Time to Write Off Twitter?
How Twitter compares to Facebook and Linked In and whether it's a simple, passing fad are questions that persist in the blogosphere. Just last night I found myself issuing a rapid response to that very question posted by an industry peer.
Remarkably, I've already formed a firm perspective on this since former Kodak Digital boss (virtual-world mentor, friend and demonic early-adopter, Pierre Schaeffer) persuaded me to join the site just last week. Initially sceptical, I'm now in danger of becoming hooked - with good professional reason.
In my view, Twitter is more 'spiky' in its opinion base than Facebook (generally a closed social/familial community) or Linked In (a more professional networking outlet). It is also a more virulent and unashamed social recruitment tool, allowing complete strangers to comfortably 'follow' one another around given discussion topics or themes. As such, its potential is huge in allowing individuals or corporate entities (represented in impressive scale) to galvanise and shape public opinion ; and is equally huge in leading them unwittingly to the sharp, pointy end of it - with all its consequential impact to reputation.
You may only have one or two isolated people 'following' your company's Twitter postings ('tweets') but, behind them, pay close attention to how many 'followers' they have tracking their tweets. What may seem like a passing discourse about product/service dissatisfaction between two seemingly innocuous and unrelated individuals could ignite a viral outburst of fevered debate as their disciples chime in with similar experiences, initiating their followers in turn to mobilise against the company concerned. Examples of this are well documented in David Meerman Scott's book 'The New Rules of Marketing & PR'.
This is the beauty of Twitter. Forget the trivial updates about what Maureen's dog ate for dinner. With that pyramid principle and, yes, with the characteristic Twitter profile of cross-demographic, everyday people who consume products, evaluate brands, companies and individuals on rational and often irrational grounds, we ignore Twitter at our peril as the home of potential activism.
With Twitter in particular as a social network, the Trojan horse is not in raw visitor numbers (around 235 million for Facebook (1) versus a reported 7-10 million currently for Twitter), but in the way individuals and groups - often strangers - appear to coalesce so readily around issues and conversations. 140 restricted text characters can generate a lot of vocal - and insightful - thrust!
In my opinion, it is that facility for social mobilisation that sets it miles apart from both Facebook and Linked In and that will constitute, I believe, a key differentiator as it moves into a future world where instant, opinion-based news and grass-roots activism is likely to increase rather than diminish. Here, the genie's already out of the bottle.
Whether Twitter will ultimately escape the clutches of a larger bird of prey - turning collective 'tweets' into resounding 'squawks' - remains to be seen. Site analytics company, Compete, just released 33 percent, past-month growth figures for Twitter in the U.S and revealed 965 percent year-on-year growth. Reports talk of Twitter membership exploding to 50 million visitors by the end of this year in that market alone.
Surely, it was the story of David and Goliath that taught us, never, to write off the little guy.
(1) CNet
Remarkably, I've already formed a firm perspective on this since former Kodak Digital boss (virtual-world mentor, friend and demonic early-adopter, Pierre Schaeffer) persuaded me to join the site just last week. Initially sceptical, I'm now in danger of becoming hooked - with good professional reason.
In my view, Twitter is more 'spiky' in its opinion base than Facebook (generally a closed social/familial community) or Linked In (a more professional networking outlet). It is also a more virulent and unashamed social recruitment tool, allowing complete strangers to comfortably 'follow' one another around given discussion topics or themes. As such, its potential is huge in allowing individuals or corporate entities (represented in impressive scale) to galvanise and shape public opinion ; and is equally huge in leading them unwittingly to the sharp, pointy end of it - with all its consequential impact to reputation.
You may only have one or two isolated people 'following' your company's Twitter postings ('tweets') but, behind them, pay close attention to how many 'followers' they have tracking their tweets. What may seem like a passing discourse about product/service dissatisfaction between two seemingly innocuous and unrelated individuals could ignite a viral outburst of fevered debate as their disciples chime in with similar experiences, initiating their followers in turn to mobilise against the company concerned. Examples of this are well documented in David Meerman Scott's book 'The New Rules of Marketing & PR'.
This is the beauty of Twitter. Forget the trivial updates about what Maureen's dog ate for dinner. With that pyramid principle and, yes, with the characteristic Twitter profile of cross-demographic, everyday people who consume products, evaluate brands, companies and individuals on rational and often irrational grounds, we ignore Twitter at our peril as the home of potential activism.
With Twitter in particular as a social network, the Trojan horse is not in raw visitor numbers (around 235 million for Facebook (1) versus a reported 7-10 million currently for Twitter), but in the way individuals and groups - often strangers - appear to coalesce so readily around issues and conversations. 140 restricted text characters can generate a lot of vocal - and insightful - thrust!
In my opinion, it is that facility for social mobilisation that sets it miles apart from both Facebook and Linked In and that will constitute, I believe, a key differentiator as it moves into a future world where instant, opinion-based news and grass-roots activism is likely to increase rather than diminish. Here, the genie's already out of the bottle.
Whether Twitter will ultimately escape the clutches of a larger bird of prey - turning collective 'tweets' into resounding 'squawks' - remains to be seen. Site analytics company, Compete, just released 33 percent, past-month growth figures for Twitter in the U.S and revealed 965 percent year-on-year growth. Reports talk of Twitter membership exploding to 50 million visitors by the end of this year in that market alone.
Surely, it was the story of David and Goliath that taught us, never, to write off the little guy.
(1) CNet
Labels: activism, David Meerman Scott, Facebook, Linked In, online PR, online reputation, Pierre Schaeffer, social networking, Twitter
posted by Joanna Lund
at
10:04 AM
Posts 
0 Comments :
Post a Comment
Home