CATEGORIES
- WEB STARTUPS
- CONFERENCES
- WEB JOBS
- MICROSOFT
- INTERVIEWS
- VIDEO
- AMAZON
- ALL TOPICS
CONTRIBUTORS
When Does a Social Network Become a “Publicity Network”?
Update: New post: Is Scribd a Porn Document Network?
Over the last week or so, Robert Scoble has mentioned several times that Facebook currently limits him to 5,000 "friends" and that the limit should be lifted. If we check his Twitter account, currently he has 6,500 friends. This discussion is not specifically about Robert but since he is the most vocal, I will use him as the post example. While Robert "friends" everyone who friends him, can he really follow each person’s conversation? With 6,000 people on Twitter, let’s assume 10% are active and post 3 messages a day, that’s 1800 messages per day to keep track of, not taking into account sleep/work/family time. I do see Robert reply to some messages on Twitter (no idea about Facebook) which is great, but is Twitter really more of a publicity networking tool for Robert rather than a social network (one which he uses very efficiently)?
When we look at accounts such as the Mashable twitter account, it’s clear that it is a publicity network. Pete posts only the new posts on Mashable and no conversation. I post many of my interesting pieces on Twitter. On Facebook we have companies such as Ticketmaster using it too as a publicity network. Jeremiah has a lengthy discussion about using Twitter as a social media tool.
A social networking tool becomes a publicity tool when "I speak, you speak, I reply, you reply" becomes "I speak, you listen".
Are these new publicity networks (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) the new press release? Think about it for a second, a press release is sent out to x journalists, news providers, etc. These new publicity networks do the same thing except in a quicker, more efficient way. In fact, Marshall over at RWW says these publicity networks are paying his rent. Naturally I am not suggesting that everyone uses these networks in a publicity-oriented manner, but it seems many of the smart marketers are doing so. As long as the people attached to your account (personal or business) understand that’s the use, then it’s a perfect marketing opportunity. In fact, these publicity networks may just overtake RSS in the long-term. And if you are working with a social media consultant who isn’t leveraging these new publicity networks where appropriate, you need to find a new consultant.
I think they should let people have more than 5,000 friends because what is the person supposed to do, create a new facebook account and double post everything (if they’re even allowed). I could be wrong but I rarely see posts from Scoble on facebook these days but I do read the changes in status. I think the more friends you have the less you’re able to keep track of them but I have 200 friends and find it difficult to keep track of them, especially those I don’t know. Even though it is a one to many model it’s still so much more interactive than traditional publicity models. I’ve actually communicated with real celebrities (the hollywood kind) through myspace, you’d be surprised. Granted this happened more frequently when I was actually on myspace and before the huge growth they experienced last year. Scoble is actually one of the smartest and most fair Twitter and Facebook users, he follows more people than he follows and often replies to his specific messages. Sorry this comment is so long!
i think that this usage of the Mashable twitter by Mashable is clearly the way things will move from ad/newsletter to social embedded stuff…
should check out vside.com and doppelganger.com most rubbish “3d environment for teens” just a marketing/advertising service they don’t give much of a care about any of the users they are just pawns for all they care. like this says, these things become just a publicity and advertising scheme while mostly treating the users or community in a rubbish bureaucratic way.
This should be another trend. Nothing more i could see in a longer term, until unless its brought out by some big web giants.
http://blogkatt.blogspot.com
Can’t we please come up with a term that means what it says. There’s nothing “social” about having 6,000+ “friends”. It would be like a pop star calling his fans “friends” when clearly they are not.
Hi Allen, I wrote about this over the summer when Robert asked if Facebook was the new press release, http://www.briansolis.com/2007/07/robert-scoble-asks-is-facebook-new.html
Twitter, Facebook, and other social networks are a new forum to share information, but it’s such a fine line between a pitch, spam, and news.
While I don’t think social networks are the new press release, I do believe that they are “new wire services” however a la BusinessWire and PRNewswire – just to different groups of people.
I made this point in a post regarding a statement made by Winer (ironically, debating Scoble) that people with a lot of “friends” may be more trustworthy than those with a few. As I said there, that number is an “audience”, not “friends”. I love ya, Robert, but I’m one of your Facebook friends – and if you’ve ever read a single post or visited my page, I’d be extremely surprised. I certainly would never expect you to contact me when you’re in my area – but I would, if you were a friend. I would never expect to be invited to your house when I’m in your area, either. And that, to me, makes all the difference. It’s not a matter of being “in” or not, or liked or not, it’s simply a matter of time.
(Sorry, WAY too many typos above but I should at least correct this one: Scoble.)
It’s all publicity. Whether you’re Perez Hilton or a MyFace loser trying to get anyone to watch their band’s AWESOME VIDEO!!!!!
Doesn’t matter what the new social media toy of the moment is, it’ll be taken over soon enough by someone like Coke or Pepsi trying to sell something to the rest of the users. How many brands have their own MySpace and YouTube pages?
As for what I see on Twitter, seems like everyone posts links to things they think are interesting for the most part. Not sure there’s only one way to use it. At least you can decide to follow who you want and not be hit up with requests to “Check out my friend’s band!”
Scobel already had enough of a following, so naturally they would migrate to Twitter. It’s not like the guy’s begging everyone to add him. It’s courtesy for the most part, but he doesn’t have to do it.
Jumping on Scobel though for PR tactics? Consider Seth Godin. Follows nobody, people follow him. Every tweet has a link to something–which links back first through his website so he gets the traffic. No updates about daily life as you might see from pretty much everyone else on Twitter, who for the most part, do rspond to others and engage in conversation.
TO each his own though. Lots of uses, like I said.
Besides, as a tech guy, I would expect Twitter to be the kind of space he’d live in and tell readers about. There are a whole bunch of agencies and consultants talking about social media sites that don’t even know how to spell Twitter, let alone use it. I find out about what’s new from either friends or a Scobel, Kawasaki. As long as people find out, doesn’t matter who they heard it from.
What about political candidates like a Barak Obama though? At last count, 5,013 following him. Certainly, their intentions are less genuine when trying to be wherever potential voters are in MySpace, Twitter, etc.
By the way, how was the traffic on this post after Scobel mentioned it on Twitter? Good, bad?
;-p
I have been blogging this week on the same thread, although my argument is not with does someone have time.. it is more a matter of trust. Real Social networks, the kind that yield social power, lead to change, and are what we all wish to tap into are built on trust.. give and take.. a true relationship.. something that I have yet to see be created and maintained only using tools like facebook and twitter. Most of the time, our trusting friends have had a moment to get to know us.. face to face.. You will find links and more discussion on this at my blog site:
http://lead2020.blogspot.com/
You are right. Tweets will become the new press releases and the Twittersphere will become the “heads-up” news arena. Have posted as such recently. http://tinyurl.com/3yvw3b
As with any limited resource, we all make choices how to make best use of our time. With something like Twitter, Robert and many others have shown that there are ways to get the most out of the technology to converse with and/or publicise to a micro-blogging-friendly audience. We all make choices about which conversations to follow by sharing our pet interests (may be a type of publicity), subject relevance, author credibility, historical interest, serendipity (something unexpected that strikes a chord with us), and the ‘quickly scanned but pretty much ignored category’. I’d be interested to know what sort of time proportions these would work out at for someone like Robert.
The reason they are not “the new press release” is that this is too simplistic – not everyone is a geek, yet anyway. It assumes Twitter offers a well-targetted audience for your publicity (be it customers, influencers, bloggers, media), and that this format is the best one for communicating the publicity message (other than “look at my publicity message here” where the above factors all apply, except that you loose a significant proportion by asking for a click). I don’t beleive this is the case. Certainly at this point, its worth some experimentation.
I certainly don’t mind folks posting the link to their latest posting, or whatever. If it sounds interesting, I’m likely to click on the link, rather than wait for the next time I try to plow through 500 headings in my feed reader.
The nice thing about Twitter, you can always unsubscribe if someone is too self-promotional, without providing any entertainment, insight, usefulness, companionship, etc.
Twitter (and similar networks) allow us a blend of both. I use Twitter to point attention at things I find interesting, including my own posts, and I use it to communicate with others. I use it for brief actions of attention-focusing, like asking a bunch of friends to check out a new post by someone I find interesting, and I use it for communication.
I don’t think it’s either/or, and further, because it’s opt-in, you can cull the folks you find less interesting or too pitchy. Right?
I use Twitterrific. It’s like a chat room to me. Brings me 12 new posts every minute or so. It is VERY possible to keep up with this kind of flow.
And I NEVER miss someone who uses “@scobleizer” in a message because Twitter puts those on my “replies” page which I check every day.
And using the new “Track” feature I can make sure I see everything on a single topic. Like, I can see every message that has “Microsoft” in it.
Thanks for the explanation Robert – I will check out Twitterific – hope they make a pc client! Sounds like you have Twitter down. I guess my simple going to twitter.com isn’t the power user way :)
Twitter works great for a “celebrity” like Scoble who has a platform. He has thousands who follow him and he uses the forum to share ideas. He also reads the random stuff that goes by (not just stuff that talks about him) because he has responded to me about topics.
I tend to post rarely, since I am not a “celeb” I do not want to over twitter those who do follow me. I used it to PR other projects or just to share random stuff. But unlike a press release, key people who have chosen to follow me do read the stuff I post, therefore it can have an impact.
The small format also makes people write in a focused manner, which is not common in a press release.
Twitter does not have mass appeal outside of those who are very active in other social media (most folks do not regularly utilize it), thus it still has limited use in the form of getting info out, so I dispute the press release idea. It is just a new format that is hot right now (think Blogs three years ago). Time will prove out how valuable Twitter will be and how it will be used.
Thanks for your post. You bring up a very good point — something I’ve been thinking about abstractly for a while.
I’ve definitely seen a trend among social networking users to engage in a lot of shameless self-promotion. It’s gotten to the point where I’ve turned off the tweets of many Twitter users.
While I’m not saying that those of us with something to promote should not promote these things, I don’t think tweets or other social networking activities should be based solely around self-promotion. After all, promotional content is the same as advertising, isn’t it? Why would I want to tune into someone’s tweets if all I could expect was a constant stream of advertisements?
The only social networking site I participate in is Twitter and I participate for its social aspects — not its marketing capabilities. I’ve made real friends on Twitter. I’ve also been notified of interesting content elsewhere on the Web by Twitter users. But of the 50+ people I follow on Twitter, not a single one of them posts more self-promotional content than other content.
Fortunately, Twitter and Twitter tools such as Twitterific make it easy to filter out the self-promoters and keep things social.
hehe,i love facebook.
I kept real people I know on facebook therefore I would not go about spamming them with ads. However when I see other social networks that most “friends” I don’t even know in real life, I’m tempted to use these networks for publicity gain. It has been argued that a good way to drive traffic to your site is to create profile on these social networks with a back link to your site.