About one month ago I decided to put some effort into becoming a Twitter devote and, sometimes even a fanatic. Given the buzz about this tool for social media, I thought it was a worthwhile endeavor and a chance to see what all this is about. Our Chief Content Officer, Ann Handley (@marketingprofs), has also been gently pushing me to give it the college try. As anybody who read my last post on this subject, I’m not too optimistic about a business model here, but that’s not the point of this current post.
So, let me premise this on my firm belief that social media is here to stay. I say this because humans have always been social, and have tried various ways of socializing throughout human history. When I think social, I must say I imagine at least two-way interactions, not just one person talking and the other passively listening. To me, being social also means interacting with others in more than just two way conversations. This makes sense, and we’ve all had these experiences with friends, family, and fun social gatherings.
So, how does Twitter deliver on this expectation? My experience is quite mixed. On one hand, it is true you can “meet” many people and hear different voices. And when I’m not overwhelmed by the amount of data coming in, along with the information streaming in from the offline world, this can be quite fun. But the extent to which this plays out as “social” is best illustrated through some specific experiences I think we all share.
To experience Twitter, the first thing I did was get an account (@allenweiss) and download TweekDeck and started following some people I thought would be interesting. It didn’t take long before it was clear this wasn’t going to be social experience I liked in the past. That’s because there is a whole narrative about followers and following. A lot of people I followed seemed to be obsessed with having as many followers as possible. In fact, there seems to be a strategy (I credit Leigh Duncan-Durst – @livepath for this word) called “Twitchers” …. people who follow you, so you would follow them, and they would unfollow you …. all in an effort to beef up their follower numbers. This reminds me of creepy people from high school who were devoting their lives to a popularity contest.
Another interesting thing is that people you follow don’t necessarily follow you back. I find this interesting as well. How “social” is that? It’s like hearing someone speak who isn’t interested in what you have to say. For all the talk about how this is supposed to be different than mass media (where elites talk to you but aren’t interested in what you have to say), this seems to me a giant step backwards.
One other thing I find most strange is watching the action on my TweetDeck. A constant stream of one-way conversations go by. Here’s just one example of hundreds that went by today.
@iThinkMedia I’m enjoying all the creativity & wit that @literacyadviser and @CaryRN added!
Hmm–what do I do with that? What I’ve learned is that to find out what is going on I need to click on everybody’s link and then search to find the thread that linked this conversation together. Could you imagine doing that in a real life social gathering? Ok..I know there are tools that are trying to make this easier (Tweetree, for instance), but it’s like being in a really crowded party and just getting bits of conversation. You really need to love puzzles and fitting broken bits of conversations together to make any sense of what’s going on. Sure, you can jump into their conversation – I imagine this as barging into other peoples conversations at a party, but this requires a personality that I don’t have (it clearly works for others, however). Is this what is required to be social?
Finally, what I’ve noticed is that this medium (at least as it pertains to marketing topics) seems to be turning into a pure selling tool (often veiled under the cloak of helpfulness) for many people. I have no problem with that, but I would suggest we call it something other than social media, and just say what it is: it’s “selling media”. At least, this would be the transparency that every social media expert talks about as necessary in this new world of social media.
So, this has made me think a lot about what social media is. It definitely is media, but I’m still wrestling with how social it is. Do I need to change my definition of social?
To get one angle on this question, I asked my 15 1/2-year-old daughter (who is desperately anticipating her driver’s license) about her experiences with social media. She was an early adopter of MySpace (and now an obsessed Facebook devotee) and is probably the most social and connected kid in her school. She’s on her computer and Blackberry all the time. I asked her what she thought about all this stuff, and how driving will change (or not) her use of technology. She said technology has really helped her stay in touch and meet new friends, but once she starts driving, she sees this as far less important. Why? Because to her, being social means meeting personally up with her friends, chatting one to one or in a cohesive group. Wow, how old fashioned is that?
Allen, I think you focus too heavily on two rather minor details.
First, “twitcher” are inevitable and easily managed (see SocialToo.com for a service that automatically cleans them away). Spammers are a pain, to be sure, but they have not (completely) ruined e-mail.
Second, it is not always practical to follow everyone that follows you. While this may not be an issue for someone with a couple hundred followers, it someone with thousands simply cannot follow that many (in any meaningful way). This is the same reason that while Bob Dylan, for example, can’t respond individually to every e-mail, he still has millions of folks that want to hear from him.
Twitter is an important social media phenomenon. Complete with “social” elements.
Allen it’s so funny because two years ago I was where you are right now with Twitter. Friends kept telling me how amazing it was, and that I needed to be there. I kept trying to understand it, and never ‘got’ it.
But some really smart people were getting a lot of value from Twitter, so I stuck with it. I think it really resonated for me when I started following a lot of people that weren’t active in marketing and social media. I suddenly found I had 20 different conversations going on at once. Everything from the future of social media, to getting kids ready for school, to a woman describing local merchants as she live-tweeted from her Honduras vacation. It made for a fascinating tapestry of human experiences, all coming at me at once.
Then I started getting involved in conversations. What I found is that as I would start talking to someone about a topic, others would notice our conversation and join in. Others would start tweeting stuff like ‘Guys if you aren’t following the conversation about the value of Twitter between @allenweiss and @mackcollier, you should be’.
Just last night, I watched the Grammys, something I hadn’t had the slightest desire to do in about 20 years. But I watched because I saw everyone tweeting about the show, and noticed one of my friends was actually there and live-tweeting the show, especially what was happening during commercials. It became a social experience that we were all sharing.
I think Twitter is something that you have to stick with, and try using in different ways before you ‘get’ it. At least that’s how it was for me.
EXCELLENT post, Allen. Like you, I’ve spent some time these last few months focusing more than ever on Twitter (I’ve been there under one or another name since 2007), and I think it’s suffering from massive self-infatuation and an astonishing level of irrational exuberance.
Which is not to say that it’s not interesting and doesn’t have some real potential in certain circumstances (though I’m not quite clear on what Twitter’s potential for monetizing the service might be), but I do think a lot of people on Twitter need to calm down, take a deep breath, and put the service into some kind of rational perspective.
My biggest problem with Twitter right now is the signal-to-noise ratio. More here:
http://www.lohad.com/?p=2458
Of course, that can be addressed in large part by who and how one follows. I like following mainly reliable news sources, industry experts, and professional associates. That keeps the signal relatively high. (How often do you venture into the “Everyone” stream? Yikes!)
If you’re looking to build followers? Well, I posted my best advice over here:
http://www.lohad.com/?p=2654
Ultimately, though, I think for most people Twitter is too clubby and cliquey — and contributes to SNF (Social Networking Fatigue):
http://www.lohad.com/?p=2503
Maybe Bing is right?
http://stanleybing.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2009/02/02/twitter-paranoia/
Allen,
Interesting take on Twitter. You have some valid points. Your experience is dictated by who you follow.
I do not folow everyone that follows me. If i have no desire to connect to them or listen to them I simply do not follow. I have a follow process and criteria that they must meet for my use case.
How has twitter become a pure selling tool?? Show some example tweets that make you think this.
People opt in to hear those messages. The power is all with the user. They can unfollow at any time if they feel they are being sold to.
A lot of “connections & discovery” occur on twitter and then the convos go into DM or email or the telephone or real world meetings. So real social connections do occur.
You have to realize that Twitter is a new communications form/channel; and not necessarily a social network as it is being labeled.
“Sure, you can jump into their conversation” most people welcome that behavior. they don’t think of it as barging in. It might help to think of it as a comment and not barging in.
“@iThinkMedia I’m enjoying all the creativity & wit that @literacyadviser and @CaryRN added!” Yes you need to take the effort and look at who these people are. Think of it as SMS text broadcasting and you get to decide what to do with it. You know how in real life there are people that you know that connect people? Well twitter is that person.
I could go on and on in long form; but twitter has helped me to be brief. Kinda.
Cheers!
Rodney Rumford
Oh, and by the way: Twitter is so yesterday: 2 is the new 140
http://www.twittwo.com
Hi Alan,
Here’s the link:
As Mack said, you point out some great insights. I do believe that many of these tools are in their infancy and we will see some change and evolution in they are used, and how discussions are threaded and looped in to us over multiple devices. I do think it will help redefine what we think is “social.”
As for “Twitchers” I wrote a post about “Bait and Twitching” after our chat. I also listed other “twepulsive” behavior and what I look for when I follow someone.
http://livepath.blogspot.com/2009/02/bait-and-twitch.html
In the end, as I unplug and go to hold my baby or snuggle with my hubby – I realize how social media cannot replace the warmth of face-to-face, human interaction. I’m fine being “old school” like that.
Thanks for the post!
For all the twitter users who “get it,” there are at least a dozen starting every day who are failing to get it and are feeling distraught.
It’s nice to hear honest observations from someone who is in the process of getting it.
I had the same experience, it’s nice to see them articulated so well.
Hi Allen,
Glad to see you’ve taken the dive and tried Twitter thus allowing you to comment on it with some insight.
I think the Twitter platform fits nicely into the Social Media arena.
You’ve made some interesting points, but not all I agree with.
You used the analogy of a party at one point and I think this fits Twitter best.
It is like a party, sometimes some groups are just too clique to allow you join their conversation, but hey that’s social life everywhere, ask your daughter and I am sure she’d agree.
It inevitably is being used as a sales tool, but this was always going to happen. I just ignore their calls, pretty much like I do at home.
As for following others that don’t follow you back. I’ve read a lot of Neal Stephenson’s books, that doesn’t mean that he’ll want to read what I write.
Like life, Twitter can be tough nut to crack and many will ignore you, thinking you have nothing to add to their stream of thoughts. That’s their choice and I don’t lose any sleep over it.
I personally like Twitter and have talked about it a few times on my blog. I believe it has value to add to “the discussion”.
But its not going to be everyone’s cup of tea.
Thanks to all who have responded to this so far. As you can see, I tried to be as honest as I can with my experiences. It seems, frankly, that like this post (and the interactions that have resulted) that this seems more social than what I typically experience on Twitter. But does it take a post that excites people to respond to make it more social for me? Ah, maybe that’s the interesting question.
Allan, I agree with everything you wrote except it being a sales tool. Maybe I don’t recognize selling when I see it, but I can’t think of a single example of being asked to buy something.
For me, Twitter is not social not is it a tool that delivers results, at least for me. However, it does deliver value for me in the form of shared URLs.
I no longer have the time for RSS or for visiting blogs or websites on the chance I will find someting I am interested in. However, when some I trust shares their post or a news item or an RT, I usually find value in that. I try to reciprocate by doing the same.
Allen,
Nothing will ever replace the face-to-face aspect of Social Interactions. The survivors will find a way to blend in both online and off-line activities – this has been happening, and will hopefully continue.
Mike
Hi Lewis
Actually, the reason why I said it was a sales tool is because I noticed a number of people who basically answer questions by sending the asker to their site, with the intention of getting the reader to hire them. If that’s not a sales too, I’m not sure what is. Again, I’m not saying this is a bad thing, it’s just that it should be called what it is, a selling media.
don’t take this as critical, but I sense an attitude in the text. It seems to me that it will take you a while “to get it.” i.e. Start with the title of the blog post, says student (professor) is not ready to listen or learn, just yet. i.e. “social media is here to stay,” not a very profound statement, please teach me something I don’t already know. i.e “people you follow don’t necessarily follow you back.” not every date i asked to go to bed with me took me up on the opportunity. check out some of the perry belchers video’s on Youtube and he will teach you how to engage people at a party.
I really think that Twitter is that any networking situation. You find what you look for. If we approach it like a “hunter,” people respond as if we’re invading their space. If we approach it as a “listener and learner,” people respond differently — they’re more attracted to what we say.
What Twitter offers is what networking always has AND it adds to that value of the reach and speed of the Internet.
Why is it that when someone offers reasonable criticisms of Twitter and the Twitterocracy, defenders assume the underlying problem is that the critic doesn’t “get it” and that once that person “gets it,” they’ll join the rest of the crowd in the hosannas?
Isn’t it possible that someone can “get it” and simply not want it?
@ Jonathan – Amen brutha. Preach it.
We are dangerous when we drink so much social media koolaid that we forget that we live in a bubble. MOST of the world, including my teenage step daughter – are not yet addicted to Twitter. We need to take some of our OWN medicine and listen to people like Allen because they can provide some important insight. They may not always be right – but we need to dare to ask ourselves the hard questions posed by them!
Thanks Jim (and Jonathan) As noted, the title is simply asking a question, and my post is taking a personal perspective. That is all, nothing more. The purpose was not to create profound statements. Just an fyi, I am a professor and I am always ready to learn.
Thanks Liz…you make a good point. And thanks to you, Leigh. I agree about the discussion about “getting it”. When people use that term, that typically means they have a hardened perspective and are unwilling to view a different perspective (and typically say the different perspective is wrong, not interesting, silly, etc.)
Allen, you seem to always somehow put my thoughts together in a nice package.
And I’m sure twitter will get channels in no-time.
I think twitter is a nice tool for someone in some point in time. That’s it. That same person will in few years stop using it.
I think IRC was a much better tool. It even had channels!
Allen,
I am going to reiterate what a lot of people are saying on these comments: stick with it, and you will soon see the very real social value. You have to participate in a meaningful way to get value.
It’s true there is some investment, but real socializing is like that, too. You don’t expect in real life to suddenly be able to effortlessly engage with strangers. It takes some time to get to know them, by listening at first.
I have found the tool to mostly be a very valuable complement to my real social networks – as former grad school classmtes dispersed – and to my career network, as I “meet” other tweeters (who live in my area in the real world, or through mutual real-world friends) via like interests and then later meet them face-to-face in real life professional situations.
I think Twitter is at its best when enhancing real-life connections, and not neccessarily to be viewed as a mass chat room.
Hi Allen,
sorry for my english, I am italian. I read your post, and I found it trough my research to understand if really we need about Twitter or not.
Question arrive because in my experience, we have a travel site dedicated to miami beach, the user who follow us trough Twitter they do only to receive impotetical visit from someone who read our new post.
So, I am not sure really, but I am starting to think that Twitter is not to much useful for us.
Basically the person subscribe with the hope that you make the same.
They don’t add a value and most of their small message are really incomprehensible.
There are also many tools where you can post in Twitter automatically from Facebook for example or from somewhere in the net.
Maybe the title could be significant in Facebook or in some other platfrom and not really suitable in Twitter.
This is my personal opinion of course.