How can anyone believe that the idea of Sponsored Tweets fits in any way into the context of the social media world? A place that’s all about connecting with people, listening to people, and relating with people – openly. A place to be genuine and transparent. (Of course, when I visited the Sponsored Tweets home page I was greeted by one of their number one “celebrity” Tweeters: CarrotTop. Ah, nothing like a heaping dollop of cheese piled atop any shred of dignified validity there. But I digress.) Now, don’t get me wrong. This new brain child of Izea, a company that specializes in social media advertising, has every intent that the sponsored tweets are openly transparent.
See? A particular Tweet that just happens to tout some product or service will openly state that the Tweeter is being paid for such. Oh. Thanks for mentioning that. Delete. This is a social network of conversations. Strikes me the same as talking to someone at a cocktail party who says, “Oh, I’ve got a killer story about what happened to us Friday night! But first, let me disclose that some of the stuff in the story is made up.” Excellent. Now I can get set to be “riveted” by anything else I’ll ever hear from that person again. Certainly, Rule #1 in marketing is this: Have an excellent product, offer excellent service. And people will talk. But in the context of the social realm – and Twitter specifically – Rule #1 is this: When people do talk openly, genuinely, and even enthusiastically about a product or service, other people truly listen and take note. Slapping a paid disclosure on any such “conversation”, no matter how open the intent, pretty much eliminates all of that. I’m sure there will be plenty of Tweeters ready to jump in and disclose their love of something in search of a little cash. Not the least of which will be the B & C list “celebrities” looking for nuggets between appearances on I’m a Celebrity… Get Me Out of Here. But the whole idea is yet one more bad spammy approach to try to circumvent the genuine Twitter-verse where excellence is replaced by quick cash schemes in hopes of moving a short term needle. Often resulting in a much greater negative back lash. As a small business, run the opposite direction from any approach of this nature in places like Twitter or on your blog! The traditional mass media is your mantle of paid advertising to tout your product. And there is a definite purpose to that. But when it comes to the social media spectrum, a much simpler and open approach is the only path to take. Communicate and connect genuinely with people. Along with, of course, offering excellence in terms of your product or service. And let the social karma pay your rewards for the long haul. What do you think? — photo credit: ..colb.. |
Related posts:
- Transparency If you’ve been in business for a while...
- 5 Things My Dog Teaches Me About Customer Service When practically anything and everything is available at our fingertips,...
- Outsourcing Impact to Your Customers I spent quite a number of passionate years working in...
- 13 “Twips” to Brand Extension (Each brand extension Twitter Tip – “Twip” - is written as a...
DISCLOSURE: I’m on the advisory board of IZEA (unpaid unless someone buys Ted for $2B and then I get a pony!)
I think it’s a tool and that out of the potential methods of putting paid advertising in play on Twitter, it’s the most transparent and disclosure/ethics-promoting tool out there.
Should everyone do sponsored tweets? No.
Should you follow people who do sponsored tweets? Depends if you like them.
Will people do this? Yes
Is Ted the best guy for the job? Yes. (again. Biased.)
I think that celebrities want the tool. I think business people want the tool. I think Twitter is the hot spot of social. It’s all in alignment.
Twitter lets you opt out. Delete every salesperson, if you want. Makes sense to me.
–Chris…
Chris Brogan…´s last blog ..Why I Promote the HELL out of Thesis
Still seems to run counter to the base concept of Twitter and genuine conversations to me. It is a tool, yes. But aren’t we skating well beyond the “genuine” aspect that makes Twitter work?
But I do certainly appreciate your input Chris!
Steve
Ditto to everything Chris said. I’m on the IZEA board as well, fyi. I did a sponsored tweet today to test the system out and of course it was clearly marked as such. Then, after I did it, I tweeted that I did it and asked if anyone cared. A few people unfollowed, but the majority didn’t really care.
Use Twitter as you wish. Follow or unfollow anyone as you wish. What Chris said.
By the way, I chose to do a tweet about something that was related to me and my world and my followers and would have been something I would have tweeted anyway.
To answer your question you now have… would I tweet about something just to get paid if it was unrelated to me and my biz and followers? No, of course not.
Sponsored Tweets are going to get enormous negative attention. They will be mocked and blocked, despised and decried. If they survive, however, it’s likely that they will find a place in the social media world. But that’s a big IF.
To all: There is no “basic idea” of Twiter, or social media for that matter. Twitter started when Biz/Ev needed an SMS compatible solution for project management. It’s evolved over time and an alpha-beta community uses it.
I remember my days as an exec @ Yahoo, when we famously said, “we’ll NEVER accept sponsored search. It is church and state!” — A few years later, we bought Overture for a billion bucks in an effort to catch up with Google.
There are several types of social media contributors: Hobbyists, Professionals and Marketeers (spammers). Sponsored Tweets could be utilized by Professionals and I’m pretty agnostic about disclosure — because if you pimp products you don’t use just to make an affiliate commission, it will show and you’ll lose your following. If, on the other hand, you spend all day contributing to the stream and never make a dime, you’ll quit someday when you finally realize that the whole thing is a waste of your precious time. Consider the fact that well over nine out of ten blogs are abandoned within a year.
I think it is crap that Brogan gets any push-back on using affiliate links to get a little commiss when he reviews a product (that he sincerely loves). He deserves it. He is contributing to thousands of people’s growth on the platform.
Remember – romantic notions about any tech platform are fruitless. Who knows exactly WHAT social media’s real purpose is.
Tim Sanders´s last blog ..Twitter Tuesday Thoughts, Volume 7
I am very against sponsored tweets and Jim I was one of the guys that unfollowed you. I have to question if making a few cents using this will cost you customers or contacts when you are pushing something of your own product later on. Odds are I will never see that product since I am no longer following you on twitter.
Vinny O’Hare´s last blog ..Getting Ready For Affiliate Summit
Chris, Steve, and Jim:
I think what we’re seeing here is simply the transition of advertising, or paid programming, across a new medium.
While I utilize Twitter for finding great people to interact with that have things in common with me, I am in no way under the impression that all (or any) of those relationships are any more authentic than those developed on other social media platforms (Blogs, Facebook, Tumblr et. al.)
There will always be need for companies to reach out to potential customers and as the “eyeballs” move, so to must the advertising in order to generate a suitable ROI. Right now, as Chris pointed out, the “eyeballs” are on Twitter and if that’s where my target market is as a business, then I want to be there! (How I should be on Twitter, advertising versus engaging, is another discussion)
For those who appreciate the current Twitter environment, while we would be naive to suggest that it is free from bias, at bare minimum Sponsored Tweets at lease provides some transparency in the advertising.
It is ultimately up to the Tweeters themselves to decide if they wish to utilize this service at the possible expense to their personal or business brand.
Tyler McKinna´s last blog ..nhldigest: RT @leaderpost @CFLDigest Saskatchewan Roughriders’ Scott Schultz announces retirement from #CFL http://tinyurl.com/ldw4u9
Should people use this? I guess it’s up to them. Will they? I think so.
I’ve had some very mixed feelings about this topic. I posted on my blog, which I liked to with my name on this comment.
It seems a lot of people have different opinions on this as can be seen in the comments. I think that there is one important point, that while many of us, in this “social media for business” space, use twitter very differently from the greater population on twitter. I don’t think this service is for us, and that’s fine. Twitter allows you to opt in to whatever you want, and you can opt out just as quickly.
The question I think that will determine the success of Ted Murphy and Sponsored Tweets, is will people buy into this system? Or will it cause people to unfollow those who post sponsored tweets and ultimately reduce the value of such a service to the point where it is no longer worth offering?
It’s to be seen…
@DavidSpinks
David Spinks´s last blog ..Will Sponsored Tweets Survive?
Who are (some) of you people?
I don’t mean in the literal sense, but the figurative one. If you are a groomed marketing person, than you understand that with every provided value there comes a price. Typically online, the price is some level of ad serving so that said provider of value can keep the lights on. Internet users have turned into Vampires. This whole world we live in is not free. It costs somebody something somewhere on some level. The least we can do is spend 5 seconds of our life looking at an ad, or having an intermittent sponsored tweet.
http://www.evisibility.com/blog/f-u-pay-me-the-internet-is-not-free/
Daniel Redman´s last blog ..‘F-U Pay Me’: the Internet is NOT Free
Vinny, the thing is, you’re a friend, not a customer. I respect you unfollowing me. Some of my greatest friends don’t follow me and we’re still great friends.
I use Twitter for leads, customers and revenue, with socializing thrown in. It makes sense to me that people who disagree with my usage unfollow me, and it’s no big deal.
@ Daniel Redman. I’m a marketer with 18+ years of experience, both traditional and emerging, just to answer your question.
With regards the whole sponsored tweet thing, personally I’m not a fan of it. Okay, you can unfollow anyone that gets too annoying with it, but is that really a great option? Can’t there be a filter offered by IZEA or any other marketing company to avoid ads if wished? Or would that simply stop advertisers seeing the system as attractive?
I do feel there’s a difference between sponsored tweets and paid advertising on blogs – kinda like a conversation and background noise at a party. Sidebar ads or 125×125 banner ads are like background conversation; you’re aware of them but they’re not ruining the atmosphere. Sponsored tweets are full-on part of the conversation you’re having with other friends and as such have the potential to be annoying as hell.
Just my two cents
Danny Brown´s last blog ..Making the Switch to Headway
I am not a fan of sponsored tweets and don’t see how they can possibly have any value for anyone–tweeter, follower, or brand. I agree with you completely, and I think Chris Brogan’s defense is terribly weak.
“I think that celebrities want the tool.” Celebrities? Are you kidding me? What legitimate celeb would prostitute themselves for a couple bucks a tweet. The Sponsored Tweet site is almost humorous, promoting @AlohaArleen and @danrua as “Web celebrities.” (Will all the people who know these folks and respect what they have to say please hold up their hands? No one?) And if 3rd-rate celebrities want an unethical and wasteful thing, thank heaven Ted Murphy is there to provide it!
“I think business people want the tool.” Brands buying inauthentic discussions and tweets will get their just rewards. Buying tweets is a huge blinking neon sign that says, “My brand can’t earn authentic dialog on Twitter, so we’re just going to buy it.” I am confident brands will be harmed, not helped, by advertising their lack of authenticity in Social Media.
And haven’t we learned anything from TV ads that are skipped by DVR, banner ad filters that remove ads from Web surfing, and the growth if iPods despite the fact hundreds of free music stations are available to consumers across the country? The old interruption, me-focused advertising is dying–this Sponsored Tweets is simply a horrible way to paste an increasingly discredited ad model on to a new medium.
I wrote about Sponsored Blogging on my blog recently. Here’s why I think it’s wrong for brands:
http://www.experiencetheblog.com/2009/07/why-izea-is-wrong-for-absolutely.html
Great post. I hope marketers are listening!
Augie Ray´s last blog ..My Paid Blog Post on the Forrester Blog
Danny, good points.
I don’t necessarily think that Sponsored Tweets as it exists today will be the end all be all for offering this type of ad product on twitter. But, let’s take a look at the big picture for a second. Whether or not you agree with sponsored tweets; we need it. We need the ability to monetize and self regulate quality. The stigma associated will iron themselves out if the people that are pulling the strings (us) do a reasonable job of managing users expectations. Think in terms of (marketers) us versus them (users). In order for publishers to continue innovating, building, delivering content the issue of monetization needs to be addressed. Very little attention is paid to the twin social towers of the internet struggling to reel in any substantial revenue. If the Myspace’s of the world cant make it, then what chance does a start up Q/A platform like sowhatnow.com have? Stimulating content creation is at the center of all things that make our world tick. I could go on an on… but you get where I’m going.
Daniel Redman´s last blog ..‘F-U Pay Me’: the Internet is NOT Free
Augie – you disagree that celebrities do endorsements? Wow! I want to be on that planet. 50 cent doesn’t pimp vitamin water? Tiger Woods isn’t selling… well, everything? That’s part of their celebrity is the opportunity to do promotions. I’m scratching my head to think of celebrities who don’t do some kind of endorsement.
Your business rebuttal is a PR rebuttal. The whole paid-vs-earned media thing. You point out a few brands to me who aren’t paying for advertising. And then I’ll tell you if I’ve ever heard of them.
I’m going to agree to disagree with you.
Chris Brogan…´s last blog ..Why I Promote the HELL out of Thesis
Danny Brown: Your point that sidebars and banners on a blog are different than an ad right in the middle of a conversation is a strong one. The ad as a part of conversation takes me back to Amway.
Chris Brogan – Your point about brands who don’t pay for advertising in rebuttal to Augie is absolute truth. Paid advertising is still the backbone of brand identity. After all you have said (and inspired me to post about), social media doesn’t replace traditional, it is merely a next step. In that regard I still see social media – especially a platform like Twitter – as something that can extend a brand through personal relationships and genuine endorsements. I wonder if a well followed Tweeter who suddenly starts sprinkling in several paid versions will start to build a semblance of distrust? And that’s something David Spinks points out as well. How quickly will a point of diminishing return arise?
Jim Kukral – “I chose to do a tweet about something that was related to me and my followers and would have been something I would have tweeted anyway.” At what point might we start to wonder? I don’t doubt that you are genuine in that comment. I just wonder when a series of paid tweets start to lead to questions among people who previously followed you in high regard?
Tyler – You make some outstanding points about the evolution of advertising across mediums and whether or not it’s easy to see how “real” many of these relationships are. I’m an advertising guy so I certainly get and believe fully in the concept and importance and evolution of paid advertising, like finding new ways to beat the DVR skim in TV. I’m just not sold on the idea melding in with the way Twitter currently works.
Danny B. – Hmmm, I wonder if you can get Coca Cola to “turn-off” all of those bilboards, posters, commercials (which are by the way a HUGE noise in the middle of your favorite shows), etc.? Now for a seasoned off-line and on-line marketer like yourself surely you have a better argument against sponsored content (and tweets). Because your ‘wish’ for an OFF switch was ridiculous.
Augie – OF course there is value for brands in sponsored content!!! It’s already been proven, brands have seen great returns and the numbers are staggering (Ted shared some with me)!!! The costs are staggering too but obviously worth it. So that argument is over. I would say that the whole Tivo (no commercials thing) is not a glaring victory over commercials. And that iTunes is so popular becuase the hardware is sexy. I personally listen to Internet radio AND watch commercials on TV like the large majority of the population, with no complaints.
Brogan – Cheers!
Redman – YDM!
Miguel´s last blog ..Duplicate Content – Who Cares?
Help me Steve. I’m still looking for this genuine and transparent Twitter utopia that you’re talking about. For instance, how many of the top Tweeters openly employ ghost writers to to maintain their feeds? Loads of celebrities do it. The venerable Guy Kawasaki does it and he has over a 150K followers currently.
I don’t know if the “transparency” argument holds water. The very nature of the Sponsored Tweet platform epitomizes the idea of transparency through clear and mandated disclosure. No?
Disclosure: I am a personal friend of Ted Murphy and work at MindComet, which is owned by Ted Murphy. However, my opinions are solely owned by me (and sometimes my wife).
Jeremy Hilton´s last blog ..Get your S**T together Twitter!
Jeremy- I’m sure the transparency thing is quite a bit more opaque when it comes to the world of big time celebrity. Probably why I don’t see any value in following them to begin with. And why I don’t even think of Twitter and the value it can add to a business or personal life in terms of following celebrities. So you’re right that I shouldn’t generalize all of Twitter, or social media, to be based on transparency. Maybe I should qualify those statements by noting that the real value comes from being transparent in connecting genuinely with people. And that said, I’m not yet convinced of long term value from a “conversation” that, on one side, has a payment attached to it.
“At what point might we start to wonder?”
Steve, they’ll ALWAYS be labeled as an ad, that’s how you’ll know. The sponsored tweet system will not let you tweet without disclosure, it’s impossible.
“I just wonder when a series of paid tweets start to lead to questions among people who previously followed you in high regard?”
Right, that’s a risk I have to take right?
Steve – I also don’t find value in celebrity Twitter accounts and just like you, generally choose not to follow them. That’s the beauty of Twitter.
To echo the sentiment of your first commenter, your inherent ability, as a Twitter user, to opt-in and opt-out is how you can express your disdain for Sponsored Tweets. At the end of the day, the freedom to unfollow is the only thing that will protect your Twitterverse and guarantee an unspoiled timeline. This tactic is infinitely more effective than publicly admonishing Ted Murphy and trying to scare away advertisers.
Speaking of Ted Murphy bashing, I recall the outrage from a few years ago when PayPerPost was launched. There were hordes of bloggers screaming that Ted Murphy threatened the blogosphere as a whole. To quote one blog – “The PayPerPost model poses a serious threat to the very thing that gives blogs their power.”
Can anyone point me to some figures that show that the predictions of three years ago have come to fruition? I think not. In fact, the blogosphere is as strong as ever. And in a year from now, people will be able to look back and safely say that Ted Murphy didn’t kill Twitter either.
The rampant criticism amounts to nothing more than chicken-littleism. Which not coincidentally, has attracted a lot of traffic to some notable and not-so-notable blogs.
Jeremy Hilton´s last blog ..Get your S**T together Twitter!
Jeremy- I want to stress that I have no intent on bashing Ted Murphy, nor do I believe as some fervent bloggers do that this is somehow “the end of Twitter as we know it.” That IS chicken-little shit, as you note! Our purposes here on this blog are more focused on points pertaining to smaller businesses and what makes the most sense for them in terms of social media marketing, as well as traditional media (where paid advertising is most definitely the thing).
You and Brogan and Jim and a couple of others are absolutely correct in that any given Tweeter has the power to simply unfollow when annoyed by paid Tweets. I’m not suggesting that Izea should turn tail and run in shame. I’m expressing an opinion that I believe is this runs counter to the best purposes of a smaller business building a connected community of followers/customers.
This is a crossroad. Let me first say, I am still finding my way through this topic of sponsorship. However bleeding sales at heart, and believing in the capitalist aspect that our country was built on, I find it impossible to believe that these tools of social marketing cannot be directly monetized.
I have worked in the traditional media field for over a decade and peeking through the looking glass toward the future is dim. More so for the short sightedness than other aspects but I have to agree with Jeremy and Daniel. I believe it is inevitable! It’s rare that I’ve attended a cocktail party and not had someone “sell” their business to me!
Steve and I have discussed the applied nature of “free” information as a necessity in the social arena. I agree, but the realities of what business owners are crying out for can’t be denied. Becoming a resource, utilizing your website, and, by extension, your blog – which is opinion – can create you as an “expert”. But come on, this wildly growing tree needs trimming to see what sculpture lies beneath. At some point a business – a business owner – needs to be shown how their time investment will produce money! Conducting business in the ecomony we currently find ourselves in….Well, all I hear from business owners is “show me how this can bring in money!”
Believing that Twitter will be transparent and pure for the purpose just isn’t realistic. I do believe however that valuable, real connections can be made…especially locally. But if someone chooses to invest time for profit, so be it. Discontinue to follow them! Then there’s the core of believing all is transparent on Twitter. Who are you really talking to? Do you know?
We are chasing drops of water over a waterfall pretending we know where it will land. As long as disclosure is included we know what we’re dealing with. I think the essence of social marketing/networking is ever evolving and the right to monetize it is…Amercian. (Did I say that out loud?)
Catherine´s last blog ..And Now a Tweet, Brought to You By…
Some like it, most don’t. Some will unfollow, most won’t.
Catherine adds more good points in the mix – coming from the perspective of selling advertising in traditional media and dealing regularly with small business owners.
Without question any business who is utilizing any form of media – be it traditional or social – is doing so with a goal of ROI. With regard to Twitter specifically there has been an almost constant debate and/or commentary on how-to-measure or can-you-measure ROI in that space. My point is that Twitter is just one tool among the mix at the disposal of a business, each of which needs to be used to best maximize what a given tool does best. Twitter’s best use is that of being a part of building open and genuine interaction and relationships with people. People who in some cases are already, or might soon be, customers.
So when Twitter is utilized in this way it earns trust which can definitely result in being monetized. Something that happens indirectly or organically. As opposed to the idea of constantly trying to simply tout one’s wares, or the notion of tweets amidst a “conversation” that are actually being paid for.
I don’t believe that a business owner shouldn’t want to make money while Tweeting and connecting, just as I don’t believe that the very notion of Izea setting up Sponsored Tweets will lead to the downfall of the platform (as some blogs tout). Instead I simply believe that the best way to use THIS particular tool is to connect by being real, being a listener, and providing some value. The ROI comes as a result of being those things – along with, of course, having an excellent product and service.
Such smashing information connecting to this good post would be used by freelance writers , I am sure.
Very cool site, but you must improve your template graphics.