Very good website. I liked it very much. Comments from http://www.delhiblossoms.com

Mack,

Is the point that folks are using Twitter to post URLs and not spending enough time conversing on Twitter or is it that they don't use comments?

Frankly, I suspect most are too busy to hang out on Twitter waiting to share or read something that might be useful in our work. I give it about 15 minutes a day. As for turning off comments, well that's just wrong.

Mack - I think listening is as important as talking when it comes to Twitter. At least in my own use of Twitter, I spend lots of time monitoring/listening, some time broadcasting, and some time conversing.

I agree it's important to "talk back" -- your example about a user broadcasting a headline or similar and then disappearing really is a waste of Twitter as a resource. But I don't think that the measure of "social" can be taken only in the number of replies.

Lewis and Ann:

My point is, I find it odd that people that clearly understand social media, would backtrack and use a social site such as Twitter, as a one-way communication channel.

And ultimately, it's none of my business how they use Twitter. The problem is when these people that are using Twitter as a one-way communication channel, tell current and potential clients that the best way to use Twitter, is to get on their 3 times a week and link to their latest blog post.

SO when I come later and tell them how Twitter could be a great way to interact with their customers, providing them customer service and interacting with them, they are likely to reply with 'I don't care about that, I just want to get my message out there'.

Great points. Personally, I feel that Twitter's technical difficulties don't help conversation either. To Lew's point, I'm not spending a ton of time browsing around on site, so texts/DMs are invaluable - when they work.

I 100% agree. Companies are jumping on the social-media band wagon just because it broadens their marketing channels. They actually don't use these tools as ways to interact but instead a way to promote. For example, I see more and more companies coming out with blogs just for the sake of it and all they do is talk about themselves.

The free-for-all structure of Twitter does make it a bit more difficult than it should be to engage in dialogue. While I enjoy the "flow" of micro-posts, it would be nice if each post could be categorized into one or more topical domains, AND if each post could be its own "domain" for threaded conversations (a la Plurk). It would be helpful to both enjoy the noisy backyard chat aspect of the Twitterati AND be able to narrow one's focus by having targeted views in a flexible interface.

I think some who use Twitter as a broadcast mechanism have fooled themselves into thinking we really care that they wrote a new post. (Well, maybe in some cases we do.)

Twitter has many uses, broadasting being one of those (monitoring/listening as Ann suggested being another; conversation being yet another).

I feel strongly that a willingness to interact with other Twits is the price of entry. It's behavior that's required for winning the right to be heard. Build a relationship first, then let me know about your post.

This behavior is not indigenous to Twitter either. It's how I view the use of most any form of social media.

Great post, Mack. I wish more experts and media would engage with the rest of us and I would hope that they would spread the word about those benefits to others. Don't you think that @zappos gets much more benefit from Twitter than @nytimes who just uses it to send out links to articles?

I think Twitter has amazing potential for collaboration if people truly engage. Besides, I'm tempted to unfollow those who just broadcast information on their blog posts or latest articles and never actually talk to their followers. I could just read your blog or visit your site and save myself the trouble.

This goes back to the whole "talk WITH us and not AT us" idea that made social media different.

I think spam is spam regardless what platform is used: email, junkmail, twitter etc...

If folks aren't willing to be a part of the conversation then why should we care what they have to say?

I think Video Blogging Pioneer, Michael Verdi said it best:
1. Provide Value
2. Participate in conversations 9 out of 10 times
3. No more than 10% pimp
4. Make your pimp interesting and useful

"I think some who use Twitter as a broadcast mechanism have fooled themselves into thinking we really care that they wrote a new post. (Well, maybe in some cases we do.)"

Paul this is what confuses me the most, because these people are smart enough(or should be) to know that if all they do is use Twitter to promote, that we'll eventually see it as advertising, and tune them out.

But so it goes...and then I have companies thinking *I* am the one that doesn't get it, cause I won't help them get started using Twitter as a new broadcast channel.

Mack,

I don't like to take more than one turn, but sharing URLs is a good thing, not a bad thing. I just came here to reply following my reading of 4 blog posts that I would not have known existed had not the authors put the URLs on Twitter. I learned something from each one.

When we follow only those we know or want to know better, their sharing of what they write, podcast or video builds our relationship.

Ann, don't stop sharing your URLs because you are primarily a listener. In fact, listening and reading are to be admired not admonished.

"I don't like to take more than one turn, but sharing URLs is a good thing, not a bad thing. "

Absolutely! In fact that's one of the core strengths of Twitter, our ability to quickly and easily share content that we find value in. My feed reading is WAY down since I've become a power Twitter users, because I read so many interesting links from the URLs that people on Twitter share.

But IMO, when the only URLs you share are the 2-3 new posts YOU write every week, that's not sharing, that's broadcasting. And to be fair, I link to many of my posts on Twitter. But I also link to posts that Ann writes, or the new podcast you and Aaron Strout did, or any number of bloggers that I read regularly. I think/hope that as a result, my followers know that I am trying to share content with them that I think they will find value in. So I think that makes them more likely to want to check out my posts when I link to them.

I think it goes back to how we use Twitter. Are we there to attempt to create value, or extract it?

BTW Ann just noticed, love how the pic 'broadcasts' its signal ;)

Mack,

You're a sharer and a guy with principles that you own. I appreciate and honor that about you. Like you, I share URLs from a variety of sources.

However, not everyone uses a tool in the same way, and Twitter is a tool. If a blogger shares their URLs but never anyone else's, I'm okay with that. Especially if the URLs they share offer value, and among those I follow, without fail they almost always do.

I don't want to get into social media scorekeeping. So while I get your POV, I also respect how other's use SM tools, as long as they don't SPAM me by trying to sell me something.

Mack - Wow. Great discussion here. You've definitely raised some interesting points and challenged folks to think about this issue, "Are we there to attempt to create value, or extract it?" Well said.

p.s. Nice graphic, huh? ; )

"However, not everyone uses a tool in the same way, and Twitter is a tool. If a blogger shares their URLs but never anyone else's, I'm okay with that. Especially if the URLs they share offer value, and among those I follow, without fail they almost always do.

I don't want to get into social media scorekeeping. So while I get your POV, I also respect how other's use SM tools, as long as they don't SPAM me by trying to sell me something."

And again, I'm just fine with it too....until these people start trying to 'teach' companies to use these social tools the same way they are.

For example, I spoke about how businesses can use blogs at an event back in the Spring. Afterward, I started an email exchange with an attendee that wanted me to take a look at their company's blog.

I did so, and immediately noticed that the blog didn't allow comments. I told my contact that the company definitely needed to allow comments if they were going to blog. She said she mentioned adding comments to her boss and his reply was 'what do we need comments for? All we need to worry about is focusing on targeting the right keywords in our posts'.

Where do you think he heard that from? My guess is a social media 'expert'.

Awesome point Mack. As I mentioned to you on Plurk, its really to the benefit of conversationalists like yourself and other social media heads.

The bigger players who actually respond to those of us who are initiating these conversation, will benefit the most and ultimately create a more loyal fan base for themselves, IMO.

I've done my share of "new post" tweets, but it's not all I do. I assume people don't mind, because I see a bunch of traffic to the blog from twitter when I do it.

I think it's hard to assume that because someone is doing whatever balance of conversation/announcement that someone else thinks is wrong that they don't understand social media. They may be engaging in direct conversations with others. They might not have much else to say that day. They might find that application of it useful and the people who've chosen to follow them might find it useful too.

People paid a lot of attention to Barack Obama for using Twitter as a broadcast medium during the primary campaign - and most of the commentary was positive. Does this mean that his people "don't get" social media?

I just don't think this is that simple.

And what about Twitter lurkers - people who like to follow people who post interesting things, but have nothing to say back to them? is that wrong? is it not social if you choose an individual whose opinions you value and spend all your time listening?

"People paid a lot of attention to Barack Obama for using Twitter as a broadcast medium during the primary campaign - and most of the commentary was positive. Does this mean that his people "don't get" social media?"

'Everything's relative'. Funny because Hillary was doing the exact same thing, but she doesn't get the love from Twitter that Barrack does.

Why? Because whereas Barrack started out following back everyone that followed him, Hillary didn't follow anyone (she might have changed later, I honestly don't know).

But in both cases, the politicians got pops for using social media to push their messages. We liked this, because it helped validate the tools we are using, to see Prez candidates using them as well.

But for all the praise Barrack got for 'getting' Twitter, would that opinion have changed if John McCain was on Twitter and scheduled an hour a day to directly reply to his followers and attempt to actually 'talk' to them?

Again, everything's relative. As I've said, it's not of my business how people use Twitter or blogs or social sites. Where it becomes my business is when I have to undo misconceptions that clients have about how to 'properly' use social media, based on what they've seen or been told by others 'using' social media.

Hmh, interesting discusssion here. Yet this always makes me wonder - how much time/energy to invest into all this communication channels?

I remember once it was said that research should be at least 5-12% of marketing costs. Is it the case with following replies and comments and discussions?

What is the return on the costs of being responsive to all channels? It is just so hard to measure. I think that's the reason why for most companies and CEO's this will remain as the rest of marketing - something you talk about.

For me personally, I try to respond to every comment on my posts and comments on my comments and comments on... well... too much. So just last month I had so much work that I left out some of them. Did it make a difference to my success? Will find out most probably. :-)

Good point Mack. But not quite fair. I, like many others, am blogging so much less. When I do finally get a post up I often "tweet" to that effect. But it's not the only way I use Twitter.

Secondly, as long as a company or organization is clear on why and how they're using Twitter, it's their call whether it's a "one-way" publishing mechanism or something else.

Mack - interesting point about the Clinton vs Obama Twitter use - I preferrred Clinton's approach, because it seemed more honest. She was using Twitter to send messages out. You could follow her, or not. The "Barack is following you" messages (and I got several) felt like spam to me.

I extract a ton of value from twitter primarily listening. I find twitter is more useful to me than looking at RSS feeds the way I used to (it's human filtered RSS by "humans" I think insightful). I like that people link to stuff, because generally speaking most of the people I follow tend to read and write things that interest me. When I write a blog post (like Debbie - less frequent than in the past), i do share it via twitter - I guess I don't see this as advertising content but sharing a conversation that is occuring on another channel. I also like to use twitter as a research tool. Just yesterday I heard about a company I didn't know. I asked via twitter what others knew and in 30 minutes I had an intro to a person at a large brand using the product that i could get first hand insight from - awesome! I'm certainly not as present in twitter as I'd like to be, but I spend 80% of my time each week with clients and the other 80% with my family - wait, that doesn't add up - you get the idea. It's a good discussion, while I won't judge how others use the tools, I will consider how i use them as ultimately we all share some responsibility in keeping the tools useful.

sean

"Good point Mack. But not quite fair. I, like many others, am blogging so much less. When I do finally get a post up I often "tweet" to that effect. But it's not the only way I use Twitter.

Secondly, as long as a company or organization is clear on why and how they're using Twitter, it's their call whether it's a "one-way" publishing mechanism or something else."

Debbie if you are using Twitter to promote your posts AND talk to others (and I have seen you do both), then I think that's in line with how many people use Twitter. I am talking about people that only use Twitter as a tool to broadcast their blog posts to their followers, and that never attempt to engage their followers. And then these people go and teach companies on how to use Twitter.

Which tends to stick under my craw when I have a company tell me 'yeah but all this 'conversation' stuff seems like a waste of time, I just want to use Twitter to get my message out there!'

"It's a good discussion, while I won't judge how others use the tools, I will consider how i use them as ultimately we all share some responsibility in keeping the tools useful."

Right and again, it's none of my business how anyone uses Twitter, until they advise a company to use Twitter as a publishing channel, and I come behind them and say that they should use Twitter in a different way.

This is like going to Chris B's blog!
- I got the link from Twitter this morning (like Sean O'D I'm not reading RSS like I used to). Most of my reading comes from Twitter

- My use of Twitter has changed soo much. I go there to gab & get to know people. It's a fun place to chat with friends. Truly a social experience.

- I quit posting my own links because the traffic was minimal - now I only pop it in if it's for Comm Mgrs (I've tried to connect with them on Twitter & create a communication channel there to pass on news of webinars & other learning opp's)

- it's better than google - I can ask techy questions & get help quickly. I also can find people quicker than using email and send a quick DM

Thanks for hosting the discussion here Mack. I agree that companies should be encouraged & taught to partake in the conversation. Maybe we're all there for diff reasons & that causes the confusion?

What bugs me are the people who follow no one, but broadcast there. It was ironic to see one on the list for the twebinar. I smiled to myself & wondered how interesting that will be? I generally don't follow those people... because they aren't participating - only broadcasting as you say.

I tend to agree with Lewis Green's comments here. Twitter is a tool and as such people will use it in different ways. It is inevitable that marketers will use an available tool to promote themselves, their products or their clients. Thats what they do. I never remember reading anywhere that Twitter (or any other social networking tool) was only for networking purists who somehow must rise above promotion.

Lets face it, if we are chatting, Twittering, Plurking, blogging or putting ourselves on Facebook we are doing it for a reason. Its all a form of self-promotion for some sort of long-term benefit, either financial or social cache.

"What bugs me are the people who follow no one, but broadcast there. It was ironic to see one on the list for the twebinar."

Connie I agree, it looks odd to me when I see someone following only one tenth of the people that are following them. I can understand it if someone is only comfortable following the people that they personally know.

And I can also think of at least one person on the Twebinar that fits that description. I've met them and followed them, but they never followed back, so I unfollowed. Nothing personal, but I don't have room in my twitterstream for people that don't follow back.

That's the beauty of Twitter, just unfollow then.

I get what you're saying, but people should be allowed to use Twitter however they want.

There are no rules Mack.

I tend to agree with Jim here. There may be guidelines - as in simply "netizen-etiquette", but no formal rules. However, one guideline may be: "don't spam, no porn", for example - but anything goes, as you can clearly see. Now, with that said, if you want to provide something "useful, unique, interesting" - (UUI) - which is always good in anything you promote or say online - try to post a URL, comment using that principle. I'm not sure people are interested in the results from the latest bathroom trip you made, for example!. I have no issue with folks posting their URL only to broadcast or update. Plus, once I see their repeat posting with the "UUI" thinking above, I tend to bookmark and follow their work with hopefully great benefit. Have an optimal day! - Cheers, Jon

Mack,
For me it's either 2 way, or no way.
Thanx!
Joel Libava

I've always considered Twitter to be a mini-blogging tool. It answers the question "What am I doing right now". If somebody has gone to the trouble of finding a person (or company) on Twitter, I'll bet they know of (or can figure out) at least one other way to contact them.

If you are only interested in getting tweets from people who are willing to engage in a 140 character per message conversation, unfollow the people who don't respond back.

Good write-up. I am way, way tired of Twitter being used for spam and marketing.

I follow Ducttape (Duct Tape Marketing) on twitter and I just sent him a link to this post because all he ever does is announce his new blog posts. His twit from today linked to a new blog post on guess what...how to use twitter.

He wasn't amused when I recommended he read your post.

I, however, was amused.

kris

I love Twitter, and use Friendfeed to really find things that my friends are posting about, in essence, other links. As far as conversation with companies, I tweeted that I was enjoying watching Mad Men on Comcast's On Demand. Comcast responded to me on twitter, saying they were glad that i liked the service! It's not all one-sided, it depends on whether or not the company "gets it."

Don't know which experts you are referring to but one bit of disturbing advice I found from one was to turn off comments on your blog.

Is a common element of these "experts" the one-page, long-form, where-the-heck-is -the-point-of-this (but you better hurry because, whatever it is, it is a limited offer) web landing page?

I have found twitter to be very frustrating on several levels.

Too many comments about what someone had for breakfast.

My new addiction is friendfeed. I have found that a much more robust tool for sharing information, and comments about various posts.

And as a marketer, I do post updates, new blog posts etc on twitter, because it works. If people don't want that information, they don't have to follow me.