There are certain words I try not to use on Twitter.
You might expect that this is down to a self imposed code of standards - like not swearing, or not discussing politics - but that's not the case.
I avoid certain words/phrases to save myself the time & effort of blocking the spam sales followers and tweets that they attract.
Here's my top 5 to avoid:
SEO
Golf
iPhone
Apple
Digital marketing
I suppose a tweet like this:
"Digital marketing for apple iphone at golf clubs improves SEO"
May become popular for follower collectors!
Which words do you avoid?
Monday, 24 May 2010
Thursday, 13 May 2010
Twitter 101
I make no apologies for this post.
Has it been said elsewhere, by other people? Frequently!
Are people that are new to Twitter the only ones that need to take notice? Sadly not!
6 golden rules to tweet by:
1. If you want to be retweeted verbatim, don't use up all 140 characters in your original tweet. Up to 100 is great, 120 is ok.
2. Shorten your web links. Filling a tweet full of web address means you have less room to talk.
3. Asking for people to "DM me for details" limits who can respond to you to just the people you follow. Or, you have to open your DMs to anyone and that can lead to LOTS of spam.
4. People really, really, really dislike automatically generated DMs appearing in their inbox when they follow you. Just because you "can" do it doesn't mean you "should" do it!
5. Interact, don't just broadcast. Social media is exactly what is says on the tin - social! Like any form of networking, you get more out of it the more you put in.
6. Don't be an egg. Take half a minute to upload a picture or logo
Has it been said elsewhere, by other people? Frequently!
Are people that are new to Twitter the only ones that need to take notice? Sadly not!
6 golden rules to tweet by:
1. If you want to be retweeted verbatim, don't use up all 140 characters in your original tweet. Up to 100 is great, 120 is ok.
2. Shorten your web links. Filling a tweet full of web address means you have less room to talk.
3. Asking for people to "DM me for details" limits who can respond to you to just the people you follow. Or, you have to open your DMs to anyone and that can lead to LOTS of spam.
4. People really, really, really dislike automatically generated DMs appearing in their inbox when they follow you. Just because you "can" do it doesn't mean you "should" do it!
5. Interact, don't just broadcast. Social media is exactly what is says on the tin - social! Like any form of networking, you get more out of it the more you put in.
6. Don't be an egg. Take half a minute to upload a picture or logo
Sunday, 2 May 2010
5 excuses not to use social media
1. I don't have time.
Do you make time to go to network meetings? Or to design a leaflet? Then you can make time to "do" social media. Take a long thin slice through your week. Now you have time.
2. I don't know what to say.
Remember those network meetings & marketing leaflets you make time for? Use those as a basis for your initial few weeks. You know your business and the questions people want answers to. You have a lot to say. Your problem could, in fact, be selecting what to use!
3. My customers don't use Twitter/Facebook/LinkedIn etc
Perhaps it's true that your current customers don't use social media. How many more do use it? More to the point, how many people that can refer you to new customers use it? Do you know, or are you guessing? How many of your competitors are ahead of you?
4. It's too risky & uncontrolled
So is all networking, you're just used to the ways of managing the risk in the more traditional formats. Transfer what you already know into the new arena.
5. There's no evidence social media works
Yes - there is. Quite a lot of it in fact! There are whole blog sites literally groaning under the weight of evidence. Good places to start are sites like Unmarketing and Social Media Today.
Do you make time to go to network meetings? Or to design a leaflet? Then you can make time to "do" social media. Take a long thin slice through your week. Now you have time.
2. I don't know what to say.
Remember those network meetings & marketing leaflets you make time for? Use those as a basis for your initial few weeks. You know your business and the questions people want answers to. You have a lot to say. Your problem could, in fact, be selecting what to use!
3. My customers don't use Twitter/Facebook/LinkedIn etc
Perhaps it's true that your current customers don't use social media. How many more do use it? More to the point, how many people that can refer you to new customers use it? Do you know, or are you guessing? How many of your competitors are ahead of you?
4. It's too risky & uncontrolled
So is all networking, you're just used to the ways of managing the risk in the more traditional formats. Transfer what you already know into the new arena.
5. There's no evidence social media works
Yes - there is. Quite a lot of it in fact! There are whole blog sites literally groaning under the weight of evidence. Good places to start are sites like Unmarketing and Social Media Today.
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
Save the clicks!
I used to advocate the "3 click rule"
Well, it's not really a "rule" - but it was the guidance that I used to give my Internet and HTML students back when I used to be a University Lecturer.
In those days of antiquity (Way back in 1997!) there was this emerging beast of opportunity called "The Internet". I used to teach the technical aspects of incorporating sound and video into this stunning new pool of information. In order to do that I had to touch on web site design. I'm not a graphic designer. I can't draw and my colour co-ordination is dreadful! By "design" I mean navigation etiquette and functionality.
Before the advent of reliable drop down menus and style sheets, we relied on frames (shudder) and other such delights. Everything was designed with dial-up access in mind. Streaming was still in it's infancy. Getting your customer from your front page to the place they needed to be required intense research and more knowledge of how people think and interact than perhaps some designers were used to.
In order to focus the minds of my students on this aspect I introduced the concept of "3 clicks to anywhere". So - how is this relevant in today's highly functional and automated information "cloud"?
Let's take Twitter as an example.
I love seeing what people are linking to and reading the fascinating information that is all around us. That's what makes Twitter great. The interaction of people and the sharing of knowledge, information and opinions. However, like a lot of internet users I'm a little impatient and want this treasure trove to be easily accessible.
Consider this chain of "clicks" that was required to get to a destination full of lovely information:
Original tweet >> Twitlonger >> Facebook >> Facebook "warning page" >> Information (5 clicks)
This is particularly frustrating on a mobile phone as the response time can be a lot slower on GPRS if no WiFi is available. My "3 click rule" is 2 clicks too long nowadays!
Let's start thinking about our readers again. Make life interesting and easy for them and they'll keep coming back. You've gone to all the time and effort of gathering your "twibe" around you. now it's time to look after them properly!
Well, it's not really a "rule" - but it was the guidance that I used to give my Internet and HTML students back when I used to be a University Lecturer.
In those days of antiquity (Way back in 1997!) there was this emerging beast of opportunity called "The Internet". I used to teach the technical aspects of incorporating sound and video into this stunning new pool of information. In order to do that I had to touch on web site design. I'm not a graphic designer. I can't draw and my colour co-ordination is dreadful! By "design" I mean navigation etiquette and functionality.
Before the advent of reliable drop down menus and style sheets, we relied on frames (shudder) and other such delights. Everything was designed with dial-up access in mind. Streaming was still in it's infancy. Getting your customer from your front page to the place they needed to be required intense research and more knowledge of how people think and interact than perhaps some designers were used to.
In order to focus the minds of my students on this aspect I introduced the concept of "3 clicks to anywhere". So - how is this relevant in today's highly functional and automated information "cloud"?
Let's take Twitter as an example.
I love seeing what people are linking to and reading the fascinating information that is all around us. That's what makes Twitter great. The interaction of people and the sharing of knowledge, information and opinions. However, like a lot of internet users I'm a little impatient and want this treasure trove to be easily accessible.
Consider this chain of "clicks" that was required to get to a destination full of lovely information:
Original tweet >> Twitlonger >> Facebook >> Facebook "warning page" >> Information (5 clicks)
This is particularly frustrating on a mobile phone as the response time can be a lot slower on GPRS if no WiFi is available. My "3 click rule" is 2 clicks too long nowadays!
Let's start thinking about our readers again. Make life interesting and easy for them and they'll keep coming back. You've gone to all the time and effort of gathering your "twibe" around you. now it's time to look after them properly!
Monday, 12 April 2010
Is it wrong to Fweet?
Fweet being the new mashup for Fake Tweet apparently.
There has been a spirited debate in my Twitter stream lately about whether it is "ethical" to have someone tweet for you rather than run your own feed. Some people are vehemently against it, likening it to have someone else attend a network meeting in your stead. Others are more relaxed. It's certainly made me think about it.
I run Twitter feeds for clients. The look, tone and content is guided by the client, but I have leeway to build relationships with other companies within the feed. I won't offer opinions on behalf of the company unless I have checked with the client first. I don't feel that this specific sort of feed is ethically wrong. Many companies are represented by an employee rather than "the boss" on Twitter and I'm just outsourcing that service.
Then there is the other side of the issue. Tweeting for another individual.
Is it "OK" for a Celebrity or a Captain of Industry to hire someone to pretend to their fans to be them? I don't think it is. That's misrepresentation isn't it? Also against the T&C of Twitter?
I've concluded that if you outsource your tweets as a company that's OK. Anyone within that company could potentially be the nominated tweeter and the feed is not purporting to authored by an individual.
Pretending to be a Celeb... Not my scene!
There has been a spirited debate in my Twitter stream lately about whether it is "ethical" to have someone tweet for you rather than run your own feed. Some people are vehemently against it, likening it to have someone else attend a network meeting in your stead. Others are more relaxed. It's certainly made me think about it.
I run Twitter feeds for clients. The look, tone and content is guided by the client, but I have leeway to build relationships with other companies within the feed. I won't offer opinions on behalf of the company unless I have checked with the client first. I don't feel that this specific sort of feed is ethically wrong. Many companies are represented by an employee rather than "the boss" on Twitter and I'm just outsourcing that service.
Then there is the other side of the issue. Tweeting for another individual.
Is it "OK" for a Celebrity or a Captain of Industry to hire someone to pretend to their fans to be them? I don't think it is. That's misrepresentation isn't it? Also against the T&C of Twitter?
I've concluded that if you outsource your tweets as a company that's OK. Anyone within that company could potentially be the nominated tweeter and the feed is not purporting to authored by an individual.
Pretending to be a Celeb... Not my scene!
Wednesday, 24 March 2010
Hyper marketing
One of the reasons I wanted to start my own business was so I could steer by my own moral compass.
I believe in offering what's required to a customer in preference to selling them a service they don't need, but would make me more money. Lately my belief in that position has been sorely tested.
I've seen companies charging huge fees for hours and hours of training on sites such as Twitter. It seems popular, assuming that the courses are full and run every time they are advertised to do so!
Having spent many years in education, I know that the end benefits for the customers are less than if they had attended a series of shorter, less expensive 1-2-1 tutorials.
Don't get me wrong. Many group training sessions are very well run and provide an excellent introduction to Social Media. It's the ones that test the boundaries of credibility as well as the customers' finances that I'm talking about here. (think 4 figure fees!)
So - why are the overly expensive, extremely extended, group training courses preferable to a lot of customers over bespoke 1-2-1 sessions? Here lies my dilemma. I perceive the difference to be hyped up marketing.
Is this something I really want to try?
I'd love more business so let's see what it might sound like:
"Maximise your client engagement using Ariadne's proven 6 steps to credible interaction and improved product uptake. The three days that will change how you do business forever! Now only £1500!"
Would you buy that? Because I'm not at all sure that I want to sell it!
I believe in offering what's required to a customer in preference to selling them a service they don't need, but would make me more money. Lately my belief in that position has been sorely tested.
I've seen companies charging huge fees for hours and hours of training on sites such as Twitter. It seems popular, assuming that the courses are full and run every time they are advertised to do so!
Having spent many years in education, I know that the end benefits for the customers are less than if they had attended a series of shorter, less expensive 1-2-1 tutorials.
Don't get me wrong. Many group training sessions are very well run and provide an excellent introduction to Social Media. It's the ones that test the boundaries of credibility as well as the customers' finances that I'm talking about here. (think 4 figure fees!)
So - why are the overly expensive, extremely extended, group training courses preferable to a lot of customers over bespoke 1-2-1 sessions? Here lies my dilemma. I perceive the difference to be hyped up marketing.
Is this something I really want to try?
I'd love more business so let's see what it might sound like:
"Maximise your client engagement using Ariadne's proven 6 steps to credible interaction and improved product uptake. The three days that will change how you do business forever! Now only £1500!"
Would you buy that? Because I'm not at all sure that I want to sell it!
Tuesday, 16 March 2010
Hacked and Phished are different!
Short post about a pet peeve of mine.
Many folks on Twitter have recently posted "Sorry - was hacked - all ok now" or similar.
Truth is this - they were NOT hacked.
They gave their details away, voluntarily, to a phishing scam. This is quite different to having someone hack your ID and password unaided - or indeed deliberately breach the security of the hosting service.
When you give your details away, however inadvertantly, you have been phished.
If you click on a link within Twitter that then requires your ID and password to "log in" again the chances are high that it's a dodgy link. Think before you type.
Many folks on Twitter have recently posted "Sorry - was hacked - all ok now" or similar.
Truth is this - they were NOT hacked.
They gave their details away, voluntarily, to a phishing scam. This is quite different to having someone hack your ID and password unaided - or indeed deliberately breach the security of the hosting service.
When you give your details away, however inadvertantly, you have been phished.
If you click on a link within Twitter that then requires your ID and password to "log in" again the chances are high that it's a dodgy link. Think before you type.
