-
Website
http://www.chrisbrogan.com/ -
Original page
http://www.chrisbrogan.com/guest-post-twitter-to-converse-or-to-broadcast-that-is-the-question/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
Judging by most ppl's tweets, I would guess that less thought goes into the avg Tweet than into the ave blog post.
Twitter is many things to many people. There is little "right" or "wrong", but to use Twitter properly is to cooperate, coordinate, to learn and to discover, to share and observe. It's OK to inject occasional personal tidbits as a means of illustrating your humanity, much as one would speak with a good friend at work about a funny anecdote about their child. However, savvy users will maintain a degree of discrepancy, as not all conversations are meant for all ears.
Thanks for posting, always great to get rethinking!
I think it can be a fine line to tread at times - obviously you want to share your blog with as many people/readers as possible, so sharing a link to your latest post is the logical step.
Yet at the same time you don't want to solely be promoting your brand - as you rightly say, that's the quickest way to hit anybody's trash bin. And as great as a brand may be, I don't recall any hugely successful branding or marketing campaigns happening from the garbage bin.
So yes, interact with the community - offer help, advice or just plain old encouragement. Read something good? Share it. One of your followers/followees write Tweet something worth sharing? Re-Tweet it.
Becoming known as a supporter as opposed to a plant will soon get you the respect and following that will automatically lead to interest in your own work.
That, and getting a guest slot on Chris's blog... ;-)
Thanks for an enjoyable read.
The 2 points that stick out are to avoid using Twitter for personal minutia, and excessive personal discussion. I've begun using direct messages for many things I would have Tweeted in the past. Great post, thx for the reminders on how we can all be more effective in how we utilize social media tools for the benefit of ourself and others.
At what point do you take it off Twitter? How rapid a conversation is too rapid? How many exchanges is too many? All this keeping in mind others who are following and having their feed filled up.
It's not the same issue as shameless self-promotion, but it can come across as self-centered somehow, at least how I've seen some people carry on like it's a personal phone call.
Suggestions? I'm @cwestbrook on Twitter; advice would be welcomed.
I think the beauty of Twitter is that everyone has an opinion for how it should be used. While some people are the "blurters, spammers, and super followers" that most of us on Twitter dislike, they are all a part of the Twitter community. We can criticize all we want, but we also make the choice on how to use Twitter ourselves. If you want to block someone, do it. If you want to follow someone, do it. If you want to DM someone to death, do it. If you want to talk politics, do it. Follow 25 people or follow 1000+. Keep your account private or make it public.
While there are "popular" methods of using Twitter, who are we to criticize the others. It's a public forum, and the strongest survive or maximize its use. I don't know how many blog posts I've read on how to use Twitter or how to not use Twitter. It seems like someone writes something daily, and it seems like everyone has a different perspective.
I don't know what these guys had in mind when they 1st created Twitter, but I would guess the original concept was for people to answer the question "What are you doing?" If that's the case then "blurting" is the answer to that question. It's all about you, your company, or whatever. Twitter has evolved, but I don't think we can criticize the people that are just answering the question. That's their choice. Just don't follow them.
Examples include knowing that people with you at a conference might want updates-frequently-about sessions they aren't in. And that F2F events/gatherings among more than a handful of people can be organized efficiently via tweets.
I'm guilty of sharing my blog entries and podcasts here, but the people in my followers met me via social media. It's not blurting, it's alerting.
I try to mention this stuff once a day. The rest of the time I'm interacting or sharing situations, answers, events and feelings.
Ultimately, Twitter began as a broadcast tool that has morphed into a communicasting tool. It's still like shouting through the form wall to your neighbors. But now people understand that they've got to listen for the responses in order to keep the conversation alive.
My advice to new people to Twitter would be to Follow respected "Tweeple" like Chris Brogan ( http://twitter.com/chrisbrogan ) and others who have a high Followers ratio (more people Following them than people they Follow) After all, they are the ones who lead by example.
Cheers
Tony Hollingsworth
http://tonyhollingsworth.blogspot.com
I enjoy the way I use Twitter; maybe as some kind of outlet. But I also want to be follow proper 'twittequette' in the community.
I think that I'm definitely going to think twice about tweets that I send from now on. Does this mean it's not going to be fun anymore? Is Twitter all about business now?
Darn. I guess I have a lot to learn.
@bhans
Keith
Thanks for the post. I blurt out messages all the time on Twitter.
I do that so people in the public timeline can be aware of my book
and the website, various resources and so on. It's also for the
people who have recently followed me.
That's only one part of branding and adding value. The the other
piece is creating interactive content, asking questions of users,
bringing people into a conversation, quoting interesting works,
offering incentives, creating short meditations, provocative debates
and otherwise informing followers as well as future followers what the
concept of being a 12-Step Buddhist is all about.
There are more dimensions to Twitter, at least in the way I see it.
And who gets to define it but the people who use it.
-d
Darren Littlejohn
the 12-Step Buddhist
http://the12stepbuddhist.com
I personally expect my twitter friends to post about their latest blog post or podcast, it's how I keep up with them. I've found myself spending less and less time in netvibes and more and more reading tweeted links.
The exception would be if it were a big brand or news source that interested me. In that case, I look at following like subscribing to a newsletter.
A side note on the conversation vs. DM thought--if the chat is a lively discussion about an issue or an idea, I'm glad it's in my stream. I've learned more information and formed more friendships just because of eavesdropping. (Tweavesdropping?)
Great post, Keith!
I am definitely going to think about posting though and while I talk about some very controversial subjects (my entire existence in this world is controversial - I can't help it), I don't want to appear as though I'm just broadcasting my thoughts or myself.
I do know some who just broadcast and don't even correspond. I try to be actively corresponding with everyone. I hope that doesn't make me a blurter. I don't think it does, but I am a really nice guy or try to be, even if I vehemently disagree with someone.
Thanks for giving me a lot to think about Keith! I enjoyed reading this post.
You can probably guess which one was more popular!
Twitter works just fine in an 'alert' sense for them, so why not for others.
I get your point, but perhaps that view is a little narrow?
Looks like it's defined as a bit of everything "too much," although mostly having to do with promotion. As ever, the comments are as helpful and illuminating as the posts. Hopefully, mine will be too.
As a relative newbie, I've opted for an immersion-experiential model of engagement for this highly interactive medium. I follow "stars" and I follow tweeps I found by searching key words relative to my interests. I was -- and become more and more -- fascinated by Twitter for:
* community building (because of my interest in church communications);
* good laughs & mini-rants (because I work primarily from a home office);
* creative and technical ideas (because I'm smitten with new media);
* pharma/healthcare trends/info.(because I write for that industry); and
* sociological good fun (because I'm a sociologist by training and my published writing is about popular culture).
My TweetDeck groups reflect these categories and the boundaries are soft because the church communications folks I follow use new media in ways my church does not [yet]; creative types (writers, designers) tend to be hilarious, I want to know what my friends are up to, and I like meeting new people from the comfortable convenience of my home office.
From my admittedly short time on Twitter, I've noticed how communications in this medium seem to map the way they do in others: by sex, age, socio-economic status (i.e., education & income & occupation). While there are always exceptions, for the most part:
* women tweet about more personal events and details than men;
* younger (e.g. Millenials) women AND men tweet more often (and about more personal details) than Boomers or GenXers.
* tweeps working in communications and interested in biz apps. tweet/blurt/alert more frequently...and would make the "alert" v. "blurt" distinction offered by Jeff Cutler in the comments above.
* tweeps working solo (e.g., freelancers) tweet more often, for any number of reasons too extensive to review here.
And the broad social groupings (i.e., cliques) that form remind me somewhat of high school: popular kids, brainiacs, weirdos, and class clowns. And like just like I did in high school, I'm interested in folks from all those categories.
So what's too much? Other than the length of this comment...
In addition to being highly interactive, Twitter strikes me as highly self-regulating. Mark Juleen's comment above captures that ethos. I'll be curious to see if it remains that way or something/someone steps in to regulate what is and isn't acceptable (LinkedIn is an example of this).
I realize that the WSJ has reported Twitter is mainstream, but in fact it's still evolving...and wonderfully so. Tweet/Blurt/Alert on!
Meredith
If I blurt (and I do, I admit), it's often on behalf of my clients, whose products I believe in. For the marketing community at large, Twitter is indeed a great way to share ideas and help evolve the 21st century methods of communication and marketing.
Thanks for the great post!
First, there should be a study done on the correlation between blurts and the portal/tool/venue used to tweet. I find that if I'm on the iPhone I am more inclined to tweet in a carefree, I'm-out-in-the-world-doing-stuff mode. I share my location and my interactions freely. And it is mostly blurting about my progress going through what might seem mundane if it weren't chronicled on a tech gadget.
People probably don't care that I'm having Roobios tea at a coffee shop in Central Square, Cambridge...UNLESS they also drink Roobios, or have been to that coffee shop, or have memories of Cambridge.
In that way the blurting serves as a connection point for people. As mentioned above, many tweeple search for terms that attract them (Unltimate Frisbee, Scooters, Comcast, Root Beer for Breakfast, whatever. To make those searches successful, there must be some blurting detritus in the stream.
I am not advocating a Tourette Syndrome-esque rain of randomness on the twitterverse. I am fully in favor of some degree of overshare.
Twisting this back to the blurting with a motive. That's not the same. When people blurt with a motive, they're selling your something and the distinction is clear. That might have a place here if you subscribe to @dealco or @woot or even some of the PR pros who are almost heavy-handed about their pimping.
A further distinction was made above by Dan Thornton. He talks about how clear it is when a person versus a automated stream is 'participating'. Perhaps that's the defining piece for me.
I want the stream in my hand (NO PUN INTENDED) to be light, fun, informative and often pointing to richer content. The tweets that are dead-ends can meet some of these criteria some of the time, but where they miss is where they lean toward blurting.
There are going to continue to be entire communities that don't understand the 'rules' and some will annoy and be dropped, others will only err infrequently and still have more good to balance out their blurts.
Finally, the thought about perusing your last 20 tweets is genius. Until we each take a look at how others perceive us, even Qwitter won't be able to really tell us why someone left.
Thanks for the post!
Quite inadvertantly I also received prospective business as well. I just posted about the fine line between business and personal use on Twitter: http://tinyurl.com/684zva please note I want people to read a posted comment by "Virginia" who put it rather well about Tweeting for business and for personal reasons and not just the post itself.
It is people like Virginia who I am glad are a part of the Twitter community. I understand Twitter has to cover its operational costs, hence the 'premier' services it will be charging for in the future--I just hope the concept itself isn't ruined by commercialization.
All the best,
Alma Gray
Twitter is a communications tool and it can be a broadcast tool as well. I follow Barack Obama and find it interesting to see an occasional Tweet about where he is. It is only annoying to me when a company or individual over-Tweets. I also find it annoying when someone is blatantly trying to accumulate as many followers as possible. I don't mind the blurt because it is up to me to decide if I want to follow or not. To me success is defined by meeting your objectives. Why are you on Twitter?
I joined Twitter with only one objective: to experience it. The most surprising thing I discovered about Twitter is that I LOVE IT! I use it a lot. It is quick. I can blurt if I want. I can link to my personal blog. I can engage and meet people anywhere in the world (as long as they type in English). I can just randomly follow links to all sorts of stuff that I would never have found otherwise that is fun and valuable... including this site.
As Chris mentioned, checking the last 20 tweets of someone really tells the story if they're a broadcaster or someone who actually participates and engages in the conversation. This reasoning alone will give me the cue of whether I follow a new person or not.
Will they bring value to me? Can I bring value to them? I see it as a two-way relationship that you have to build and nurture before you can spit out your own links. Show your value to the community and you will reap the benefits of like-minded followers.
I see people with big egos only announcing book deals and contest wins and speaking engagements and nothing else. I see other people ranting about politics and their personal lives. And then there the ones who actually share resources (even their own, when appropriate), help people solve problems, support other people. This last group, these people make twitter a useful tool.
I also have come to the conclusion that some people love twitter because they can "micro-babble" anything that comes into their mind, click and send it off, without having to think about whether it makes sense or adds value to a conversation.
"Do you want to have lunch?"
"Sure. Where?"
"That Mexican place was good last time."
"Yeah, day and time".
Blah, blah, blah.
There are several precious seconds of my life I will never get back.
Thanks Keith for the words of wisdom!
Twitter is a public forum. This attribute alone creates an environment for communication which is dominated by blurting. Your comparison to leaving your business card at tables at a wedding is good, but in reality that has happened. It doesn't make it right of course. My point is that if you are in a public forum such as Twitter, expect to find a lot of blurters. Twitter etiquette is still being developed.
I believe the popularity of micro messaging is exploding as reflected in enterprise level services such as Yammer where blurting is probably the exception (if at all).
Regards,
Bernie Borges
@berniebay
Good post--thanks for shining the light on the broadcast problem. The broadcast problem is threefold. First, we Digital Immigrants, are still getting our sea legs when it comes to participatory media. Collaboration is not our comfort zone. We want try out the latest social networking tool, but find it uncomfortable to put ourselves out there, trust "strangers," and give away our ideas for free. It's a cultural issue.
The second issue is the adoption continuum. Remember 1994 when email was still fairly new? Little by little friends and family members were "getting on email," as we said back in the day. The user habit was to write an email letter--yep, these were long messages--to your friend. Then once you'd gone back and forth a few times and had nothing else to say, the "forwards" would start. From jokes, to consumer warnings, to limericks, you were one recipient on your friend's mass distribution list. At first this was funny and you, too, would forward these inane messages along to your friends who were "on email." But "funny" quickly soured and turned into annoying. You moved on. You started using email as a productive communication tool rather than as a toy. It became a seamless part of your daily communications.
The same adoption continuum exists for social media. First we sign up for a service and then probably forget about it for awhile. Then we passively observe the landscape. Next we dip our toes in and blurt and broadcast, "I had pizza for lunch!" Then we settle in and start sharing useful and mildly interesting information with our followers...but we're still operating in a 1.0 broadcast paradigm. As we build our follower networks, we begin to see the value of social media. Suddenly we "get it": we have this mindshift that it's not about us, it's about them. Broadcast is about increasing value for the creator; social media is about increasing value for everyone else.
The third and final piece of the broadcast problem is that the blog and microblog platform infrastructures are, too, still evolving and are not yet truly conducive to the collaboration that their content is trying to encourage. I'd be interested in hearing if anyone knows of a blogging platform that truly facilitates collaborative discussions.
@Paul Moss, that's why I gave the Barack Obama analogy, because it seems that as long as you have enough enduring fans and your creating value with your blurted tweets people will still follow. However, if you or I do that, people will close the book on us!
@Meridith, great comment and great study on your part. I am also a tweet deck user and i use it to follow certain groups. With almost 1,000 followers on twitter it would be impossible to catch anything. Tweet Deck Helps me sort these feeds of interest. I think Twitter is self regulating. The Unfollow Button is powerful.
@Marc - Awesome! Your doing geat. It's all about intentions.
@Rebekkah - Thats exactly why those marketers will never gain traction. They are coming at it from the standpoint of "Whats in it for me, rather than how can I serve"
@Jeff, I think people do care about the tea your drinking! More so, as this thing grows it will be great way for people to meet you in a certain place.Keep up your tweets man! I'd be surprised if you haven't already used twitter to generate meet-up or lunch.
@Alma, Twitter is FULL of Professionals of all kinds and to leave out your professional life or your blog posts would be a sin. However, if the only thing you do is post your links to yourself, people just wont follow. Your doing great!
@Theresa, way to engage! Keep having fun!
@Sonny, Awesome - Thank you.
@Judy, I am in full agreement.
@Bob, many times I find people replace it to comment on a blog post, i also find that people don't subscribe to blogs as much because they get their feeds from Twitter.
@Bernie, Thanks for the feedback
I hate to stop following, tho. Wish there was an option to filter our the blurts and leave everything else!
I enjoy some blurts from people promoting what they do, it's because of who they are and what they do that I follow, however if that's all twitter is, another advertising outlet (popup banners anyone??) then they'll quickly find themselves un-followed.
The only blurts I want are from the news agencies and the like that I follow!
Great post!
I have been guilty of most of those "sins" you enumerated. I often Tweet my new blog pieces and self promote at times. I also post inpirational quotes, link to interesting sites I come across (with no affiliation to myself) that I think the community might benefit from. I sometimes ask sincere questions when I need help. If I had a book out, I would probably let people know. I also tweet about mundane stuff from my life just to share with my friends (my Twitter stream feeds into my Facebook status).
The beauty of Twitter is that there are so many apps that you can use that you need never actually go on Twitter and see the spam if you don't want to.
And you can check out my blog for more Twitter hints and... Oups! I did it again! Sorry ;-)
I think your points about adding value to the community and making sure it's not all about you are important. My main concern, though (and it echoes many others who have already commented)is that there seems to be an almost elitist attitude out there regarding The True Purpose of Twitter (and I'm not saying this comes from your post, Keith). While I have no time for people who are focused on blatant selling and constant promoting, I think there are many good uses for Twitter. I agree with those who have said they're all valid, and people should just follow the people who share their approach.
I, for instance, starting using Twitter as a writing exercise, and I like reading tweets that entertain, make me laugh, stir up nostalgia, and generally make me feel like I'm not alone--that there are people out there who experience some of the world like I do. I also appreciate tweets that offer new and different perspectives on the world. If I notice that the bulk of a person's last 20 tweets have some sort of link--even if they're sharing and it's not all about them--I tend not to follow them. But that's just me, and it should all be OK.
@kt_writes
But that doesn't mean I have to like it.
Cheers!
George
I'm finding my own balance is tipping rapidly toward more following & less blog subscribing, as someone else mentioned.
The personal recommendations--and even the quasi-mystery of the tinyurl and the unknown content that lies beyond--are just more fun than opening my Google Reader & seeing how many hundreds of things I haven't read yet. So I don't mind an occasional reminder that there's longer content to be had outside the magic 140 characters.
@BarbChamberlain
(Follow me & you get a mix of Spokane civic life, PR/social media, news from Washington State University Spokane where I work, my kids, & my caffeine habit)
Twitter like a lot of other social media sites has and will evolve according to the flavour of the month of it's users.
Over the last year that evolution has moved towards it becoming an announcing medium. Blurting if you like. But hey in the end users will decide.
So let Twitter evolve baby!
There is a fine line between what I like to call "the art of shameless self promotion" and "blurting". I post on my blog a few times a week. When I post, am I going to throw a link up on Twitter? Absolutely. Am I going to throw a link in Facebook? Why not? But, one has to strike a balance.
In addition to those links, I'm also throwing up all kinds of other information and links to other stuff I find interesting. I'm also having conversations with people on Twitter about many topics, I'm commenting on blogs, I'm collaborating on posts with other people, and occasionally doing a guest post like you.
The secret is, don't try too hard. I don't do this solely because I'm trying to promote my business or my blog or anything else. I do this because I enjoy the process of connecting with other people. I enjoy sharing ideas. And I think the Internet is an amazing place. If I'm making a contribution that others appreciate, that's a side effect - it's certainly not the entire point.
Excellent post - I enjoy your tweets too!
I have a column for tweets from people who follow your idea of twitterquette. They are mostly real people whom I want to have conversations with. They are experts in a field of interest to me.
I have a column for news twits. I can keep up with breaking news.
I have a column for businesses so I can find out what is going on with them.
I have a column for experts on using social media. I like to see what is new and ways people are using it.
I even have a column for famous personalities.
Some of these columns I read as a possible part of a conversation or to ease drop on other conversations, or good links to follow.
Some I just follow.
Some are idea generators.
All are different.
All add vlaue to my tweetdeck is some way shape or form, but not all will be used for conversation.
I left there scratching my head and wondering how the hell this gentleman could think that @replying to people is missing the whole point of Twitter. I must admit, he was a little bit older, and clearly formulated his Twitter philosophy around the "what are you doing?" text box.
But I wholeheartedly agree with the wonderful ability to converse on Twitter - but there are times to broadcast too. I live in a small up-and-coming city, and have rounded up a great group of Twitter users who come to Tweetups I organize by both broadcasting things of value and @replying.
Its a fun tool. Just using some common sense (business sense- and personal), having respect for your followers, and having fun makes Twitter such an awesome app. Thanks for your take on this subject!