The Wall Street Journal ran a story on October 27th proclaiming “Twitter Goes Mainstream.” There’s no doubt Twitter has been growing strongly. The latest analysis from MediaPost indicates an almost fourfold from 533,000 to 2.4 million visitors on the microblogging site. What is driving Twitter’s growth? Simplicity.
The online service from Web start-up Twitter Inc. prompts users to do one thing: answer the question, “What are you doing?” in 140 characters or less. People type these brief updates, known as “tweets,” into Twitter’s site or send them to Twitter as text messages. Friends and colleagues can then check the site to monitor each other’s updates.
The article does an excellent job of outlining concepts like “following” other Twitter users, using the service for business development and broadcasting information. As one would expect, there are the typical nods to Zappos and comcast.
Despite this great coverage, The WSJ missed several critical points:
Engagement
The biggest flaw with the WSJ article is the failure to point out the importance of engagement. The most I could find was:
Some companies are using the service as a way to reach out to customers.
Many companies and non-profit organizations are using twitter in a number of ways that go beyond the simple broadcast of information. Take any media outlet on Twitter. Most have few or no followers and simply repurpose information in 140 characters or less. Is this useful? Yes, to a certain extent, but it fails to use the resource to the fullest extent possible. If broadcasting a message – on an exclusive basis – is your goal, stick to email.
Why is engagement so important? It narrows the distance between you and your customers, it’s helps them identify with your brand (and your brand manager), both of which help to increase the value associated with “following” other users. Let’s also keep in mind engagement can be measured and tied to customer propositions, ultimately linked to corporate strategy and financial outcomes.
Monetization
Twitter is a business without a model. As Claire Cain Miller writes on nytimes.com:
“Twitter has absolutely no revenue — not even ads” and “grow first and monetize second.”
This serious issue is left out of the WSJ article, which mentioned a “premium service” monetization strategy.
“Looking at the value commercial entities are getting out of Twitter could help us build a sustainable company,” he says, noting that Twitter might charge for premium services in the future.
Yes, Web 2.0 has serious issues with monetization, but given the open-source alternatives, like identi.ca, is this even viable? As Simon Dumenco points out on AdAge.com:
“Oh, really, now? Cash-strapped companies are going to want to pay to annoy their customers? Customers are going to want to be monitored?”
Why should this be a concern for Twitter users? As the economy tanks, will want to invest our efforts in services that will be around in a year.
The Fail Whale
The service was plagued with a number of issues earlier this year. Flaws within the Twitter API prompted a number of failures.. replacing the service with the fail whale.
Twitter’s Mr. Stone says the company “has made great advances in reliability and performance” in recent months and will continue to improve. “We still have work to do,” he says.
These reassurances make for good PR, and the service has greatly improved it’s uptime. However, for organizations seeking to use Twitter as an engagement channel, service interruptions represent a risk.
The Future
What does the future hold for Twitter? Monetization and reliability represent significant problems, but the value offered to users is extremely important to capture.
{ 5 comments }
