Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Last call? We haven't even begun.
We heard it with Facebook and now it's the same argument against Twitter - how will it make money? You see, a lot of people don't understand Twitter. A lot of people think it's a fad that will simply go away. They don't see the benefit in Twitter. Well, I respectfully disagree.
The biggest reason I am on Twitter is the constant learning it provides. It's learning I can't get elsewhere. Stuff you can't read in a book. It's that experience you get outside the classroom.
I'm not trying to brand myself - there are folks who use Twitter to do this. I'm not proclaiming to be an "expert" - there is no such thing. In fact, networking isn't my primary objective. Let's face it, Twitter is basically an internship for me.
There are a lot of folks out there that are smarter and more talented within the PR field than myself. These are the folks who are mentoring me. Where else could I be provided a forum to connect with as many brilliant folks? What meeting could I attend where so many talented folks from all over the world freely give advice?
Quite frankly, I could care less if Twitter makes money. As long as I am able to continue my conversations with the community I build, I'm not going anywhere.
Labels: Twitter
Read more!
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Web 2.0 isn't about you
Why are you on Twitter? Why did you create a Facebook profile? Is your Web 2.0 goal to build your personal brand? If you are participating on Twitter and other Web 2.0 platforms based solely to advance your own individual goals, then you have the wrong mindset. Don’t get me wrong, advancing yourself professionally is important and you should always be trying to build your own brand. What I am saying, though, is that if you are engaging in Web 2.0 for that reason alone, you are missing the purpose and benefit of Web 2.0.
In my opinion, your purpose with online media should be focused on building a community and engaging with others. It should be about listening first and talking second. From a goal standpoint, this should be your primary mission.
Based on this belief, I believe celebrities are going about Twitter with the wrong approach. Promoting one’s movie should be a tactic, not the goal or purpose. Utilizing Facebook to sell an album is a great marketing strategy for artists, but it shouldn’t be the reason behind they implement Web 2.0.
The same can be said for the “regular Joe” on Twitter. The key to success is by being able to add something of value. Ask yourself, “what am I bringing to the conversation?” Are you bringing anything valuable and useful or are you simply trying to promote yourself and push your agenda?
Let’s be honest, PR folks like the hear themselves talk. There’s nothing wrong with that. We should be vocal people. We should have opinions. We should strive for improvement. But are you that kid in class who’s simply raising his or her hand and participating just to make it be known that you're present? Speaking up more frequently isn’t necessarily going to be the determining factor whether you get an ‘A’ or a ‘B’ with Twitter.
Remember folks, if you engage and build properly, then the rest will come. As much as it may hurt, this time, it's not about you.
Read more!
In my opinion, your purpose with online media should be focused on building a community and engaging with others. It should be about listening first and talking second. From a goal standpoint, this should be your primary mission.
Based on this belief, I believe celebrities are going about Twitter with the wrong approach. Promoting one’s movie should be a tactic, not the goal or purpose. Utilizing Facebook to sell an album is a great marketing strategy for artists, but it shouldn’t be the reason behind they implement Web 2.0.
The same can be said for the “regular Joe” on Twitter. The key to success is by being able to add something of value. Ask yourself, “what am I bringing to the conversation?” Are you bringing anything valuable and useful or are you simply trying to promote yourself and push your agenda?
Let’s be honest, PR folks like the hear themselves talk. There’s nothing wrong with that. We should be vocal people. We should have opinions. We should strive for improvement. But are you that kid in class who’s simply raising his or her hand and participating just to make it be known that you're present? Speaking up more frequently isn’t necessarily going to be the determining factor whether you get an ‘A’ or a ‘B’ with Twitter.
Remember folks, if you engage and build properly, then the rest will come. As much as it may hurt, this time, it's not about you.
Labels: Branding, Personal Branding, Twitter
Read more!
Friday, April 17, 2009
Ashton punks Twitter
If you're online and into Web 2.0, you've probably heard about Ashton Kutcher's Twitter challenge with CNN. Twitter is going crazy with this with people are on both sides of the argument. Personally, I am on the "con" side of this publicity stunt. Here's why:
On the surface, this is great for Twitter. Getting mainstream coverage is huge for the growth of Twitter and getting its name in traditional media is vital to its success. Although "big names" on Twitter is nothing new - see @tonyhawk @the_real_shaq, the recent press definitely helps. Heck, even @oprah is on now. So in that sense, this is good for Twitter. However, I don't think this does anything to prove the value of Twitter.
Yes, this shows that Twitter is popular and that messages move quickly on Twitter; but it doesn't show the true value behind Twitter. In my opinion, the true value of Twitter is the ability to share knowledge and create relationships. Others may use it for something else. This "challenge" does nothing to show Twitter's unique ability for a person to interact and form relationships. In fact, I'd go on the record to say that Ashton's quest for 1 million followers is nothing more than him saying "I'm more important than you, so follow me."
News came out early today that Ashton did in fact reach 1 million before CNN. So now what? What was the goal of reaching 1 million? Simply to say you did it first? It's my belief that this had nothing to do with a challenge, rather simply a publicity stunt. And it was quite brilliant. Do you think it was merely a coincidence that Ashton started to up his Twitter activity around the same time he's shooting a movie? Again, I think it's quite brilliant. But it goes against all that's Twitter (that could be another post).
In the end, all this "challenge" did was reinforce that fact that Americans are obsessed with celebrities and those who are "famous." Brad Pitt, Leonardo DiCaprio, Justin Timberlake - all could have achieved this same result had they decided to go public. It doesn't prove the strength or influence of Ashton, nor does it indicate anything about Twitter.
The icing on the cake? He took out a billboard! Lame and desperate, in my opinion.
Your thoughts?
Read more!
On the surface, this is great for Twitter. Getting mainstream coverage is huge for the growth of Twitter and getting its name in traditional media is vital to its success. Although "big names" on Twitter is nothing new - see @tonyhawk @the_real_shaq, the recent press definitely helps. Heck, even @oprah is on now. So in that sense, this is good for Twitter. However, I don't think this does anything to prove the value of Twitter.
Yes, this shows that Twitter is popular and that messages move quickly on Twitter; but it doesn't show the true value behind Twitter. In my opinion, the true value of Twitter is the ability to share knowledge and create relationships. Others may use it for something else. This "challenge" does nothing to show Twitter's unique ability for a person to interact and form relationships. In fact, I'd go on the record to say that Ashton's quest for 1 million followers is nothing more than him saying "I'm more important than you, so follow me."
News came out early today that Ashton did in fact reach 1 million before CNN. So now what? What was the goal of reaching 1 million? Simply to say you did it first? It's my belief that this had nothing to do with a challenge, rather simply a publicity stunt. And it was quite brilliant. Do you think it was merely a coincidence that Ashton started to up his Twitter activity around the same time he's shooting a movie? Again, I think it's quite brilliant. But it goes against all that's Twitter (that could be another post).
In the end, all this "challenge" did was reinforce that fact that Americans are obsessed with celebrities and those who are "famous." Brad Pitt, Leonardo DiCaprio, Justin Timberlake - all could have achieved this same result had they decided to go public. It doesn't prove the strength or influence of Ashton, nor does it indicate anything about Twitter.
The icing on the cake? He took out a billboard! Lame and desperate, in my opinion.
Your thoughts?
Labels: Ashton Kutcher, Ashton Twitter Challenge, Twitter
Read more!
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Spam is good for Twitter
Before you start scratching your head on why I would suggest that spam is good, let me clarify. Spam, in its current stage on Twitter, is actually good. Let me try to explain my madness.
How can something defined as disruptive be thought of as beneficial? In its current stage on Twitter, spam actually confirms that Twitter is mainstream. It confirms that Twitter isn't just a useless fad. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying spam alone defines Twitter and proves it's effective - that is achieved by a successful marketing and communications plan. Spam usually follows where users are gathering. Again, another way to reassure that Twitter is growing and the potential to reach and engage with your audience is something that needs to be considered.
Like most SM tools, spam is easily ignored on Twitter. All spam can do right now via Twitter is follow you. That's pretty harmless. If it's a nuisance, simply block it. The only really problem, and it's more an annoyance than a threat, is the "auto-dm." Again, that's something easily treated by blocking the person who sent the auto-dm.
Think about it, all popular and effective communication channels have had spam at one point. Telephone? Yep. TV? Yep. E-mail? Definitely. Spam isn't usually associated with useless and deserted channels. MySpace had it's run with spam, Facebook has had its and now Twitter is finally getting blasted.
The point of this post was to show that with popularity comes spam. And that isn't necessarily a bad thing. For those who aren't "sold" on Twitter yet, the presence of spam is a clear indication that Twitter is just beginning to grow. If you haven't had a conversation about creating a presence on Twitter, you need to immediately. Not being on Twitter means potentially missing a huge segment of your audience that you could be engaging with.
Jeff Jarvis, author of What Would Google Do, states: "Amazon.com knows how we shop. Google knows what we're looking for. And Twitter is headed to knowing the most about what we’re doing and thinking." So come jump on the wagon and emerge yourself with a powerful and effective communication tool.
Labels: Cost of Social Media, Facebook, Spam, Twitter
Read more!
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Twitter: The hot ticket
I don't hide the fact that Twitter is, by far, my favorite social platform. For me, I feel it allows me to connect and build relationships in a far more productive manner than other social media platforms - both personally and professionally. As Twitter continues to gain users and continue to be the "hot ticket," there are sure to be a few flaws that come along. The two biggest potential flaws are: 1) unnecessary following & 2) companies joining for the wrong reasons.
1) Unnecessary following: Everyone wants to be popular or appear to be popular. There's a big misconception with Twitter, that the number of followers one has, the more "legit" they must be. While this thought process holds some validity, you need to truly decipher why a certain person has a large following. Some are "experts" and major players in certain industries, PR has @prsarahevans. However, there's a trend of following people, just to be able to build one's own volume. Remember, Twitter should be about quality not quantity.
2) Joining for wrong reasons: By now the word is out, Twitter is the new social media platform that everyone is on. Why aren't you? You must be behind the times, right? Not necessarily. As more consumers join Twitter, there is going to be an ongoing trend of companies joining Twitter. I've read articles recently urging more and more businesses to hop on the wagon and "get with it." But before you decide if you or your company should have a presence on Twitter, sit back and evaluate this tactic. Joining Twitter shouldn't be "because everyone else is" or "because my competitor is." You need to treat Twitter like any other business decision and research, research, research. Realize that Twitter will require effort and a strategic plan. You won't get results by simply jumping in. You need to engage your community and build rapport. You need to listen. You need to provide a benefit to those that follow. A successful Twitter account requires time and effort. It can provide countless benefits if done properly, you just need to sit down and determine what your goal is and if Twitter is the best resource to reach that goal.
I love Twitter. I put in a lot of time and effort into my account and I've learned far more than I ever expected. I'm a firm believer that Twitter is by far the best social media tool for consumers and businesses. But like everything else, you only get what you put into it.
Labels: Social Media., Twitter
Read more!
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Twitter - Update from previous post
Came across a great article on Seeking Alpha regarding Twitter.
From Sarah Lacy:
"But, truth be told, in this Darwinian Web cycle, the financial results are a lagging indicator when the king-du-jour of the Internet gets dethroned. If you look closely, we're already seeing loads of signals that Google is losing its grip on Web supremacy.
Read more!
From Sarah Lacy:
"But, truth be told, in this Darwinian Web cycle, the financial results are a lagging indicator when the king-du-jour of the Internet gets dethroned. If you look closely, we're already seeing loads of signals that Google is losing its grip on Web supremacy.
- The Inauguration: I flicked to this in my daily Yahoo "ValleyBuzz" post yesterday, but it bears noting again. Look closely at the Web stats on Inauguration day. While Obama was taking the oath of office and delivering his speech, Google's stats shows a decline in search activity. Meanwhile, Twitter and Facebook usage soared. This speaks volumes for two reasons. One: It proves why Twitter and Facebook are ultimately more powerful sites, and paradoxically it's the same reason they are so tricky to monetize. They aren't about "transaction" they're about "connection." People went to Google to find specific information about the President-Elect and the ceremony. People go to Twitter and Facebook to share the experience with one another. That means, Twitter and Facebook are delighting users more than Google, because they are keyed into natural human needs and emotions that trigger far greater and more addictive endorphin rushes than just finding a piece of information. But far more telling and troubling was the explanation on Google's blog about why their numbers went down: Because people were obviously glued to the TV. Maybe. But they were also on other sites. Google no longer gets where the Web and its audience is going."
Labels: Sarah Lacy, Social Media, Twitter
Read more!
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
The hot topic in 2009 is the advancement of social media (SM) with Twitter being one of the more intriguing SM tools. Per its Web site, "Twitter is a service for friends, family, and co–workers to communicate and stay connected through the exchange of quick, frequent answers to one simple question: What are you doing?" However, to marketers, PR professionals, advertisers and most importantly, brands, Twitter is an invaluable tool. With all new things, though, Twitter does not come without varied opinion. Some love it, some don't see the value and a lot don't understand it.
My opinion on Twitter is this: it has the potential to be a beneficial resource for those individuals/companies to put forth the effort. It's a pretty unknown tool compared to Facebook, MySpace, LinkedIn; but I think it has the potential to be a lot bigger. Why? The return is so much better than other forms of social media.
Imagine you're a small floral shop. You don't have the big budget for advertising, nor do you don't have the tools to put out a huge marketing campaign. Sure, you can put an ad in the local newspaper, you can place a coupon in the local pennysaver. But what is the return on those investments? More than likely, pretty small.
Now you have Twitter. It's a free service. The only real cost is the time you spend, or your employee(s) spend on it. Granted, that time could be used for other activities; but a quick 5 minutes on Twitter announcing "Dozen Roses $19.99" is a free form of advertising. I understand that larger companies would need to scale this approach quite drastically, but the concept is still the same. Why can't Polaris have a Twitter account? Why can't Best Buy tweet that they are having a 1-day sale?
The biggest concerns are security and control of content. However, I don't see why this should be viewed any differently than the content being placed on radio, print, etc.
There are a couple of good discussions out there regarding Twitter and social media. I'd encourage you to check them out. Social media is the new "it" in PR and advertising...jump on board!
Interesting read on social media in general - http://marketingpie.risdall.com/?p=700
Cost of social media via the MNPR blog - http://www.mnprblog.com/2009/01/cost-of-social-media.html
Happy Hunting!
Read more!
My opinion on Twitter is this: it has the potential to be a beneficial resource for those individuals/companies to put forth the effort. It's a pretty unknown tool compared to Facebook, MySpace, LinkedIn; but I think it has the potential to be a lot bigger. Why? The return is so much better than other forms of social media.
Imagine you're a small floral shop. You don't have the big budget for advertising, nor do you don't have the tools to put out a huge marketing campaign. Sure, you can put an ad in the local newspaper, you can place a coupon in the local pennysaver. But what is the return on those investments? More than likely, pretty small.
Now you have Twitter. It's a free service. The only real cost is the time you spend, or your employee(s) spend on it. Granted, that time could be used for other activities; but a quick 5 minutes on Twitter announcing "Dozen Roses $19.99" is a free form of advertising. I understand that larger companies would need to scale this approach quite drastically, but the concept is still the same. Why can't Polaris have a Twitter account? Why can't Best Buy tweet that they are having a 1-day sale?
The biggest concerns are security and control of content. However, I don't see why this should be viewed any differently than the content being placed on radio, print, etc.
There are a couple of good discussions out there regarding Twitter and social media. I'd encourage you to check them out. Social media is the new "it" in PR and advertising...jump on board!
Interesting read on social media in general - http://marketingpie.risdall.com/?p=700
Cost of social media via the MNPR blog - http://www.mnprblog.com/2009/01/cost-of-social-media.html
Happy Hunting!
Labels: Cost of Social Media, Social Media, Twitter
Read more!
Monday, January 12, 2009
Barack Obama - PR mastermind?
Putting political views aside, no one can argue that Barack Obama didn't run a masterful campaign. The way he engaged voters, the press he generated and the overall public relations aspect of his campaign was brilliant. As he sets to take office and gives his inauguration speech on Jan. 20, the question looms - does the "Obama Brand" wear off?
One of the keys to Obama's successful nomination was his campaign's use of social media. His status was constantly updated via Twitter, his Facebook profile was filled with thousands of "friends" and his supporters were constantly reached via email. I firmly believe that any chance Obama has of maintaining his positive image, or of his "brand" continuing to be at an all-time high, is to continue to capitalize off the success social media brought. The tools and resources are already in place. They have contacts and they have lists. Why throw these valuable tools away? If I had any direct involvement with Obama, I would highly recommend the continued used of Twitter and Facebook. Why not update supporters of policies via Twitter? How about using Facebook to gauge public opinion? His email list is gold - a perfect way of getting direct feedback about how his term is going.
Obama's campaign was historical in the fact that it got the country involved. It got people out of their seats and finally got people to voice their opinion. It would be a shame if Obama didn't harness what every marketing and advertising company dreams of - verifiable data that generates results.
- Happy Hunting
Read more!
One of the keys to Obama's successful nomination was his campaign's use of social media. His status was constantly updated via Twitter, his Facebook profile was filled with thousands of "friends" and his supporters were constantly reached via email. I firmly believe that any chance Obama has of maintaining his positive image, or of his "brand" continuing to be at an all-time high, is to continue to capitalize off the success social media brought. The tools and resources are already in place. They have contacts and they have lists. Why throw these valuable tools away? If I had any direct involvement with Obama, I would highly recommend the continued used of Twitter and Facebook. Why not update supporters of policies via Twitter? How about using Facebook to gauge public opinion? His email list is gold - a perfect way of getting direct feedback about how his term is going.
Obama's campaign was historical in the fact that it got the country involved. It got people out of their seats and finally got people to voice their opinion. It would be a shame if Obama didn't harness what every marketing and advertising company dreams of - verifiable data that generates results.
- Happy Hunting
Labels: Barack Obama, Facebook, Inauguration, Obama, Social Media, Twitter
Read more!
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]