Thread: twitter as a marketing tool

Please, talk to me about how twitter is:

1. hip, relevant, necessary, invaluable

or

2. inane, ridiculous, waste of time, meh.

I'm trying to weigh the pros and cons. I get how it works, but I don't really get how it works... if you know what I mean.

Twitter, like any other marketing tool, has its pro's and cons, and isn't for everyone!

On the upside, Twitter (and any social media, for that matter) has a really nice effect of rounding out your brand and creating a cozy, approachable and "real" face to your business. My energy as a performer (and a human) is vivacious, cheeky and fun, so I like to show a little personality in my marketing efforts. I have my tweets and my blog on the sidebar of my website for this very reason.

Twitter is also great as a directional, leading people to your website, your venue's websites, and any blogs or publications you may write in. Also fantastic for quickie little "reminder" gig updates.

When it comes to connectability, Twitter kind of stinks compared to Facebook. FB makes it much easier to find people, to connect with your circles of friends, and to express what can't be said in 140 characters.

And as people have politely reminded me on more than one occasion, it's always key to be relevant and "clean" in your tweets. Read: if you don't want your mom to read about it, don't post it on Twitter. I walk a very fine line between keeping it real and TMI - but this has been easy enough to overcome, with a bit of focus

ETA: Twitter shouldn't be viewed as a be-all, end-all to social media marketing, if that makes sense. It's best used as a holistic mix, to complement Facebook, MySpace, Flickr and all the other goodies. I also don't think it's for everyone. Social media requires consistent upkeep and interesting content. Using Twitter, Facebook, et al strictly to blast event invites and self-promote isn't what I'd consider an optimal strategy. You've gotta remember the "social" component and be engaged with your online pals :)

I think twitter is over hyped

Google Trends for Websites: twitter.com, facebook.com, myspace.com

Wow. Interesting stats, HubicRuzz!

I knew MySpace was on a downward spiral. Didn't know that Twitter was literally flatlining. Guess it just goes to show that Facebook really is the place to be. At least, until the next new thing comes along ,r:;

Should be interesting to see what happens with Twitter in a year or so.

Originally Posted by SatinWorship19

Wow. Interesting stats, HubicRuzz!

I knew MySpace was on a downward spiral. Didn't know that Twitter was literally flatlining.

The issue I'd have with this, is that Twitter isn't Facebook.
*sigh* I feel slightly frustrated, because it's like we're measure the iceberg by what's above the surface. But here's the deal -- 90% of the interactions w/Facebook and MySpace are browser based. You have to have either that, or one of the smartphone clients, to use those services, except in some non-standard circumstances.
But many people, esp. in other countries, don't have regular access to browsers. But they do have cell phones that do text messages, and Twitter is easily updated via those. On top of this, many people have programs that specifically access Twitter w/o accessing the website; a quick poke at the famous #iranelection tag at twitter (a tag that's relatively weighted towards non-American users) shows 2 of the last 10 posts are from clients, and thus will not show up on any metric about web site use. And another check, a few minutes later, shows 6 out of 20.

We need, when evaluating web services, to be very careful about understanding that the web is far more complex than just web sites. We've had parallel tech for awhile; many people, for example, built early web businesses on email alone, and it's still a powerful mechanism, when used wisely. And all this tech is nothing but tools; just as Twitter, with Iran, was the right tech at the right time*, so too, in other contexts, is Facebook, and even MySpace has a role to play (MySpace's music support kicks Facebook in the face to this day, and is far more useful if you, for example, work with a live band who you can promote alongside your dancing).

And yes, Twitter can work. I think the canonical example to-date is Dell, who's used Twitter to move millions of dollars of computers out of their Outlet sites that would otherwise likely lie fallow. And this is one use for Twitter in the business case; if you have, for example, a DVD, you can use Twitter to move a few copies with special sale that might get you some more followers; trading that income for long-term eyeballs for other networking and selling opportunities.

All that said, I've collected some links that might be of help in understanding Twitter, and working with it in these regards:

asim's twitter Bookmarks on Delicious

I hope these are of use.



* Twitter has a light web page, and only takes short messages. So unlike Facebook and MySpace, with complex and heavy web sites, Twitter was small enough to push messages through state censorship and bandwidth restrictions.

That's all interesting stuff. I never stopped to think about the implications of mobile users. That's huge.

I have to admit, I'm just starting to get into SEO and social media. But I can see your frustration. It doesn't sound like any of the social media sites have been accurately measured, nor do those stats reflect the individual needs of the advertiser or the structure of their marketing campaign.

Can't wait to check out those links on Twitter!