Context in Twitter-where is it?
Monthly Archives: June 2009
What exactly does adding value mean? 7 simple examples.
That was the question asked of me via Twitter and I thought, “Wow, apparently value is still the jello we’re trying to nail to the wall.”
In it’s most simple of terms, value is not:
“I just ate a salad”.
Value is:
“This salad was so good I’m sharing the recipe..”
Or value isn’t:
“I’m at the Expo all week”.
Value is:
“Anyone who would like to go to the Expo, here are some passes”:
But even more, value isn’t:
“I’m too busy to work with this client”.
Value is:
“Hey @bethharte I have a client that could really benefit from your knowledge, here is their name and number and email.”
Value is not: “I’m reading about 10 superb social media presentations.”
Value is: Here is a link to 10 superb social media presentations
Value isn’t, ‘Thanks Sonny.”
Value is: ” If it wasn’t for @sonnygill, I’m not sure what I would have done”.
Value isn’t reading about an Amber alert.. Value is Retweeting an Amber Alert
Value isn’t about applauding someone for giving money to a good cause. Value is about stepping up and coming together as a community to help someone out because it’s the right thing to do.
The reality is you knew all along how to add value. You didn’t need me to tell you, but just in case, perhaps these 7 examples helped you out.
20 Twitter brands behaving badly
I was doing some research for a Twitter webcast that I have coming up, and something caught me by surprise. I came across a post featuring the 100 most mentioned brands on Twitter. While the list is interesting, what I thought was more interesting and what prompted this post were the number of brands that were mentioned(talked about) a significant amount of times and the ones that I could think of, who did NOT have a twitter presence. Some might not think much about it. But to me, given what is happening with Twitter, I think it is somewhat significant. Why? What a golden opportunity to talk with people about your brand that already talking about YOUR brand!
Below is a list of large brands that are currently doing a really poor job of managing the Twittersphere. This easily could have been a much larger list.
- Nike
- Apple
- Microsoft
- Coca-cola or Coke
- Sony
- Adidas
- Nokia
- Skittles*
- VW or Volkswagen
- Subway
- Mercedes, MercedesBenz
- Audi
- Heinz or Hjheinz
- Lexus
- Budweiser/Budlight
- Rolex
- Levis
- Converse
- Toyota
- Mountaindew
As a marketer you are challenged every day for marketshare, eyeballs, mentions and anything else that can get people talking about and engaging your brand. For big brands, people already are talking about you. Good or bad They want to talk about you. Twitter allows you to do both. You can listen to what they are saying and you can create communities of brand champions. Yet these 20 are a) slow on the draw b) don’t care and or c) are too arrogant to “bother” with Twitter. We’ll see how long that lasts, but know this, There are many many more.
Share this Post
The Pornification of Marketing
There’s an article in todays online Newsweek about a Bud Light spot that came out in February with little fanfare and completely under the radar. However, the commercial rivals, if not leapfrogs over the Quiznos spot in terms of what they are suggesting, cancel that, in what they are implying, strike that, in terms of what it is saying. Bud Light has taken the game to a new level or perhaps has lowered the game to a whole new level.
Granted, the assumption is that this commercial is directed right at its sweet spot demographic; and that in and of itself is somewhat troubling if only for that fact that it tells you how much Porn has become accepted into mainstream America and mainstream marketing and advertising. The assumption being that nothing in this spot is really outside the norm for the demographic. Or as Newsweek likes to call it, we are undergoing the phenomenon of “Porn Creep”.
Decide for yourself. Has Bud Light taken things to an all time low? Does this make you want to drink their beer? Do you even care?
Share this Post
Do Twitter users have an obligation to provide value?
The short answer is No. But I suppose it all depends on why you joined Twitter in the first place. Some of us joined because over 2 years ago, it was the new shiny social media “thing”. We had no idea at the time, nor did Biz and Ev for that matter, it would be what it is now. I almost don’t recognize it.
Beth Harte a few months back, talked about social media purists in a blog posts about the 4 faces of social media. For the purists out there, I think Twitter is just another extension or another channel to communicate, share and learn. That’s CO-mmunicate. As in 2 way. or as Beth mentions, The purist “truly embraces social media as the conversation that the tools allow people to engage in from day-to-day”.
The purist on Twitter doesn’t feel “obligated” to share information or provide value, they just do.
For those that are not into Twitter for the value that they can give and get from conversations, chances are they are misguided in to what they think Twitter can do for them. The operative phrase there being “what Twitter can DO for them.” Or rather, at some point along the way, for these “takers”, it ceased to be about the conversation, and more about them. Chances are, it was never really about the conversation in the first place. Essentially Twitter became a vehicle for narcissism.
This user will take value but won’t re-purpose or share value. Nor will they provide value. Unfortunately this person seems to be appearing more and more often in the space and for that reason, one is now forced to create niche like silos for information that hasn’t been tainted so to speak. I have maintained that that concept (silos) seems to make the most sense to really get and give the most value from those you follow and those that follow you, but by creating your own walled garden, you do miss out on some morsels of good content from time to time. But, to some degree, we now have no choice.
I’m going to semi-quote a song by a really famous band that was pictured above and rehash the words.
In the end, the value that you take, should be equal to the value that you make.
So what’s the answer?
You think about it.
Share this Post
Why people are leaving Twitter
According to Nielsen last month, a full 60% of users who sign up to use Twitter fail to return the following month. And in the 12 months before the “Oprah effect,” retention rates were even lower: only 30% returned the next month.
I have a theory as to why that might be and it’s pretty simple.
Example #1
It’s probably a given that most new users have heard about Twitter and want to try it out. But this homepage doesn’t do much to explain it. Does it? By the way, the home page? That’s pretty much the same one they have used from the get-go. Of course you may click on the watch a video link for a how-to, but me thinks most will just go ahead and sign up and jump right in. In which case you get the following screen after you have registered.
Is this intuitive? Don’t you think it’s time to at least re-do the UI/Homepage?
Unmarketing
Behold, marketers take it to another level with 3 spots I saw over the weekend.
In the immortal words of the Budweiser “dude”, “Seriously…Dude..Seriously..”
Are these chin ups? Or are they chin downs? Late night direct response marketing has just gone to a whole new level.
Then there was the Quiznos Video. Or was it? Quiznos denies it.
Which leads me to ask..How does the pitch meeting go down? How do things like this get the green light? Which at this point allows us to segue’ to this..
Another Go-Daddy Spot pushing the limits of acceptability..You be the judge.
Direct Marketing Observations 