Categories
BlogSchmog

Tweeting Authentic

At this time last year, Twitter was just a blip. Today, it is a legitimate and effective way of connecting to others. On Friday, Larry Chiang posted yet another list of how to leverage Twitter for marketing purposes. I worry about strategies for tweeting that don’t start with being authentic.

At this time last year, Twitter was just a blip. The first academic study on microblogging wasn’t even finished collecting their data, and Facebook’s application platform was about to explode, dominating blog chatter. A year later, tracking “twitter” is more time-consuming and the consumers of the API are creating APIs, but we are still focused on the wrong metrics.

What are we Twittering?
What are we Twittering? (source: The Onion)

On Friday, Larry Chiang posted yet another list of how to leverage Twitter for marketing purposes. On the surface, there’s nothing sinister about what he wrote. It echoes and augments what Ed Dale termed side-by-side communication, developing a shallow but trusted relationship with others so as to make one’s message better received. Chiang is specifically examining Twitter as a tool for founders of startup companies when offering the following tips:

  1. Don’t be afraid to Tweet above your head.
  2. Watch your Twitter ratios.
  3. Leverage what’s going on.
  4. Move your Twitter conversation(s) off-line.
  5. Migrate your real-world conversation to Twitter.
  6. Time your tweets.
  7. Pre-write some of your material.
  8. Work the Twitter Room for product development.

My problem with this approach is that is undercuts one of the things that makes Twitter work: authenticity.

I am glad that marketers are embracing Twitter because, unlike other channels, each of us has near-complete control over what we see. A spammer can only gain a foothold in our tweet streams if we allow that message in by following him, and we can stop such messages at any point afterward simply by unfollowing. There are a few basic tips to identify a spammer—most notably an insanely imbalanced following-to-follower ratio—but one often overlooked one is authentic posting. Do the tweets reek of self-promotion?

For a channel dedicated to spreading millions of short posts daily about personal minutiae, sensitivity to self-promotion in Twitter may seem like an oxymoron. However, there is a difference between answering the core question—”What are you doing?”—and gaming the system. It’s a difference that is noticeable on some level. As spammers inevitably adapt to the technological and cultural constraints in Twitter, an “authenticity radar” will be used by members more and more to shut off unwanted messages.

The most interesting aspect of Chiang’s list is its dual nature when viewed in the lens of authenticity. It can be interpreted as inherently manipulative and false, a guide to inauthentic behavior. It can also be viewed as an encouragement, appeasing concerns about participation and transparency that support authentic posts. On my pessimistic days, the term marketing invokes only the former.

There is no right way to use Twitter (one of its many beauties). However, I think we as producers and consumers of content benefit greatly by reducing the list to one core mantra: Be Authentic.

By Kevin Makice

A Ph.D student in informatics at Indiana University, Kevin is rich in spirit. He wrestles and reads with his kids, does a hilarious Christian Slater imitation and lights up his wife's days. He thinks deeply about many things, including but not limited to basketball, politics, microblogging, parenting, online communities, complex systems and design theory. He didn't, however, think up this profile.

4 replies on “Tweeting Authentic”

I would be interested in your definition of authenticity or authentically Kevin. It seems problematic in some ways as how is something you do not yours unless told to do it? Even if told to do something doesn’t that still reflect who you are in that you are willing to do it?
Anyone else?

Good question.

My understanding of authenticity is more the psychological one, although there is overlap with philosophy and art, too. That is, living according to the needs or your inner self, rather than societal conditioning. I have heard it described as taking gratification in “signature strengths,” and I like that phrase quite a bit.

No one will know whether one is truly authentic unless there is some form of sustained connection in which change can be detected. But I think that collective experiences will play a role in our ability as individuals to detect inauthentic behavior. There is some innate sense of that present in any relationship.

It is a fine, but important line between sincerity and manipulation. In Twitter, I have a lower tolerance for the latter.

Comments are closed.