Earlier today, the ever-wise CK noted that Twitter considers itself an “information network”, and that she agrees with that idea, in the grand sense. She also mentioned that many of us primarily use Twitter as a social tool, which is probably true too.

I agree with CK on both points actually. While Twitter may have grown into a legitimate information network (I get most of my news first from my TweetDeck), its growth has been spurred by the fuel of social interaction. Sort of a “Come for the conversation, stay for the news” type of situation. I think that as Twitter continues to evolve, it will be sharpened as a distributed information source, but it will retain it’s social foundation. Because, really, without it, what’s the big deal?

What say you, internets?

First off, it’s really hard to coherently follow someone who is live tweeting a speaker or a series of speakers. Like many of you, I have a lot of action in my feed. If you’re following hundreds/thousands of people, despite being hashtagged, there’s no sense of continuity. It get’s lost in the stream.

Piggybacking on that point is the fact that I don’t think live-tweeting does the event justice. There’s no context, no visuals (which good presos usually incorporate), no completeness. I think there’s so much more to these presentations, and while I’m grateful for the quotable nuggets that people pull out, it doesn’t really illuminate much.

But that’s just me. How do you feel about the whole thing?

While it’s not as long as some of the die-hard early adopters, I’ve been on Twitter for almost a year and a half. And in that time it seems like every few months there’s some sort of Earth-shattering, life-altering, mind-blowing change that SHAKES THE FOUNDATIONS OF THE WAY WE USE TWITTER FOREVER.

Seriously…

From the stability problems (does anyone remember that robot before the failwhale?), to Plurk (somewhere Beth Harte is shedding a tear), to the advent of Twitter as a customer service tool (@Comcastcares), to the stellar aps (Tweetdeck!) to the elections, to Ashton/CNN/Oprah. There’s always something new going on.

And while each of those things has been the cause of some hooplah for a short time, eventually we accept it and move on. But what people might lose sight of is the fact that Twitter might “change” another 31 times before it settles in. That’s just how developing mediums are. Think of it as your favorite chair. You’re gonna have to spend a lot of time sitting different ways before you get that perfect butt-groove (yes, I just went there).

And while the regular user just sits back and absorbs these changes, maybe enjoying one or two of them, casually mentioning it to their friends or family, all of us marketers/social media people/trend watchers/etc. are trying desperately to understand the changes, what it means, and how we can leverage the new playing field.

So take a minute, understand how the celebrity rush is going to “change” Twitter, because it will (Mack Collier and Jeremiah Owyang cover it well), and then get ready. Because in the next 45 days something will change Twitter again.

(jumping the shark…?)

If you don’t fit the bill, you can follow me here.

Twitter DM
Pro: Short. Good signal/noise ratio (except auto DMs). Not real time. Easy introduction medium. Good for cutting through the clutter of email.
Con: The Auto DM
Verdict: Best Communication Medium in The Universe

Instant Message
Pro: Great for real time, online conversation. High adoption.
Con: They know you’re there when you start IMing back.
Verdict: A personal favorite of mine, but once someone knows you’re around, you’re stuck. Hard to disappear/ignore/get back to someone when they know you’re sitting right there.

Email
Pro: Good for long, detailed messages. Permanently recorded. Not real time.
Con: Have you seen your inbox lately? Exactly.
Verdict: Oh email, savior of our age. The problem is that people’s inboxes are so overflowing that the signal to noise ratio is getting bad fast. Good but not great.

Phone
Pro: Not location specific. High participation rate. A step beyond written communication.
Con: Real time can be a problem when you don’t want to talk to someone.
Verdict: It’s up there. Hard to imagine life without the cell phone anymore. Don’t believe me? Run any episode of Seinfeld and give them cell phones. Kills half the jokes/scenarios.

Land Line
Pro: Get to talk in your PJ’s.
Con: Have to be home.
Verdict: Do people still use these? Really?

Morse Code
Pro: Able to send messages long distances. Keeps communication secret from spies.
Con: You have to freaking know Morse Code.
Verdict: Not bad – if you want to give the coordinates of an enemy submarine, I guess.

Carrier Pigeon
Pro: “Smart” message delivery. No minimum wage.
Con: Message limited to what you can physically attach to a pigeon. Possibility of looking like a hermit/conspiracy theorist while owning pigeons.
Verdict: Aside from owning pigeons, keeping pigeons, feeding pigeons, training pigeons, and attaching things to pigeons, it’s not that bad really.

Smoke Signals
Pro: Long distance. High badass-factor.
Con: Fire hazard. Not the best for indoor communication.
Verdict: I wouldn’t attempt without adult/Apache supervision.

Fax Machine
Pro: Able to send complex print documents anywhere in the world.
Con: That sound! It sounds like an electronic cat hopped up on Red Bull and trapped in a cardboard box.
Verdict: Occasionally useful, but my guess is email attachment is going to kill the fax.

Tin Cans & String
Pro: Cheap to obtain/make. Cute.
Con: For some reason it doesn’t work unless you’re six years old or homeless.
Verdict: I’m not sure this even works. Whose idea was this in the first place?

Bike Courier
Pro: Able to deliver larger physical objects. Faster than a larger delivery service for short ranges.
Con: Spandex and attitude.
Verdict: If you need those designs across town NOW!

Boom Box Serenade
Pro: High visibility. Large audience. Ability to work Billy Idol into everyday communication.
Con: High crazy factor.
Verdict: I’m guessing this has it’s applications, but no one needs “Rebel Yell” at 9:30 on a Monday.

1) Tweet Blasts
The most obvious way for Twitter to make some money is to offer a bulk tweet delivered to it’s user base. The way I would set this up is to offer a tweet to everyone ($$$), to a smaller random number of users ($$), and an even smaller random number of users ($). The best uses for this type of advertising would be the traditional products with mass-market appeal like movies, fast-food, or cars.

I know this is very “old marketing”, spray-and-pray type of stuff, but hey, if it pays the bills and keeps Twitter free without overdoing it, I’m all for it.

2) Targeted Tweet Blasts
This one is a little more focused, makes a little more sense, and would take a little more time than just general or random Tweet Blasts. The one play here would be to leverage people’s Bio information to target them based on things like location or interests. Terms like “Charleston, SC” or “avid gamer” could be used. This would make sense if you were promoting a local restaurant or a media (game, music, movie) release.

The other angle you could take, and this might be tough, is to pull a tweet cloud for each user. This way you can see that someone spends all their time talking about “Apple” or “Philadelphia Phillies” or “Snowboarding” even if it’s not in their Bio information.

3) Headliners
If you checked the web version of Twitter today, you would see a warning for a phishing scam above your timeline. This is, again, not much better than a billboard, but would still be a high profile place to put a one-line ad. One problem here is that it would only reach web users.

4) Tweet Cloud Contextual Ad Blocks
Now here’s a sweet, sweet internet advertising mashup. The first thing that would need to happen here is that Twitter would have to institute ad blocks on individual profiles. My best guess would be to put them on the right side of the timeline, as people usually do their custom background graphic on the left. Next they would have to figure out which users Tweet cloud to pull the data from. Is it the user of the profile that you’re visting? Or is it your data? And what happens if you’re not a Twitter user or have limited data?

5) Charge A Membership Fee
I’d rather it not come to this. But I’d pay it. Twitter is totally worth it.

Did I miss anything? Am I way off base? Let me know!

Note: I don’t necessarily endorse any/all of these ideas, it was just a brainstorm.

So, last week we talked about the importance of being patient when building a Twitter profile. This week we’re going to work on letting people know who you are.

This week’s Twitter Principle is: Secrets, Secrets Are No Fun.

Besides the follower/following numbers, the first thing that I look for when going through profiles is the “information” section. That little section in the upper right hand corner that gives you a snapshot of the person that owns the profile.

Here’s what mine looks like.

So first off, you must must must have a picture. It doesn’t have to be you. It could be your car, your dog, your lamp, I don’t care. Just anything but that default weird little picture.

The next two bits of information, Location and Web, are not as essential. Sure it’s cool to know that there are other Twitter users in your area, and it’s great for tweetups, but I wouldn’t consider this mandatory. As for the “Web” part, if you’ve got a blog or other website, by all means fill it in, but funny as it may seem, not everyone on twitter has another website. If you don’t, it’s no big deal (but check out Blogger and WordPress).

Lastly, is the “Bio” section. This is crucial. You have to write something in here, because if you don’t, I have absolutely no idea who you are. Also, if you can’t think enough to say who you are in 140 characters or less, what does that say about your ability to put together good tweets?

So to recap:
1)ADD A PICTURE!
2)Tell me a little about yourself

And you can always follow me on Twitter here: @MattJMcD

I agree with Alan that just because we’re doing something a certain way now doesn’t mean it’s the “right way”, but I do think there are a few principles of using Twitter that can be passed on to maximize your early experiences.

So, I’m going to be running a weekly series on Twitter Principles.

This week’s Twitter Principle is: Patience Grasshopper

It happens all the time that people get on Twitter and “OMG look at all the awesome people on here! I need to follow all 1,374 people I might be interested in immediately!”. First off, I love the enthusiasm, you’ve clearly got heart. But jumping in and following a massive amount of people right away isn’t a great plan.

The thing is, when people get the “Captain Followsalot is now following you on Twitter” they go and check out your profile. And then they see numbers that look like this “Following: 1,374 – Followers: 119″. I don’t know about you, but the first thing that jumps into my head is SPAM.

You have to take it slow with a new account. How about starting by following the 100 most interesting people you find/have heard of? That way you build your account and following slowly, instead of not at all.

Also, and I can’t stress this enough, you have to tweet stuff. You can’t follow even 100 people and expect for them to follow you back when you only have 2 tweets.

So to recap:
1)Add followers slowly
2)Actually use Twitter

And if you’d like me to be part of your well-paced expansion, you can follow me on Twitter.