Tag: clear

Twitter Lists: courtesy, classification, trust

Following someone back on Twitter validates a two-way connection. It confirms mutual interest.

The rhetoric of courtesy
Everyone online is entitled to be selective with their follows. In fact, some of the most successful networking efforts are deliberate and executed with clear purpose.

So if someone follows you but you’re not sure if you want to follow back, what do you? Most people will likely do nothing because they’re not obligated to follow back.

But if you want them to know that you actually  find their twitter account interesting but you’re not quite prepared to follow their stream, should you care to let them know that?

The question’s meant to be rhetorical, but yes, I think so. And you could do so by listing them.

icon sourced from pazeinteractive.com

Classification versus influence
Twitter Lists allow you to group your follows according to the various categories (types) of follows you’ve created. Some argue that the number of instances in which you are listed reflects your scale of influence.

I respect certain aspects of that view, but have yet to see a clear explanation of how the metric is designed to show the correlation between number of instances listed and what “influence” is suppose to represent…I digress.

Your intent to tag someone under one of your lists demonstrates your interest in their request to follow you. You’ve not actually followed them back yet, but since you’ve actually bothered to ‘tag’ who they are, what they represent into your personal library of connections, it means you’ve acknowledged their presence. If they really want you to follow back, they should be able to tweet that intent and let  you know.

Trust—an organic build
Being selective on social networks is not an attitude; it’s actually a practical way of building a trusted group of connections with whom you want to interact, converse and form communities.

Tagging new follows (listing them) is an ideal way to organize your follows and show appreciation for someone’s interest in your online presence.

New follows always get me psyched. But I do tend to expect a level of interaction from them, be it random or planned online conversations through @’s or DM’s.  That’s like me saying, “Okay, now earn my trust and confirm the value and credibility of our connection.”  How else am I to get to know you?

How do you approach building your social network? What values do you personally bring that strengthen both your personal and professional brand?

Trouble with Likin’..Content, that is

Why be clever when you want to be clear, right? Yep. I tweeted that once, and in spite of myself, I insisted on a clever-sounding title. But before I jump into the bulleted list about content (the point of this post), a brief digression:

cover courtesy of penguinsciencefiction.org

I could have avoided alluding to John Wyndham’s classic sci-fi novel Trouble with Lichen, but after coming across a few headlines this week that read “Trouble with..” I simply couldn’t resist. Something to think about when aiming to be clear: resist at all cost! (unless of course the idea comes naturally)

There’s also a double entendre behind the novel’s title, as I recall it being quite a slog of a read, and Wyndham somehow never really managing to complete his revolutionary thoughts around women in society, immortality, etc.—as if there were way too many things going on. Why be clever with your content when you want to be clear? Oh the sweet irony.

Content is king
Now despite this tried (tired?) and true adage, here are some thoughts which may help give added perspective:

  • Less isn’t always more, but it’s usually more concise
    I was recently at a seminar on the subject of digital marketing. That event essentially inspired me to write this post. There was so much material crammed into the short time period that the presenter kept apologizing about how it would take days just to properly talk about one of the points. So why not adjust the content to fit the time frame?
  • Social media is now a given; Twitter is not a fad
    There were many useful nuggets in the presentation. In fact, overall, it was clearly an eye-opener for many of the people in the audience, most of whom were still new to social media. However, I thought it was misleading (perhaps misinformed?) of the presenter to say that “the jury is still out on whether or not Twitter is a fad” and to refer to LinkedIn as “just a directory to me”. If social media is part of your content, talk about it in a way that shows you are actually using and experiencing it, and share the HOW with others.
  • Video is underused but only works with good production value
    Many corporations are in steady pursuit of finding ways to leverage all types of media in their B2B strategies, including video. The user experience associated with video is self-evident. However, for video to be truly compelling, producing it must really be left to the pros. This is where committee-driven decisions have no place and where collaboration between MarkComm and either its internal team or a vendor must be allowed to be a self-contained process. Think tacky commercials by biz owners who DIY-ed their way into producing their own spot.
  • The social web is fragmented; messaging can’t be
    Because the web was meant to be a virtual experience of interconnectivity, the speed it takes to permeate throughout the fabric of society shouldn’t really be a surprise. But because of a multitude of channels and platforms from which messages are pushed and pulled, it is important to ensure that the key messages that characterize your content is reflected consistently throughout all your online and offline assets. This is not a new communications insight. However, in the rush to get on the board the social train, organizations, now more than ever, must pay very close attention to the level of integrity and accuracy of their messages. It can make or break all your efforts.

I had the privilege of getting feedback on this piece prior to posting it. A colleague suggested that I tighten up the intro as he found it somehow detracted from the gist of the post. I agree with him. But I thought it would nonetheless be a healthy exercise to demonstrate how one can easily fall into the trap of trying to be clever and end up being unclear. Lesson learned?

What do you think? What aspects of the “King” would you consider worthy of sharing? What pitfalls have prevented you from staying on point?