Design Lessons from the Twitosphere

There were two big incidents in the past week involving backlash from the Twitter community. The first was Twitterank, yet another rank-order-the-elite tool to measure network value of twitterers, and the other is a swift response to a poorly conceived advertising campaign for Motrin. There are design lessons to be learned from both.

After a successful viral spread through the twitosphere fueled by auto-posts reporting a member’s score, many people ultimately concluded Twitterank was a twishing site. This idea was helped by some prominent articles leveling that charge, but suspicions were already raised by a number of cues—the poor presentation, use of Internet speak, no attribution or ownership by the developer, and a rating completely without context.

It took some quick reaction from developer Ryo Chijiiwa to calm the masses. The web site has changed, with more accountability, a more polished design, and a re-working of the programming to eliminate the need for users to enter their Twitter password. Had this been the model that was put out into the world, the reaction would have been quite different.

The second incident was the new ad campaign for the over-the-counter pain-relief drug, Motrin. The slick looking ad is very well produced, bringing to mind the great “Le Grand Content” by Clemens Kogler, Karo Szmit, and Andre Tschinder. However, the content was, at best, out of touch with the consumer group they meant to persuade.

Motrin’s ad targeting baby-carrying moms

… and the #motrinmoms response to seeing that ad.

Jeremiah Owyang wrote a great synopsis of the biz-tech dynamics that evolved, including several screen shots of tools that show how quickly this reaction developed on Twitter. While Owyang focuses on the reaction and impact on the Motrin brand, both of these are great examples of ways to mess up a design.

In a human-centered approach, the designs arise out of a real need that can be identified only by understanding the person or group of people who are meant to benefit from the outcome. In the case of Twitterank, the user group was largely unstudied and the process was decidedly technology-centered. Ryo built the code, and paid a price for its initial form being incompatible with his intended audience. For the Motrin ad makers, it seems only a superficial understanding was gained of its intended market audience. It is only speculation but plausible to think that the idea for this particular ad came from studying business spreadsheets with an enterprise goal of wanting to get more moms to buy Motrin. Even if the aftermath reveals focus groups and vetted ads, it will be easy to question the methodologies used by the company in light of the highly-motivated opposition to the 30-second spot.

It is clear, too, that the rules of engagement are changing. The swiftness of response and the willingness to become active in opposition made some quantum jump in the past several weeks. Personally, I’m not sure if the Motrin ad is offensive, even if it is flawed and misaligned, but enough people made enough noise to catch the attention of the company, who pulled the ad campaign with apologies. Blink, and the world changes.