Comments on: Scoble Blindness

By: Neil Anuskiewicz

Neil Anuskiewicz — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 01:35:08 +0000

Yes, that is a good point, what you see enthusiasts or techies using today, everyone will be using tomorrow.
The PC and the Internet are two prime examples.

By: Robert Scoble

Robert Scoble — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 00:51:12 +0000

I both agree with Alan and disagree with him, as I said in a post on my blog: http://scobleizer.com/2009/01/07/seagatetheater/
Be careful here, though. Early adopters ALWAYS lead the market in the tech industry.
Today I spoke to an audience at the Consumer Electronics Show. Most of the people said they used TweetDeck. Most “normal people” don’t have any idea what that is.
Who do I talk to? The people who use TweetDeck. Who do you want to reach? The people who don’t.
It leads to some interesting conflicts, but I have a lot of viewers around the world who are in weird places.
The librarian who runs the Library of Congress’s photo and images division says I’m her favorite blogger. Liam Casey, who runs a supply chain in Shenzhen China, says the same. Etc. Etc.
The fact that you wrote this post tells me I’m reaching exactly who I want to reach: tech enthusiasts.

By: Neil Anuskiewicz

Neil Anuskiewicz — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 02:36:13 +0000

So if people are just messing about with social media is it really that good a marketing tool?
My sense is that it is mostly a toy.
I guess I have a lot to learn.

By: Alan Wolk

Alan Wolk — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 21:25:02 +0000

@Leigh– gotcha. We are indeed on the same page It was the word “tool” that threw me, but now I see how you meant it and we are in complete mind-meld

By: Leigh Duncan-Durst

Leigh Duncan-Durst — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 20:58:59 +0000

Alan,
I DO agree heartily that this “A-lister” thing is not scalable and has questionable meaning. Nuff said there… I doubt you’ll get many serious detractors on that!
However, I think perhaps you misunderstand me – I’m not falling into a trap.
Sorry if I was unclear in any way. The fact is, Twitter IS a tool! It’s a communications tool – just like the Phone was and is today. Follow that parallel to frame my comments in the post above….
With regard to the Twitter segmentation idea… that’s just the analyst in me getting curious about HOW people are currently using the tool to create “success.” This may a range from connecting to a college buddy to enciting a social media frenzy over a blog post.
In other words, we agree.
Like use of the phone did over time… Twitter, microblogging and life streaming usage will change over time… morphing as people join and features emerge and cross-convergence and innovation are applied.
In other words, I think we are on the same page! Kthxbai!

By: Alan Wolk

Alan Wolk — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 20:43:43 +0000

@Ben – excellent points re: McCauley- that is definitely what I’ve been driving at here. Fortunately, most seem to get that.
@Leigh – I think you are falling into the trap of looking at Twitter as a “tool” for users rather than for marketers. I just don’t see most people outside of the SV bubble using it as a “tool” for anything other than talking to their friends. The things that are important to the SV crowd (“someone just retweeted my blog post!!”) have zero relevance elsewhere.
Of course some people will have more influence than others within a certain ecosystem. But the bigger point of this post is that the SV model of the big name “A-List Influencer” is not likely scalable, to use the local parlance and that those of us who work in marketing need to take that into account rather than produce a steady stream of posts about “5 Ways To Improve Your Twitter Influence”

By: Leigh Duncan-Durst

Leigh Duncan-Durst — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 19:52:31 +0000

Alan,
I totally agree with David’s comment about the many bubbles in our ecosystem… kinda takes the wind out of what I wanted to say.
It would be interesting to see some analysis and segmentation emerge for Twitter users. One of the agencies I freelance for did something like this for Technorati and the insights were awesome.
You are correct in asserting the “one size fits all” approach doesn’t work on Twitter. Things like the definitions of “influence” and “value” are therefore malleable definition to various users.
MANY users do not care to influence the world – they just want to chat with friends. Some users may want a tight, meaningful network. Others want a HUGE, sprawling network. Some care about privacy. Others don’t really give a darn about follower envy or privacy.
I’m pretty sure if you did contextual or data analysis on usage patterns for Twitter, you might be able to identify some core segments, which would allow you to align Twitter users to some descriptive personae.
These core user types – defined by the typical demographics ALONG with volunteered profile information and observed data (e.g. like usage patterns, “tweet types” (e.g. information sharing, self-promotion, etc.), tweet topics, aggregate friending trends… e.g. number of followers (and segment breakdown of those followers) could be really interesting. We’d probably see a number of models of Twitter use that spell “success” and find a MULTITUDE of successful ways Twitter is being used to change the way we work and live…
Just thinking out loud here.
However, even if this analysis DID exist today… and I probably wouldn’t change the way I operate. I’d still use Twitter in a manner that seems to work best for myself….
And love ‘em or hate ‘em, this IS what Scoble and Kawasaki did.
I’d STILL be asking myself how much value I am adding to my network – embracing the fact I don’t have the time or resources to ALWAYS offer pithy, wise, thought provoking 140 character tweets. My hope is that I will always be authentic, warm, personal and display a willingness to learn and a sense of humor.
Again, just thinking out loud.
Thanks for the post, Alan.

By: Ben Kunz

Ben Kunz — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 19:41:59 +0000

Agreed. Our early adoption of social media has created a form of *groupthink*, where we all chase each other’s reflections in a gee-whiz-get-followers hall of mirrors.
Psychologist Clark McCauley once wrote that there are three conditions that lead to groupthink: (1) strong leadership, (2) homogeneity of members’ backgrounds, and (3) isolation from outside perspectives. The early adopters of social media fit the bill — we follow leaders (the Robert Scobles or David Armanos or A-listers that many emulate); we have similar backgrounds (higher education, affluent, interest in technology); and we focus on blogs or tweets like our own, insulated from outside perspectives.
Alan, your post is a great reminder to stick our heads up and see what the real world thinks of all this — if they think at all. History may judge our obsession with the *tools* of social media similar to the guys hovering around the first fax machines, crazily happily with the techniques of pushing images through wires.
Eventually, people will just use the fax.

By: Alan Wolk

Alan Wolk — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 15:52:00 +0000

@David A: First off, let me say that I am flattered that it is this post that brought you out of retirement, so to speak.
Second, I do not dispute that there will always be spheres of influence. My intention in writing this was just to point out that outside the Silicon Valley bubble, those spheres are likely to be much smaller and limited to a person’s friends and family with Twitter being used as a tool for socializing rather than for self-promotion. (I had read this theory somewhere about something called “micro-interactions” and it’s sort of applicable here–someone’s cousin may tweet about how much they love their new Ford Focus. The recipient won’t re-tweet it, but it will be duly noted next time they go car shopping.)
Point being, that as marketers, we need to stop focusing on mega-influencers, how to reach them and how to be them and realize that most ideas will spread by the un-self conscious actions of people with no vested interest in seeing them spread.
As for Robert Scoble, again, I personally find his writing very valuable. But like you–and most of the people involved in digital marketing who you refer to–I am squarely within the greater Silicon Valley bubble. I doubt most anyone in the creative department of a traditional ad agency has heard of him or thinks Kawasaki is anything other than a brand of motorcycle. It’s just not their world.

By: David Armano

David Armano — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 13:12:15 +0000

Wow,
I have not commented here in a Long time (shame on me). But it reminds me that there are many bubbles (you could argue that communities are one) and within those bubbles we all influence each other in some way.
For example I see a lot of familiar voices here, Lewis CK, etc. who add to the discourse here. Everyone has some level of it.
I don’t see it as illogical to conclude that some have more reach. It’s all part of the ecosystem. Everyone makes the whole thing work.
One of the interesting things about someone like Scoble is that he has transcended the tech bubble where he started and though many people have not “heard of him” others have. Most people who I work with in the marketing field have. Years ago it was mostly tech folks.
But does it really matter? It takes all types of people with all levels of influence in all kinds of bubbles to get ideas to spread. So the focus should be on making them spreadable.
Good thoughts here Alan as it’s making us all think.

By: Alan Wolk

Alan Wolk — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 12:05:21 +0000

I remember reading someone (it may have been Seth Godin) once saying that no matter how clear they thought they’d made themselves in an essay, there were people who misunderstood what they were trying to say.
So to clear up a few misperceptions from here, Twitter, FriendFeed et al:
1. There will always be “influencers” – though for most people those influencers will be friends and family and co-workers rather than a “famous” (or internet-famous) person. But much of what’s being passed off as advice on how to use Twitter assumes the Expert-Influencer will be the primary influence. I don’t think that will be the case.
2. I was not suggesting that every non-Silicon Valley user will only interact with their friends and family. Many will use it for business reasons for the same reasons some people join and become active in trade associations in real life. Since Anita Campbell’s business is small businesses, I’m curious which areas she sees that sort of activity happening. (As opposed to incredulous.) But again, I don’t think that sort of usage will mirror the way Silicon Valley uses Twitter because of the cultural differences between the Valley and other professions. In other words, while there will be CPAs who provide excellent advice for other CPAs, there will be no Certified Public Accountant equivalent of Robert Scoble or Guy Kawasaki, or certainly none with as large a following.

By: gregoeylent

gregoeylent — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 08:08:44 +0000

jesuz eff, you’re doing the same thing … crikey

By: Bob Gower

Bob Gower — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 05:41:54 +0000

Great post. I’m just getting over a case of Scoble Blindness myself and have turned off the auto DMs on twitter and decided the 500 followers is plenty if they are quality followers I care about.
Let’s put the social back in social media.

By: Alan Wolk

Alan Wolk — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 21:44:07 +0000

Thanks again all for the effusive response.
@Anita: I’m curious what areas you are referring to in your second point. Is it business specific information? Do you find that there are significant communities of non-tech/non-MLM users building on Twitter?
@Aldon – I suspect that many Twitter users, especially newer ones don’t have an interest in being experts in anything and that their “bubbles” will be confined to their real life friends and families and co-workers. Twitter works wonderfully as an asynchronous IM device and nothing more.

By: Aldon Hynes

Aldon Hynes — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 21:16:51 +0000

Is awolk-blindness next? I say this mostly in jest, but I suspect that many people seek to be the expert in their own little niches, whether it be the silicon valley social media bubble, the online marketing social bubble, the citizen journalism social bubble or whatever.
I will say that most of the people I know that use twitter have their streams open to everyone, as part of their desire to influence people around them, no matter which bubble they live in.
Beyond that, it seems like this takes us back some old social networking ideas. Connectors, mavens, all that stuff.
Personally, I like being more of a connector and trying to reside in several of these bubbles or niches and getting people to share ideas across them. For that matter, I think connectors are important in trying to get beyond a given bubble.
So, yeah, lets try to avoid Nascar blindness, Scoble blindness, awolk blindness or even ahynes1 blindness.

By: adam ainbinder

adam ainbinder — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 20:50:05 +0000

great post! i think that most of twitter’s power users came on in the early adoption stage, and these users were focused on social media.
over time, the audience will filter into something far different, and I think you hit the nail on the head in saying that there are so many more uses that the average consumer will use twitter for!

By: Anita Campbell

Anita Campbell — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 18:53:37 +0000

You make some really good points, but I also think you may be generalizing a bit overly much based on your own preferences.
(1) There is a wider range of people using Twitter for business purposes than Silicon Valley and multi-level marketing types.
(2) There are many types of information in this world, of interest and value, that do not appear in the NYT or BBC twitter feeds, etc. And unlike golf, there is a lot of information that is not already packaged up, but for which Twitter is a primary source.
Maybe the value of Twitter, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

By: Internet Strategist

Internet Strategist — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 18:39:10 +0000

Exceptional insights. I’ve learned that most people have little awareness that everyone else isn’t just like them!
All “influencers” are not created equal and neither are all Twitter users. It WILL continue to become more mainstream – and more niche users will find ways to connect there.

By: CK

CK — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 18:36:50 +0000

It’s Déjà vu all over again.
Alan, you and I live and work in a Big bubble (NYC) and we know how common it is for marketers here to get caught up in blindness. I often have to remind my friends and colleagues living here that, in fact, NYC is actually NOT the center of marketing… that’s why marketers never ‘test market’ their products here (unless of course it’s a product targeted to NYC folks). Nope, they test market in the Midwest.
So what you’re aptly citing, as you’ve done before with NASCAR blindness is what I call “Enemy 1″ for all marketers–be it offline or online. And that devil’s name is myopia. It’s as prevalent today as it has always been. We’re just seeing it reflected online. Humans are oddly consistent.
Now, another critical principle that you cite is that of knowing WHAT you’re using Twitter for. It’s different (like, completely different) to use Twitter/blogs/social networking for business purposes–e.g. customer service, marketing, communications–than for purposes as a marketing professional. Because in the latter role we marketers are using social media to learn and improve our skills by sharing views, practices, opinions, successes and, yes, failures with others. And equally important, we all know (or should know by now) that trends always start on the fringes and only move mainstream once they’ve gained enough ground. The ‘gem’ for marketers is to be able to identify trends in the early phase so that we can leverage and capitalize upon them.
So, how do we do that? Listen to fringe voices–and those voices are, by nature, ones with smaller followings and “influence”. Actually, they usually don’t have influence at the outset of a trend.
To that end I strongly recommend that marketers–who are using Twitter/social media as a learning and research tool–not only follow the voices that are echoing much of the same, but the voices with smaller followings that, if you listen, offer many different views/viewpoints.
PS: While you’re only using Scoble as an example (not to personally ding him), I do want to point out something he shared that’s of incredible value to marketers starting out in social media. His book, “Naked Conversations” (he co-authored it years ago) is one of the few social media books–as there are many, many social media books–that I encourage clients and colleagues to read. It’s longer than a tweet for sure, but it still deserves praise and is written in very plain language (something all marketers could do more of!) But I should note that while I actively recommend his book to many, and find him quite likable and ego-free, I do not follow him on Twitter. I’m just more apt to follow people with smaller followings.

By: Nancy Boyd

Nancy Boyd — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 18:26:01 +0000

Alan, this is a great post that reminds us to step into the shoes of our target markets and learn how they like to walk, before we start making decisions without that information.
Taking that one step would save a whole bunch of grief later, it seems to me.
Thanks for reminding us!
Nsncy

By: gordon phillips

gordon phillips — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 17:59:23 +0000

If it weren’t for twitter, I may not have heard the name Alan Wolk and consequently not have read this article. And that is why I twitter.

By: Lary Stucker

Lary Stucker — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 17:22:37 +0000

Thanks to your article I finally know what my mother was talking about when she said, “if you Scoble your Twitter too much you could go blind.”
Twitter has a place for business to be successful. It is just a different strategy for marketers, professionals and regular Joes.
@LaryStucker

By: Rachel

Rachel — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 16:48:53 +0000

Love the post Alan. I think there’s now a different view from the UK where the use of Twitter has hit the mainstream tabloid newspapers in the form of 3-4 articles over the last month about Twitter.
Or should I say about the celebrities who use Twitter and how they are wasting the (BBC) licence payers money, or being completely banal – http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1104726/How-boring-Celebrities-sign-Twitter-reveal-mundane-aspect-lives.html
So there’s definitely a growing awareness of the tool which has absolutely nothing to do with the Valley

By: Shannon Nelson

Shannon Nelson — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 16:00:43 +0000

This is a really interesting post. I think it all boils down to the same thing, as with all things–you just need to know your audience.
@ShannonNelson (if you want to know what I am eating for breakfast )
@piercemattiepr

By: Jeff Crites

Jeff Crites — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 15:37:17 +0000

Enjoyed the post. It mirrors some of my thinking of late, that – while I hate New Year’s resolutions – I plan on spending less time this year caring what certain people think about everything (Scoble, Arrington, Kawasaki, Godin, etc), and more time following my own gut instincts.
I love discovering new technology and social media services … that are applicable and attractive to business, or that make my life more enjoyable and manageable. Folks like Scoble and blogs like Techcrunch have helped lead me to services like Qik (mobile video) and Utterli (mobile podcasting), so I don’t discount the influencers entirely. I look at them as ‘discovery scouts’. But their opinions weigh the same as everyone else I”m connected to. I could care less how Scoble feels about Friendfeed. I”m never on that platform, but love to spend time on Twitter throughout the day. All the influencer hype in the world won’t change that.
Lastly, while traditional media is diminishing, elements of it are still incredibly powerful in terms of reach and audience. The viral potential of social media and the web are well known, but don’t discount an interview on NPR or Wall St Journal radio or CNBC or FOX. When you have a chance to share information with a captive audience tens of thousands strong, that’s an opportunity I’ll take any day.
@BrickandClick on Twitter

By: Alan Wolk

Alan Wolk — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 15:29:27 +0000

Wow. Thanks all for the overwhelmingly positive response here.
Nothing much I can add except to repeat that I do think Mr. Scoble has some interesting things to say and for people in the Silicon Valley community he’s certainly worth listening to. No beef with what he’s putting out there, just with the notion (put out by others) that it’s of universal interest.

By: greg giersch

greg giersch — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 15:21:36 +0000

Guy and Scoble are intertesting, but too prolific to keep following. Your comment to think about how your friends outside of (the biz) use social media tools is right on. I’m using Twitter to learn SM trends and discover new blogs, but I keep and eye on my wife and friends who are more typical of the general public. They are the long tail of the Power Curve discussed in Here Comes Everybody. And they will represent the masses once the facination with the new shiny toy wears off.

By: Craig Sutton

Craig Sutton — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 15:11:48 +0000

Great Post Alan,
Much like Lewis, I had, and still have, no idea who Robert Scoble is and why he is important or whatever. In fact I think I probably followed him because with all the followers he had I figured he must have been important. But even though I work in IT, I’m not sure I care to read anything he has to say.
Some of the best conversations I have had on twitter are with people who have no business aspirations at all.
I would fit in the middle of this pack. I’m not actively pursuing business at a high pitch and talk to people for fun. But I have had ROI without really trying. Just letting people know what we do on occasion when a need pops up and these opportunities have appeared themselves without pressuring.
If you come to these Social Media tools with an INTENT only to score big. You will be sorely disappointed in my estimation.

By: Lewis Green

Lewis Green — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 14:12:33 +0000

Alan,
In my 35-year business career, I had never heard of Robert Scoble. And 20 of those years were in Seattle, a stone’s throw from Scoble’s office at Microsoft.
Too many of us live in a social media bubble, which is dangerous. We need to live in the business world, where social media and social networking are merely a blip on the radar screen.
Although my firm offers SM and SN consulting, we have yet to find a good fit for our clients. Why? Because we guarantee results, not conversation or hits. While SM and SN have been good to us, for most traditional businesses the tools are not a must-have or an urgent need. They need ROI in this economy and traditional tools continue to outperform Web 2.0 in that area.

By: Birgit Pauli-Haack

Birgit Pauli-Haack — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 13:52:35 +0000

Alan,
I had the same experience among my friends over the last four weeks, while I was diving into Twitter.
Mostly have heard of it, none of them use it or don’t see the benefit. I was once right there with them not too long ago.
Twitter gave me a great crash course in all things Social Media as that’s what you mostly find on Twitter: Social media experts. However that’s only one segment of people I follow, the other groups are people in the publishing fields like Tim O’Reily, Jay Rosen, who try to figure out where journalism and technology will go. A very interesting conversation and no where else to be found.
Another group of people I follow, are people who are programmers like me in a certain techy arena. A conversation on how to implement new technologies and in which we listen to the marketing crowd to find out what’s the language we will be confronted when will receive implementation request. I also learned about new services, I never would have found myself, and I have a much broader knowledge about the way people will do things on the net in the future. We need some depth in domain knowledge to be helpful to our clients.
This feeds also into the next group of people I follow which is the growing groups of nonprofit advocates trying to use new technologies to broaden the reach for their causes.
So it’s a broader range on expertise, I follow and for now, I am still listening and sucking up the knowledge like a sponge. But soon I will be able to contribute own original thoughts to the conversation and help newbies along.
It’s the classic example of an early adopter crew for new technologies and it’s a small circle of friends (no matter how distant).
The mainstream adoption of new tools will come after the early majority passed through, which hasn’t arrived yet. They will follow in 2009 more in 2010, and that’s when other features of Twitter will become more prominent. Like Favorites, like private posting. New features will be added, like rooms, groups and better web interface.
In our small company we use Yammer, a closed Twitter with some additional features and we have cut way down on e-mail, way down on interruptions, ie because for the asynchronous nature of communication among multiple persons, with small information snippets and coordination is much easier now. I would imagine that a similar use of Twitter will be in the stars for open communities. Ad-hoc project teams that discuss things beyond large distances.