In the past week, there have been several articles on both ReadWriteWeb and TechCrunch suggesting that Twitter Japan might start charging for access to tweets. TechCrunch posted a piece, 6 Reasons Why Twitter Japan’s Subscription Model Might Work. The post cited that Japanese mobile users are already used to having to pay for several services similar to Twitter. They also stated that Japanese users are sometimes more interested in the personal lives of celebrities and growth on Twitter Japan is accelerating compared to Twitter usage elsewhere that is beginning to flat line.
I’m very skeptical of having to pay for tweets. The first concern that came to mind was that I doubt many people would want to have to pay for tweets to begin with. Yes, there are some obsessive fans out there, but what if they are fans of 50 celebrities who all start charging for access to their tweets? I’m guessing each update would be a few cents, but that could certainly add up quickly. Next, what is to stop certain people from aggregating tweets of several people and releasing them under their own account? They could follow a few celebrities themselves, retweet the tweets and then charge a lump sum so that their own followers would then get the updates of a number of celebrities. I’d rather follow and pay for one stream instead of pay for 50 individually.
I can certainly see charging corporations a small subscription fee for tweeting. Many companies are benefiting greatly through both sales and customer relations as a result of their social media interactions, including Twitter. If Twitter wants to make money, it seems like it would be much easier to charge people a subscription fee instead of charging to view individual streams. Of course, as soon as they start charging subscription fees, I’m guessing many will decide to go with other microblogging services to get their link, news, and status publishing fix.
Alright, so I have to admit that I didn’t bother using Twitter lists when it was first introduced. I was just messing around with my account and decided, eh, why not. I made a private list and started adding a few friends. I instantly realized what all the buzz was about. I follow around 750 people on a daily basis. Do I see every tweet that comes in? Definitely not. Out of that 750, there are only 10 or so people that I actually know personally. LIST! Now I can I see the posts of just those few people. I can make it private and call it whatever I’d like. I can make lists of professors I’d like to follow, blogs, tech experts, etc.
If you have yet to jump on the Twitter list bandwagon, here’s a few resources that may be of some help:
Brian Solis, blogger at PR 2.0, never ceases to produce interesting posts. Opening my RSS reader today, I came across one titled Casting a Digital Shadow; Your Reputation Precedes You. Not the most information-intense article, but a good overview of keeping your online identity in check. He gave some great examples of people being fired from jobs (or not being hired) because of information or photos they had posted on Facebook, Twitter, or some other social networking site. He states in the post that CareerBuilder.com recently completed a study in which
The professional network asked 2,500 hiring managers whether they
search Facebook or other social networks to discover information about
prospective employees. An astonishing, but not unexpected, 38-percent
of respondents said yes. In comparison, only 22% of hiring managers
acknowledged searching social networks in 2008.
He later cites another survey done in 2006 where 77% of job recruiters had used search engines to do background checks on candidates.
I’m always so surprised when I see Facebook friends post pictures of themselves wasted at some party or complaining on and on about work when I know their employers are just as experienced in social networking as they are. I’ve stressed that they should be aware of the backlash their posts could have, but they say, “Oh, they’ll never see it.” Or even better, “They don’t care.” I don’t bother going into it, but inside I’m screaming, but what about that boss 5 years down the road? What you post on the internet is there…forever. Even when you delete things they are often archived or cached. The last boss I had openly said that he’d checked out all of the job candidates on Facebook before he hired me.
If you’ve never given thought to how your online identity can affect you or your think anyone warning you is feeding you bull, do yourself a favor and check out Casting a Digital Shadow; Your Reputation Precedes You or do a simple search for similar articles.
The talk itself is very interesting. I was a little surprised at how much time was spent on how media affected a few isolated events. The talk repeated the same message that I’ve been reading in articles all over the internet lately. That’s the idea that media has gone from a one-to-one relationship to a one-to-many and finally to the many-to-many relationship that we have today. At one time people could talk to one another. Then TV networks, radio show hosts, or columnists could reach out and deliver a message to a broader audience. Today millions of people can literally communicate with millions of other people with all sorts of different messages. Not only can a person talk to a person, but an organized (or unorganized) group can interact with another group thousands of miles away if they’d like to. Shirky states that we have had the “largest increase in expressive capability in human history.”
Shirky mostly touched on Twitter and a tiny bit on text messaging. I didn’t actually catch any mention of Facebook. I think it’s just assumed that it’s included as one of the biggest networks that people can communicate through. I thought one specific quote was especially interesting.
These tools don’t get socially interesting until they get technologically boring. It isn’t when the shiny new tools show up that their uses start permeating society, it’s when everybody is able to take them for granted.
It seems that this is entirely the case. Most people are still acting like Facebook is a brand new network, when really it’s been around since the beginning months of 2004. It just seems new and exciting because everyone and his brother is now a member. Or Twitter. Twitter is already three years old. It wasn’t until the end of 2008 or early 2009 that Twitter really started being dropped in conversations. In either case, both networks are now mentioned daily, if not hourly on news stations and throughout personal conversations.
As Shirky says,
The question we all face now is how can we make best use of this media even though it means changing the way we’ve always done it?
As I had touched on in a previous post, Social Media -- Where Is It Headed?, more and more people feel the literal need to get involved. This of course leads to what Shirky touched upon -- more and more of the “producers” of content are amateurs. Every second, people are connecting to new networks and adding content to those to which they already belong. Are we going to hit a breaking point? How are we supposed to filter this media, or are we?
Social media seems to be transforming not only the internet, but the world, bit by bit. Within the last few months it seems that you cannot turn on the morning news without hearing the words tweet or Facebook. In everyday conversations I find myself referring to these technologies without even meaning to. Many times I am speaking to people who have absolutely no interaction with the internet whatsoever. As I describe my internet explorations, many people are amazed at how connected everything is and how easy it is to accomplish things with various programs. Others could care less and think that it is crazy that people would want to share as much as they do. Both my explanations of these technologies and the articles I have read lately make me wonder if we will take it too far. Most likely, I think we will.
Every time I sit down to update my networks, I am surprised at how long it actually takes. Between posting photos, posting videos, publishing blog posts, updating statuses…not too mention actually generating the photos, videos, and posts. As always, the more work something takes, the harder people try to figure out a way to make it quicker. Such is the case with the our new social media commitments.
Brian Solis, principal of an award-winning Public Relations and New Media agency writes a number of excellent articles on social media. One in particular, The Social Media Manifesto: Integrating Social Media Into Marketing Communications, is especially valid for this post. Surprisingly, even though it was written two years ago, it seems to precisely describe our current relations on the internet.
Monologue has given way to dialog…Content is the new democracy and we the people, are ensuring that our voices are heard…Those who participate will succeed – everyone else will either have to catch up or miss the game altogether. Engage or die.
Of course that is in regards to marketing. Companies will most certainly go under if they don’t grasp this new technology. But even in a broader scope, I think everyone is starting to feel this pressure, little by little. The more they have pressure, the more they will want to interact or feel left out. More and more I’ll find myself say, “Have you heard from John Doe? I saw his pictures posted on Facebook, seems like he’s having a good time.” If they aren’t already on Facebook, the reply has gone from “What’s Facebook?” to “Man, I really need to join that soon.”
But what if people don’t have the time? It takes too much effort…or it’s too confusing to them. What happens then? It seems that companies are taking care of that.
