Todd Zeigler at Bivings breaking down his own anecdotal evidence for Twitter being a better traffic referrer, along with some good reasons why this would make sense, including a point that dovetails well with the Time piece “How Twitter Will Change the Way We Live“:
Ultimately, I think Facebook is still primarily about your friends, while Twitter is more about content discovery (and, increasingly, brands and celebrities). I have no doubt this will change as Facebook continues to grow and tweaks its model further. But for now the nature of Twitter makes it a better driver of traffic than Facebook, at least in my experience.
Twitter has already distinguished itself as being more relevant to its users than Facebook has, and with a fraction of the audience is driving more traffic to at least some websites. As the Time article points out, Twitter is actually enhancing the covnersation:
Websites that once saw their traffic dominated by Google search queries are seeing a growing number of new visitors coming from “passed links” at social networks like Twitter and Facebook. This is what the naysayers fail to understand: it’s just as easy to use Twitter to spread the word about a brilliant 10,000-word New Yorker article as it is to spread the word about your Lucky Charms habit.
What Todd refers to as “content discovery” really goes to the heart of Twitter’s value: it’s not about what your friends had for breakfast — it’s about what your peers think is important right now. People who get that and follow intelligently get value out of Twitter.
Nancy Scola at techPresident taking notice of John Kasich’s campaign announcement online blitz (full disclosure, Kasich for Ohio is a client of emotive, llc):
“Announcing your candidacy through a multimedia assault has very quickly become the new normal. Today’s example: John Kasich, who announced for Ohio governor yesterday via an integrated blend of YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, blog, and more.”
I’ve sit down to actually process snail mail, which I probably do once every other month, and one thing has become painfully clear. Organizations I care about are wasting my precious contribution dollars by sending me expensive and elaborate mail pieces designed to get more of my money.
Newsflash: I will never send you money by mail. Ever.
I could (and have) opened a mail piece, been blown away by the message, been moved to tears by the imagery, and totally agreed with everything the organization stands for and is trying to convey, and still will NEVER GIVE BY MAIL.
This should not come as a surprise. Given the socioeconomic demographic information about me plastered all over the Internet, credit bureaus, and countless “public information” depots that smart organizations match their housefiles against, the fact that I’ll never send a paper check through the mail to anyone should be as plain as the nose on a direct mail vendor’s face.
It’s not that I don’t care. I do. But I haven’t physically touched a checkbook in almost a decade. I don’t write checks. I barely open my snail mail, and then only if it looks like something that came from a government entity that is trying to levy some kind of fee against me. Frequently I get junk mail that tries to look like these notices. This only makes me angrier.
Second newsflash: I give online. It’s easy. It’s fast. It’s ridiculously more secure than sending sensitive information through the United States Postal Service.
And best of all, how much does it cost my favorite organizations to proposition me for more money via my favorite means of communication? Almost nothing.
Direct mail is not dead. Far from it. They make all kinds of money. But not on me. And many others I suspect.
So, in summation: fire your direct mail firm if they are sending your fundraising pieces to me. Find one that can actually save you money by not wasting dollars propositioning people who obviously will never engage with them in that channel. Send me an email. Better yet, create something online that is so compelling that friends and peers will actually send it to me on your behalf because they recognize a) how compelling it is, and b) that I will also find it compelling. Then your communication comes to me from a trusted source with a high degree of relevancy.
Then I will give. Generously, and instantly.
PdF Chat Time with Jon Henke | Personal Democracy Forum: “Jon Henke: Outreach strategy: Get to know bloggers. Be one of them. Be credible. Be interesting. Keep it short. Respect their time. Don’t just ask for favors. Try to help bloggers whenever you can. And NEVER send out a press release.”
Translate this to campaign signs and turn your supporters into photogs who can post pictures back to the candidate site that make it look like the whole state is covered in the candidate’s brand:
Major Ad Campaign for Starbucks to Focus on Quality – NYTimes.com: “The idea for the Starbucks photo contest came from watching what people already do on Facebook and Twitter, said Chris Bruzzo, vice president for brand, content and online at Starbucks. Each year, people race to post the first photos of Starbucks shops decorated in red for the holidays, he said, and on Flickr, people vie to post photos that include multiple Starbucks stores in the same shot.”
“The reality is Twitter’s got all sorts of business models available to it,” said Todd Chaffee, general partner at Institutional Venture Partners and a Twitter investor. “We’re putting together monetization framework, things like features for commercial accounts, which could be for global companies all the way down to local companies.” He said the business model will be largely driven by the creativity and needs of the businesses using it.
So true. Hat tip to Allen Fuller: Small talk with a web designer by The Anti Pimp.
Todd Zeigler at Bivings gets it right: splash pages can be annoying and technically present an extra step between users and data they are searching for, but as long as they continue to work, developers are smart to continue to use them, as long as best practices are observed: In Defense of Splash Pages
I was a guest on the Digital Politics: “The Art and Science of Targeting Voters” podcast yesterday, and relayed my thoughts about the recent Politics Online conference, the state of the industry, and the importance of a database centric strategy for political campaigns.
The Digital Politics podcast this week will focus on how web tools can be used more effectively to identify likely contributors, volunteers, supporters, and voters.
My guest today is Matthew Dybwad, Senior director of Internet Strategy, emotive LLC, a Virginia based Internet consulting firm. Matthew moderated a panel at the IPDI Politics Online Conference in DC this week and we will be talking about where the political insiders are seeing the most potential for the next round of online campaigns.
Get in your ROFL Copter. This is from Josh Trevino:
About 30 minutes ago, I posted this:
About 10 minutes ago, I got a call from a producer at Nightline, asking for my source.
The answer? Steven Seagal’s 1992 classic, “Under Siege” –
So disappointing. But now you know they’re watching.