To coincide with Britney Spear's adoption of Twitter and reclamation of her "singing" career, I would like to announce a personal milestone of my own: My Third Obligatory Post about Twitter. Obligatory Twitter Post #3 also known as The Spam Years discusses the cultural shift sparked when Internet platforms are adopted strictly as PR tools.
Britney's Tweeting is no secret with hundreds of posts and tweets professing the micro-blogging service's official entry into the toolkit of mainstream PR professionals. With Britney's 3,620 followers accrued in under two weeks, the mainstream proclamations are probably accurate but the larger problem of remaining transparent via an online platform remains. Notable online personalities Gary Vaynerchuck and Fred Wilson stressed the importance of personal ownership with online media. Fred noted that both he and Gary respond to their own emails and tweets stating 'I cannot imagine someone else answering an email sent to me. So it's not happening. You'll either hear from me or you won't hear back at at [sic] all."
The suggestions from Wilson prompts the following questions: Are personal responses a reasonable request for global brands? What is the threshold for relationships on Twitter? Gary and Fred are definitely pioneers in online branding, but do not possess the massive public recognition of Britney Spears. Even if Britney attempted to maintain her social media presence, the task is probably too daunting for someone expected to learn dance moves, lyrics and make public appearances. Enter Lauren...the Twitter Britney.
Britney's marketing team recognizes the potential time investment of tweeting, blogging, plurking, flickring, etc so has decided to attach "Posted by" at the end of all media. Removing personal identity from Twitter could transform the service from a conversation tool with broadcast capabilities to a broadcast tool with conversational potential. Profile from Obama, Senator Clinton, McCain, etc also faced this problem. Mass amounts of followers make listening and participation nearly impossible.
So is there still value in Twitter as a broadcasting tool? Or does the account persona need to be maintained by stunt doubles able to answer accurately on behalf of Britney or Barack? I am still uncertain...but have hope for the latter. Wondering if television, radio or other communication outlets experienced a similar transition when corporate control entered?
Britney's Tweeting is no secret with hundreds of posts and tweets professing the micro-blogging service's official entry into the toolkit of mainstream PR professionals. With Britney's 3,620 followers accrued in under two weeks, the mainstream proclamations are probably accurate but the larger problem of remaining transparent via an online platform remains. Notable online personalities Gary Vaynerchuck and Fred Wilson stressed the importance of personal ownership with online media. Fred noted that both he and Gary respond to their own emails and tweets stating 'I cannot imagine someone else answering an email sent to me. So it's not happening. You'll either hear from me or you won't hear back at at [sic] all."
The suggestions from Wilson prompts the following questions: Are personal responses a reasonable request for global brands? What is the threshold for relationships on Twitter? Gary and Fred are definitely pioneers in online branding, but do not possess the massive public recognition of Britney Spears. Even if Britney attempted to maintain her social media presence, the task is probably too daunting for someone expected to learn dance moves, lyrics and make public appearances. Enter Lauren...the Twitter Britney.
Britney's marketing team recognizes the potential time investment of tweeting, blogging, plurking, flickring, etc so has decided to attach "Posted by" at the end of all media. Removing personal identity from Twitter could transform the service from a conversation tool with broadcast capabilities to a broadcast tool with conversational potential. Profile from Obama, Senator Clinton, McCain, etc also faced this problem. Mass amounts of followers make listening and participation nearly impossible. So is there still value in Twitter as a broadcasting tool? Or does the account persona need to be maintained by stunt doubles able to answer accurately on behalf of Britney or Barack? I am still uncertain...but have hope for the latter. Wondering if television, radio or other communication outlets experienced a similar transition when corporate control entered?
