Tag: twitter

  • Tweets w00t

    I’ve never plugged plugins before, but in this case, I’ll gladly make an exception, because its so damn useful. Quite a while back, after installing the friendfeed plugin, I remember asking on Friendfeed whether there was a WordPress Plugin that could pull in any sharing of a blog post. Think of the trackbacks we have for blogs, and then imagine if we had a similar mechanism for Twitter, Google Reader, Delicious or any of the sites we share stuff on.

    Mashable wrote sometime back about the concept of Tweetbacks, and thanks to the magical way in which web 2.0 operates, the bridge from fantasy to reality was quickly created, and the WP Plugin creation was called yes, Tweetbacks. Dan Zarrella, you’ve heard this before, you’re awesome. 🙂

    I’d recommend it strongly to all those bloggers who are familiar with Twitter (actually even those who aren’t) and would like to see who’s sharing your post there. Its an absolutely hassle free plugin- easy to install and adds another dimension to connecting with people and conversations. And now, Dan has built another plugin called Tweetsuite, which adds a load of functionalities. Testing it out now. Suggest you do too.

    until next time, hoping for a Reader and delicious plugin 🙂

  • Web 2.0 and transience

    As I am wont to do at infrequent intervals, I came up with one of  those  quirky connections – this one, for Tata Sky. I mentioned on Twitter that “aamir’s ghajini character could find Tata Sky Plus’ features quite useful-pause, rewind, record 😉 wonder if they’ll make a TVC with that”. In the days that followed, Asin has been extensively used in the Tata Sky campaign, so now I’m hoping thay actually make that TVC, complete with the Tata Sky helpline number tattooed on Aamir. 😉

    It led me to a tangential thought on social media. (the FB, Twitter variety, not business networking like LinkedIn) In what might amount to blasphemy, I wondered whether brands should make desperate efforts to be ‘engaging’ in social media. They need to be there definitely, but perhaps its only to know what’s being talked about them, and why. They perhaps need to be there more for reactions than actions. This also saves them the challenge of generating interesting ‘engagement ideas’ at all times.

    Why did I think all this? Because I realised that the engagement is being created by users themselves, for each other. For non web 2.0 brands, the engagement is most likely a result of something that’s been done offline. A TVC, a billboard, a radio jingle and so on. Must say, this perspective on how to use twitter for Marketing and PR made me think too.

    At one point, web 1.0 used eyeballs as measurement, that’s an idea thats not going anywhere great? Web 1.o gave us many great websites and lessons, but in a few years time, we jumped into web 2.0. The attention span and shelf lives for most things are becoming smaller. Is web 2.o just a transient phase that is needed to get us to another version? The optimist in me (which is usually bullied into submission) says that when a certain version is reached, the engagement and revenue models will manifest itself in an uncomplicated manner. (now you know why it needs to be bullied). Maybe the baby steps of getting connected are meant for simple things. Maybe it is only meant to let businesses know  that a connected world can shake up existing models. Maybe there’s some growing up to do, some discovery to be made, before revenue models and engagement by brands can happen as a regular occurrence.

    Or perhaps I’m going out of whack and being impatient. Center Networks has a good comparison of Web 1.0/ 2.0 revenue models and profitability. As this good post sums up in a different context

    New business models for media require entirely new exchanges of value — it’s not about finding new ways to balance the old equation.

    Perhaps the more meaningful discussions lie in figuring out how the basic pillars of web 2.o – connecting, sharing, collaborating-  can be used to build brands. The ‘How to use Twitter/Facebook for Marketing/PR’ are based on tools, and that would mean that we’ve been confusing tactics for strategy.

    until next time, discover 🙂

    PS: A few things that I thought were good to share

    Discovery Is The New Cocaine – Going Beyond Engagement

    View SlideShare presentation or Upload your own. (tags: discovery ux)

    Social Media PR vs Social Media Marketing, and in context,a tool – CoTweet, that’d be a help to teams handling a brand on Twitter.

  • Authority doesn’t figure

    The measurement of social media, or rather the lack of it, is a topic that promises to be carried over to 2009 too. I shared this article last week on Twitter, because i felt it voiced most of what I felt on ‘authority’ in social media. Coincidentally, I was also checking out Twitority – an ‘authority based Twitter search’ engine, at the same time. The first article lead me to Chris Baskind’s post on the same topic. Though I’m sorely tempted, I’m going to refrain from using block quotes from that post, because its an excellent read and you should make the effort of clicking the link and reading it all yourself. 🙂

    The new search engine has used the number of followers as a measure to decide authority. TechCrunch promptly suggested the number of RTs (ReTweet) as a better indicator. But while it does place more importance to the tweet than the tweeter, I agree that the number of RTs is just a function of the number of followers. IMHO, we’re barking up the wrong tree – popularity instead of authority. Are they connected? Yes. Are they the same? No.

    If they were the same, Twitter users should still be cheering newspapers and television and all those thingies which we call mass/traditional/heritage media, because they obviously have more ‘followers’ than the aggregate of all Twitter users. But yes, you noticed that Twitter did add a bit of value during the Mumbai events (most recently). So there’s something that’s different about this social mechanism. There’s a uniquely customised experience that we build for ourselves on social media over a period of time. Like Chris Baskind says so wonderfully in his closing  “the ad hoc nature of social media atomizes traditional concepts of authority. We may establish trusted networks, but it’s the relevance of information which really matters.”

    Shefaly threw a good pointer when she replied to my article share with a link to a post of her own. Among other things, she discusses the ‘quality of interactions’, and a four point selection criterion that she uses to ‘follow’ people, but the most important part of the article to me, was the reference to the strategic intent behind what we do on social media. (I’d argue with her on the finer points she raises on this, primarily because of the geography independence that separates virtuality from reality, but I’d completely agree that intent should drive everything else)

    A personalised, trusted network that gives me contextually relevant info (among other things) is what I get out of social media, and to me, ‘authority’ somehow just doesnt capture the way I feel about this very human network. And its not just the term. It makes me feel that maybe we are guilty of taking the term ‘follower’ a tad too literally. In trying to be ‘thought leaders’ and such, the human ego is perhaps trying to thrust upon social media a set of metrics which don’t belong. Authority reminds me of circulation, readership, listenership, viewership, and so on. Maybe its just me, but haven’t we walked that path before? Lets try a different path please.

    until next time, desperate measures?

    PS. Check ‘Mumbai’ on Twitority and you might get a clue on where ‘authority search’ will lead us

    PPS. 2009 (for now) will see this blog with an altered content strategy. The 3 posts per week are being cut down to 2 – one each on Monday and Thursday, but I shall try to post a few interesting links in addition to this. Please don’t sulk 🙂

  • BoT – Brands on Twitter

    A few days back, there were a couple of very interesting posts on Mashable – on the topic of whether brands belong to Twitter- one post against, and a couple of days later, a rebuttal. The first post first suggests a fee for brands to be part of Twitter, and then says that they should be banned altogether since it would be against the spirit of Twitter. It finally advocates the use of personalities, since people like to talk to people. The second post, while agreeing that spam accounts are generally disliked, states that brands can have personalities too, and gives some great examples, and tips for brands on Twitetiquette.

    I thought these posts and the issue of bloggers being paid to write posts about brands (which surfaces when we are sufficiently bored of doing this guy’s job of finding revenue models for social media) were two sides of the same coin. The issue of trust is being tackled from two sides.

    In the case of brands being on Twitter, the argument is that faceless brands cannot be authentic or transparent like a real person. How can we trust such an entity? In the case of bloggers who are paid to write posts about brands, the argument is that if they are paid for it, how can we trust the veracity of what they’ve written?

    In both the cases, the answer will emerge by itself, in time. If brands use this as a one way communication medium, to just broadcast, without having interesting conversations or adding value for the audience, the crowd will treat it as a broadcaster and move away, unless there is some really awesome content being shared all the while. If bloggers make up stuff about a brand, and transmit it to their readers, the crowd will remember not to trust them the next time.

    A bit more on the topic of brands on Twitter, since its debatable whether the brand should be itself, or have a spokesperson who represents it. Its understood that behind every brand (not including spam accounts) on Twitter, is a human being, even he is one that first configured Twitterfeed to send out ‘auto tweets’. So, I am guessing that what would’ve happened more often than not, is that an individual came on to twitter, discovered how cool it was, and then decided that it was a great place for his organisation/brand to communicate to the outside world, which contains his consumers and potential consumers. A chance for the brand to talk about itself, and hear from consumers what they had to say.

    The individual would already have an equity on Twitter, and would enjoy the trust of those who follow him. Considering how a blogger who writes a paid-for-post (even with disclosure) is almost crucified, it is understandable if he wouldn’t want to mix his own equity with that of the brand’s equity, especially when there is every chance that the organisation may not have a policy on social media, and he wouldn’t be getting paid like the celebrity blogger. Also he doesn’t even know how long he would be with the organisation. Lastly, by mixing a personal account with a brand, the person might be constrained to speak of things in context with what the organisation does.

    Keeping all this in mind, I’d have liked to say that brands belong on Twitter, as brands. After all, we already have people building personal brands. In fact, organisations should perhaps look at multi functional teams which can communicate with consumers on different aspects with authority and domain knowledge, so that over a period of time, they can re-create the credibility they enjoy in the real world, in the digital world too. This post, however, gives some great points on why the logo should be replaced by a public face.

    In summation, though, I’d have to say that as always with any strategy, it’d have to boil down to intent. As this wonderful post correctly says, “The beauty of Twitter is that it is what you make of it, and you can make so many things of it”. What do you think?

    until next time, brands are limitless characters?

    PS. … and in this season of giving, here are 2 good resources I’d like to share with you

    In return, i’d request you to give a few minutes of your time and participate in the Exchange4Media.com & Blogworks.in Blog & Social Media survey.

    Merry Christmas everyone, have a great 2009, and I’ll see you next year . 🙂

  • Connecting people

    It might be time for Nokia to rethink that line, thanks to the following recent launches- Google Friend Connect and Facebook Connect, both of which offer data portability across sites which have implemented the services. It got me thinking about online identities. Before we get to that, a bit of introduction.

    Facebook Connect, when implemented on a website allows any user to log in using their Facebook credentials and use that identity to comment etc, and also transmits these activities back to Facebook. FB seems to have focused on popular web services like Digg, Hulu, among others, and a couple of entities that got me interested in the deal – Disqus (soon) and Twitter. It perhaps hopes to use their massive user base, to popularise itself. On the other hand, Google  seems to be have the average blogger in mind, and has tied up with Yahoo, AIM, Open Id and now Twitter to have a common login across websites that have implemented Google Friend Connect. A good comparison can be found here.

    As a blogger, Facebook Connect seems to be a more difficult thing to set up, but implementation in individual blogs will be helped by the plugins (esp on WordPress). I’m wondering whether FB will try to seed this service through the Blog Networks app that’s quite popular there. FB Connect does offer great advantages thanks to the social connect that is brought about by the usage details being transmitted back to Facebook.   So if I had installed FB Connect on this site, and you had used your FB id to login and comment, the fact that you’d commented would be shown on your newsfeed on FB, thereby giving that extra exposure to this site. Although Facebook assures data security and privacy, it does seem a little like opening your FB account to the world, since a lot of profile details will get displayed when you use the FB Connect service. The other question I have is whether these activities become the property of Facebook by virtue of appearing in the newsfeed? (I remember the old controversy on ownership of content uploaded on FB)

    Google Friend Connect seems to be quite easy to set up, and in that sense makes it simpler for a regular blogger to adopt it. The snag is that inspite of the Invite option, I don’t get much additional exposure since the usage information doesn’t get reflected anywhere (not even Orkut). I wonder if Google will have a one click installation of the service in the next version of Blogger. I am also thinking about where Ad Sense will be made to fit into all this.

    And now to the identity part. I blog as manuscrypts, a handle that I have used for more than 5.5 years now. For most of those years, the real me could only be pieced together from various posts I’d written. With the increasing usage of social/business networking services like Facebook and LinkedIn, my real world identity is not exactly a secret now. If i choose to comment on any blog using FB/Google Friend Connect, it has to be using the ‘real identity’, unless I create profiles only for my virtual self. 🙂

    On one hand, a portable identity across the web, and the advantages it offers are tempting, on the other hand I’m not sure whether I want all these networks to be talking to each other – when I comment on a social media site, I wouldn’t want the other users of the site to see my tagged photos on FB.  So far, I’d controlled what information about me goes to a contact, depending on his/her relationship with me. Different amounts of data for different levels of friendship. Yes, my profile is open on FB, but I don’t advertise it outside. That will not be the case if I use FB Connect. More importantly, I don’t want an entity like Google (which invokes paranoia in me) to know everything about me. The sad part is that I dont think an increase in transparency will improve personal integrity, tolerance etc, but that’s a different debate altogether.

    Me? I’ll wait a while before I encourage the use of either service on this site, who knows, maybe a LinkedIn Connect might come about. For now, let me try this app, that adds a twitter identity to my commenting system. 🙂

    until next time, connect 🙂