What Twitter lists have done for me lately

ChecklistA classic ISTJ, I’m a sucker for making lists. To-do lists, chore lists, action items – writing things down helps me organize a plan of attack. Which is why it may surprise you that I’ve done very little with Twitter lists in the few months since the feature was launched. However, I’ve found lists helpful in a few ways and am hoping to experiment with them more in the coming weeks. Here’s where I am:

Geographic Sorting

Twitter use among individuals and small businesses in my area has exploded in the last year. Initially, I followed nearly everyone locally I could find. That included every small restuarant, dry cleaner, college kid, gamer or media outlet. Creating an “Albany” Twitter list has allowed me to corral all of those people in one place without actually having to follow them. I now can focus on only following the local Twitter accounts that really provide me value. They show up in my stream, while I can casually keep tabs on the rest (who I don’t follow directly but follow via my Albany list) by just checking the list every now and then. It’s easy and risk-free for me to add someone to my Albany list; I don’t have to contemplate whether or not I think that person/business adds enough value to follow them.

Reporter and Blogger Pitching

I’ve created a “Pitching” Twitter list that’s comprised of the reporters and bloggers I’m currently pitching on behalf of my clients. The list is private, so only I can see it. It allows me to keep tabs on what’s on the mind of these writers, which can be helpful in generating story angles or even just finding and “in” or a commonality to get a conversation going with them. I also look to see what lists those reporters/bloggers have either created and been added to, and it’s led me to several new outlets that I might have otherwise not known about or considered pitching.

Gauging “Value” of Twitter Accounts

I’m squarely in the camp that number of Twitter followers is in no way correlated with how interesting, useful or worth my time a particular person is. But like most people, I’m still conditioned to look at a big follower count and wonder if someone is a “big deal” or not. With spammy following schemes, it can sometimes be difficult to tell right off the bat if a Twitter user has organically and legitimately grown their following or not. But lists have made that a bit easier (and some believe, even made follower counts irrelevant). If someone has 8,000 followers and is only on 12 lists, then to me that’s an indication that not many people value what that person has to say (auto-follow bots aren’t generally in the habit of putting people on lists, yet). I’m not saying that “value” can be reduced to a simple ratio of followers to lists, but as a “first glance” metric, I’ve found it useful in helping me red flag accounts that I may want to pass on following for the time being.

Twitter lists will continue to evolve and develop, especially since they have already been integrated into third party apps like TweetDeck and Seesmic. I can see lists being extremely useful for events and conferences, for example. Personally, I’m planning to experiment more with private lists to help me sort and keep track of my own Twitter ecosystem, and then also eventually start to follow other people’s lists (why reinvent the wheel?) of useful people in my field. (One of the issues I see with lists right now is that they’re highly personal and not definitive – how many lists of “PR professionals” or “Dawgs fans” are out there right now? Few are likely to be comprehensive and as of right now it’s not possible to merge multiple lists from different Twitter users. But I digress.)

What innovative ways have you been using Twitter lists? Share away in the comments.

Photo via Flickr user numstead

Allan Schoenberg: My Twitter “Patient Zero”

Ever heard of a woman named Mary Mallon? Probably not. But if I said “Typhoid Mary” that might trigger some recognition. Mary Mallon was the index case for typhoid in the US in the early 1900s. She was a healthy carrier of the disease and spread it to at least 53 people before she was forcibly quarantined. Mary Mallon was the American typhoid epidemic’s Patient Zero.

For me, Allan Schoenberg played a similar role, but without the fever and malaise. I consider him to be my Twitter index case. (Stick with me here.)

I spent the first several months on Twitter not doing much. I followed a few people I knew from “real life” and a few who were into Georgia football. I didn’t even really think of it a professional networking medium at the onset. At some point, though, I caught the Twitter bug and from that point things changed dramatically. And I can trace that moment back to Allan.

It was about this time last year when I was working on putting together a photo book of pictures from my trip to Iceland. I tweeted about it and got a random @ reply from Allan commenting on how great Iceland was and how much he loved it when he had visited earlier in the year. I followed him back and checked out his profile, where I saw that he had a pretty sweet job as director of communications for CME Group. We continued to chat via Twitter throughout the next few weeks about everything from movies to beer (good beer) to the economic situation in Iceland.

Allan  Schoenberg and Amy MengelAllan was my conduit to the Twitter PR and communications world. Recognizing that he was pretty interesting guy with an interesting job in my field, I figured that I’d probably enjoy following some of his other Twitter pals. I began looking to see who he was following and unabashedly started poaching his network. This led me to people like Mike Pilarz, Arik Hanson, Matt Batt and Lauren Fernandez. They led me to others like David Mullen, Kellye Crane, Chuck Hemann and Scott Hepburn. And it just kept proliferating.

Today, I consider Allan and that initial group tops among my trusted colleagues, confidants and advisors. In the year since that first tweet about Iceland, I’ve started this blog and my consulting business, founded Social Media Breakfast Tech Valley, and forged what I consider to be lifelong friendships as well as professional alliances with people from Twitter. I’ve had the opportunity to meet most of my closest Twitter friends in person, despite the fact that they all live in far-flung places. Allan even got me a tour of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange when I was visited last spring.

So in the spirit of those Bud Light “Real Men of Genius” ads (though Allan would rightly never drink Bud Light):

I salute you, Mr. Twitter Uber-connector Index Case of Networking Genius Guy. Thanks.

Whose your Twitter Patient Zero?

Facebook etiquette: To delete, or not to delete?

The following is a guest post from Lindsay M. Allen, a PR and communications pro from central Michigan. I’ve had the pleasure of connecting with her on Twitter and meeting her a few times in person this year. Enjoy. -AM

This post has been brewing for awhile — too long, really (and I bet Amy won’t disagree … ha ha ha). It started when I noticed a brand that is near and dear to my heart (and shall therefore remain nameless) making what I felt was a big ol’ Facebook boo-boo, leading me to ponder when — or whether — it’s acceptable click that “Remove” button on the Facebook pages we are called upon, as professional communicators, to moderate.

Back to the inspiration for this post …

Organization X posted on its Facebook fan page, “(Organization X) has some breaking news to officially announce… Stay posted for details.”

Unfortunately for Organization X, there were several other organizations involved in its “big news,” and the scoop was already floating around out there and being reported on by credible mainstream media outlets that regularly cover the organizations involved, including Organization X. Bottom line: Lots of people already knew the “exciting news” and began posting about it in the comments section under the post.

As I revisited the page several times to see when Organization X would finally, officially post the news, I noticed something. The fans’ comments — all positive, excited remarks about the forthcoming news, which also was positive — were being deleted almost as quickly as they were being posted. It was sort of like a a clay-pigeon shoot, communication-style: The comments kept popping up, and someone kept shooting them down … so quickly that it would’ve been impossible to get accurate screen captures of the situation.

I was stunned by, a little angry at, and quite disappointed in Organization X. But then I realized … Organization X and its Facebook gatekeeper(s) probably aren’t alone.

Really?! Are there communicators who need so badly to control their organizations’ messages that they go so far as to delete positive comments about positive news just because they haven’t posted the news yet (probably because a news release is caught up in the review process and stuck on a manager’s desk somewhere)?!

Most conversations I had with people in the aftermath of the situation yielded one opinion: In cases like these, don’t delete! Arment Dietrich PR CEO Gini Dietrich said one of the things I’d been thinking:

Gini also suggested that any deletion of tweets, comments, etc. could be unethical, but I definitely saw something on another Facebook fan page this fall that made me think that a deletion is sometimes justified:

The folks behind the Kohl’s Facebook page removed Gilbert’s comment, and I can’t say I blame them. Would you leave something like that on your company’s Facebook page? Shelby’s “Wow” comment — presumably posted with a “holy crap; I can’t believe someone posted that” sentiment – echoes the likely thoughts that others had upon reading Gilbert’s comment (myself included).

Regardless of whether it was true, would you want to read something like that about a store where you shop? I don’t know about you, but I’m a fan of Kohl’s on Facebook so I can get news about sales … not so I can read about the company’s employees’ sexual exploits with one another. Someone at Kohl’s must’ve thought that, too, since the comment was deleted.

So, the question remains: To delete, or not to delete? And under what circumstances?

Social media darkroom: The importance of creativity

This isn’t a 2010 predictions post. You could find enough of those to keep you reading from now through Valentine’s Day. I’m not going to list a half-dozen trends or tools that I think will “break out” next year. But I will talk about something that’s always been and will become even more important as social media continues to evolve: Creativity.

I recently read an interview in one of my favorite photography magazines (Digital Photo Pro) with celebrity photographer Indrani, who had this to say (emphasis mine):

Art directors who used to hire photographers to create their vision are now able to pick up a camera and create it themselves. Today, there is a great challenge – you have to be really, really good and come up with things that haven’t been seen or done before. Anybody can do the rip-off things. There are millions of people who have the capacity to make images look decent – photography is reaching a place where you don’t need years of training and tons of money to create a rip-off, but if you don’t have the artistic ideas to create, then you will come up lacking.

Creativity is what makes Indrani an amazing photographer, not simply her camera and lenses. She’s realized that her ideas and artistry are more important that what ISO setting or exposure she’s using when shooting. The technology has made it so that newbies can quickly pick up the technical aspects of digital photography. But it’s the artistry and creativity involved in composing a stunning image that’s key to Indrani’s survival as an elite photographer.

darkroomSo what about social media? Well, just about anyone can learn to use tools like Twitter and Facebook, or learn how to build out a blog in WordPress or upload photos to Flickr. It’s easy to look at what other brands have done in social media in the last 1-2 years and “do the rip-off things.” Twitter hashtag contests, crowdsourced videos, Facebook coupons – these have all been done.

Simply having a social media presence isn’t creative anymore – anyone can do it, and most companies are already or are at least trying to get on board. What’s going to be important in 2010 and beyond is how creatively organizations can use these platforms to drive engagement with customers.

For early adopters, merely using social media platforms as a way to reach out was creative in and of itself. But that phase has long passed, and companies who don’t want to “come up lacking” will need to think more creatively in order to rise above the constant noise that’s being created as more brands start engaging with social media.

I’m personally looking forward to 2010 to see just how creative we can all be.

Image via Flickr user mac.black

The fallacy of targeting audiences on the Web

Memo to brands trying to reach teenage boys with raunchy campaigns: we can all see you.

Burger King’s Shower Girl is the latest in a series of misogynist social media campaigns targeted at hormonally-charged teenage boys, it seems. PepsiCo’s “Amp Up Before You Score” iPhone app this summer broke women into 24 stereotypes and gave guys tips on how to pick up each and tally their conquests. Remington’s “Face of Success” microsite and game  encouraged guys to try out pickup lines on virtual women (these fake women had Twitter profiles and followed back successful players).

Not surprisingly, these types of campaigns have drawn varying amounts of ire, from women and men alike, who feel that they’re inappropriate, don’t advance the product being hawked, and continue to promulgate objectification of women in Western culture (and that’s a post for an entirely different blog).

burger_king_shower_camThe typical “defense” often heard about campaigns like this is that they are intended only for a specific target audience. To me, that’s a fancy way of saying, “if this offends you, then you’re not our target audience, so please shut up and leave us alone.” Granted, PepsiCo did apologize for its iPhone app, but it’s hard to believe that they couldn’t have anticipated a backlash before ever launching it.

Nothing is truly targeted on the Web anymore. It’s too easy for people to share and pass along links to content, no matter where that content originates. That means campaigns that are edgy or risque are just as likely to find an easily-offended audience as they are to find their “target audience” online. Organizations can’t assume that only their target audience is going to see and interpret their campaign.

I’m not purporting that all marketing campaigns should be so sanitized and boring so as to make sure no one is offended. Often edgy campaigns are the most effective; they merit attention by being different. But there’s a difference between “edgy” and “in poor taste.”

There’s no “section” of the Interwebz reserved for 16-year-old boys (or any other demographic, for that matter). Your content should definitely speak to the interests and sensibilities (or lack thereof) of the core group you’re trying to reach, but let’s not forget that it can speak to just about everyone else online, too.