesting the one-time Leicestershire quick had been "pervy" in his radio interview with singer Lily Allen. After approaching Buckley and apparently getting no joy, Aggers posted his feelings thus:
"gave Will Buckley 24 hrs to aplogise for calling me a pervert, and he has declined".
Within minutes, he had added a contact for Buckley's boss and the following promise:
"will tell you how he described his readers (you) if he fails to print a total apology to me and my family on Sunday".
Allen supported Aggers with her own Tweets and a chastened Buckley posted an apology "for causing offence" on the Comments section after his story. Now all was well again: Aggers was OK with things and The Guardian website had received lots of traffic.
"What an eye-opener this has been for all... to the power of new media. It is here and will change the way news is responded to, in particular. This showed what twitter can do."
It certainly does. After spending just over a month on Twitter, Aggers now has an army of 22,000 followers, many of whom will, as it were, go into bat for him.
Clearly, Twitter is now the shot heard around the world, whether it's Lance Armstrong commenting on his team mate or Jordan venting. And such is its power to make mass contacts, magnetise crowds and apply lobby pressure that any fuss can be over inside 24 hours without a physical blow being struck.
The big problem for the tabloids is that disintermediation has well and truly arrived. Social media works at warp speed and, to the chagrin of print media, 'stories' can be done and dusted faster than it's worth to roll the presses. Storms in teacups can now stay there rather than raging on forever: the Twitter attention span won't have it any other way.
The very least Twitter's founders deserve is a Nobel peace prize for their creation, which now manifests itself as a faster troubleshooting medium than the UN or League of Nations ever offered.