Social Media and You

The two are so closely related that it’s hard to distinguish between them, sometimes. But actually, they differ in important ways. Important, that is, if you’re wondering how to sell your products / services online.

Social media is a sub-set of inbound marketing. It’s much easier to understand and manipulate than inbound marketing. Social media is to inbound marketing what a rowboat is to an ocean vessel.

It’s like writing a letter, versus developing an entire postal service.

What you consider to be social media may range from a narrow perspective, in which only the networks of Twitter-Facebook-LinkedIn and such are included, to a broad definition inclusive of almost anything about your business that exists on the internet.

Perhaps social media goes even further than that, extending to in-person meet-ups and Foursquare events.

Social media is a set of tools.

Inbound marketing is a state of mind.

Inbound marketing is about moving beyond a competitive economy to a branded one, where value is derived from observed behaviors and relationships that are relatively personal.

(Traditional business values subliminal seduction through mass communications.)

Social media’s easy. Inbound marketing’s hard.  It’s tough to teach: it begs intuitive understanding.

More to come on this.

There are a few people who speak like prophets about the internet, and Brian Solis is one. Along with Clay Shirkey, Mitch Joel, Seth Godin (+ others), Solis establishes the lingo, defines operative principles.

Solis writes about Social Media Best Practices for Business and drives home in just a few strokes the essentials of the new culture that the web has created. He uses words like dedicate, conquer your fears, listen. He teaches that we need to be not only attractive, but expansive.

“The ability to showcase your products and services to attract customers and spark conversation is arguably greater on social networking sites than your own website.”

This sentence presents a formidable thought.

I asked some other supposed ‘gurus’ about the future of websites: they replied with indignation that individual websites are and always will be paramount online.

Shirkey more clearly understands the realities: social media (read, your Facebook Page, your Twitter presence, your LinkedIn activities and profile) is now almost as important as your website.

Note that this doesn’t mean you should use Facebook as your home base and bypass the need for a website. Rather, it suggests that both website and social media are required, working together.

Facebook’s grabbing all the headlines these days, but let’s talk about Twitter for a minute.  FB is mundane, but Twitter is divine.

Dan Schawbel tweeted yesterday: “In order from highest to lowest conversion rate: Email > Blog > LinkedIn > Facebook > Twitter.”

Odd that the service is often seen as the underdog. Not so many members, not such fabulous return. In there, but trailing behind.

First thing every day, I check my emails, the news, and Twitter, in that order. BUT (true confessions time) I very seldom do original tweets. I react, retweet, even post links. But you won’t read much that’s just me. Why is that?

The simple truth is that I haven’t gotten past the awesomeness of everyone else’s updates. I’m still thrilled with the experience of just going to my tweetdeck and seeing what people are up to.

I tweet quite a bit on behalf of clients. I know how to use the tool as information exchange. But how to use it to express ME? Gee, I’m just not there yet.

It’s okay to take your time getting to know your options in online inbound marketing. It’s a relationship, after all. Not created in a day.

True confessions time: I no longer make use of my Google Reader. There are thousands of unread posts in there.

Somehow, about six months ago, I stopped culling RSS feeds and following certain people. Now, I just go to Twitter and follow tempting links from there. I cannot tell a lie: it’s so extreme a change that I’m not even faithful to Seth Godin anymore.

If I had more time, every day, to spend reading posts, it would be wonderful to keep up with everything. As it is, however, going fishing on Twitter (and sometimes Facebook) for an hour or so is all I can afford. Oh yes, and LinkedIn group discussions enthrall me for some time every day as well.

This keeps me up to date on many things, though the process mostly lacks the in-depth study that’s available through a Reader.  In-depth is best when you have a chosen a path for learning; but using social networks and grazing blogs and articles relates well to plain old daily life.

It stumps me that we’re all urged to post to a blog daily, but no one really has all that much time to read. How can these opposites attract?

Twitter users are divided on the issue of pre-scheduled tweets.

Do you use SocialOomph or Twuffer to set up messages that will post sometime in the future? Or do you view such tactics as heretical, diametrically opposed to what Twitter’s all about?

The beauty of Twitter is its emphasis on the here and now, with authentic, nearly real-time communications between real people. In such a context, pre-scheduled tweets seem not much different from billboards.

Some people will only do in-the-moment interactions on Twitter.

Others use pre-scheduled tweets in various ways. I’ve noticed some who respond spontaneously on a regular basis, but also run branded pre-arranged tweets just as regularly. Others aren’t shy about having almost all their tweets pre-recorded. The most famous twitter gurus don’t run these kinds of tweets, but I’m not sure that means they’re ineffective (the pre-mades, not the gurus).

Though I likened them to billboards, these aren’t really ads. They’re more like announcements, updates, information. I come from a non-profit background, so it’s not hard for me to see the difference. On Twitter or any social network, the PSA (public service announcement) is perfectly acceptable, but the advertisement is verboten.

What’s your take on the issue?

How I decide who to follow on Twitter.

• Does the email notification I receive from Twitter show a person or a business? If a business, is there any compelling reason to follow?
• Has the person tweeted very much, or is s/he at just a couple tweets so far?  If you’re not already out there with your content, I’ll probably decline.
• Do you have 73 thousand follows and 3 followers? No thanks.
• When and if I click through to your Twitter page, do you have name, location, website, and description reasonably filled out?  Good, because if any of these are missing, it’s a nix.
• Is the look of your Twitter page repulsive in any way? Forget it.
• Do you tweet nothing but one-liners from motivation coaches and Ghandi? Oh, please.
• Do you duplicate the same tweet over and over? It’s just not worth it.
• If, when I look at your profile page, I don’t understand a single tweet, you’re outta here.

Is all this harsh, in your estimation? You bet it is. With auto-following programs polluting the process and spammy laziness a human condition (it seems), you can’t mess around. Be selective in your social media liaisons. Life’s too short for misalliances.

I may be a Certified Social Media Marketing Specialist, but I’m as much a student as the next nerd. Social media is hardly even defined, much less described with any ultimate accuracy. You can be a specialist, but you can’t claim mastery over social media, any more than anyone can claim mastery over outer space.

And the ways and meanings of Twitter.com may be the most mysterious territory of all in our new internet universe. HubSpot reported yesterday that Twitter’s growth seems to be slowing.  This is not too surprising, given the incredible complexity lurking under its simplicity.  Twitter may be the most important invention of the past decade. But to most, it’s incomprehensible. Sort of like reading must have been, when the printing press was first invented.

True confession: although I participate daily with the tool, my moves and shots are still as awkward and uncertain as a freshman on the court. I’m still overwhelmed by its immensity and by the challenge it presents to my consciousness. I still tweet far less than I would recommend for my clients. I use it much more as inspiration than microphone, despite my naturally gregarious nature.

Twitter’s a hive mind. Twitter happens.

One thing prominent on my list of to-dos is to get an account at Hootsuite. It’s a service that’s earned high praise from all quarters, and I could be more efficient by using it.

But Jason Falls wrote a post today that reminded me why that task seems to stay on the list and not get crossed out. I’ve a slightly indignant disinclination to can my messages. Remember that term? We used to speak of canned music: a recording, not the real thing.

If you plaster a single, duplicated message across many different platforms, you’re taking the belligerent route, IMO.  Belligerence describes old marketing; the new inbound marketing emphasizes a soft sell.

To post the same updates to Twitter and Facebook, for instance, ignores the unique energy of each site. Why confine Facebook to Twitter’s 140 characters, as if the use and character of these two tools were the same? It’s like using a screwdriver as a hammer.

There are really solid reasons why “the big 3″ – Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn – have gained prominence. They’re each useful in their own right, for different things and different people at different times. To homogenize them is to lose their usefulness entirely.

The great question of the age: who to follow on Twitter? Everyone has their own style of following. Some automate the whole process. Some collect followers as if they’re amassing armies. Some avidly seek out certain types, while others just follow their friends. The range, I’m sure, is enormous.

You might even characterize Twitter as comparable to life itself, the panorama parading by, the bewildering, teeming Garden of Earthly Delights. In such a place, there can be no rules about “best practices.” There can be no ‘right’ way to build your community. Everyone’s path is their own.

Still, it’s a good question: how do you decide who to follow on Twitter? It’s a good question because your answer indicates your brand in a big way. How do you decide who will be your friends? How do you know what you want and who you like?

Some are choosy, some not at all. Some like the stars, others the critics. Some look for laughs, some look for looks. Me, I refuse to follow anyone who doesn’t say where they’re from or what they do. Nor anyone who promises internet riches, because they’re fanatics. I like twitterers with a wider view. You?