social media explorer

Now, I see what you were asking about this.

Great explanation, many people will gain a lot by seeing real-examples of the four styles of Twitter marketing.

~joe

Now, I see what you were asking about this.

Great explanation, many people will gain a lot by seeing real-examples of the four styles of Twitter marketing.

~joe

I think I tend to sway back and fourth between Conversationist and Conversational Marketer. When I have an event to market or a recent blog post to promote, I will tweet those more, otherwise, I just try to have conversations. The more I focus on conversation, the more I feel more connected to my followers and those that I am following.

I think I tend to sway back and fourth between Conversationist and Conversational Marketer. When I have an event to market or a recent blog post to promote, I will tweet those more, otherwise, I just try to have conversations. The more I focus on conversation, the more I feel more connected to my followers and those that I am following.

Very good categorization of the Twitter users – it would be nice to develop some sort of matrix, similar the one created by @klout – but the problem with the latter, is that sometimes, they classify what you and I would call a spammer as a “Persona” … I think the axes could include audience but i'm not sure what i would place on the y-axis
It would also be interesting to actually how many twitter users fall in each of the four categories you mentioned in your post.
Thank you for a great post.

Very good categorization of the Twitter users – it would be nice to develop some sort of matrix, similar the one created by @klout – but the problem with the latter, is that sometimes, they classify what you and I would call a spammer as a “Persona” … I think the axes could include audience but i'm not sure what i would place on the y-axis
It would also be interesting to actually how many twitter users fall in each of the four categories you mentioned in your post.
Thank you for a great post.

I won't say who, but after six tweets promoting the same blog post in about three hours, I have just unfollowed an apparently unrepentant spammer

I won't say who, but after six tweets promoting the same blog post in about three hours, I have just unfollowed an apparently unrepentant spammer

Thanks, Nathan. It's certainly a good place to be on the scale. I'm
probably in that same area myself. Thanks for sharing.

Thanks, Nathan. It's certainly a good place to be on the scale. I'm
probably in that same area myself. Thanks for sharing.

Good thoughts, John. Will have to chew on those a bit. I like the idea.

Good thoughts, John. Will have to chew on those a bit. I like the idea.

Thanks Joseph. I hope it proves useful.

Thanks Joseph. I hope it proves useful.

Arg. I sure hope it wasn't a technical glitch …. and that it wasn't
me. It shouldn't have been. Heh. Thanks Dave.

Arg. I sure hope it wasn't a technical glitch …. and that it wasn't
me. It shouldn't have been. Heh. Thanks Dave.

Nice summary. Just curious, how did you pick Tide, which has all of 196 followers? I don't mean they're not worthy of mention, but how did you decide they were one of your four examples? Is it a coincidence that two of the four Profiles you mention in category four (The Spammer) have so few followers. Are you making a point or is the point making itself? Thanks as always.

Nice summary. Just curious, how did you pick Tide, which has all of 196 followers? I don't mean they're not worthy of mention, but how did you decide they were one of your four examples? Is it a coincidence that two of the four Profiles you mention in category four (The Spammer) have so few followers. Are you making a point or is the point making itself? Thanks as always.

Fair question, Brian. I honestly bounced around to a number of brands
and accounts I knew existed looking for examples. When I happened upon
Tide, it fit the description of a spammer (again, not that an approach
like that is always bad). I didn't take into account number of Tweets
or followers, just looked at what the Tweets were and made the call.

To be fair, I'm not even sure if the @tide account is run by P&G. Even
if it is, what's to say they don't come out tomorrow with a strategy
that makes the approach different.

While I would agree that the spam approach (unless you're a celebrity
apparently) makes it hard to gain followers, there IS an audience even
for those accounts. I do follow that local Raffertys account because I
like the restaurant and am interested in specials there. I don't like
how they use Twitter, but that doesn't stop me from following them.
Tide's activity here isn't interesting to me, but if someone digs
Tide, loves coupons, etc., they'll follow this account. I'd bet if
they had more activity (even spammy type) and publicized the fact you
could get coupons and other deals on the Tide Twitter account, they'd
have a lot more followers.

Fair?

Fair question, Brian. I honestly bounced around to a number of brands
and accounts I knew existed looking for examples. When I happened upon
Tide, it fit the description of a spammer (again, not that an approach
like that is always bad). I didn't take into account number of Tweets
or followers, just looked at what the Tweets were and made the call.

To be fair, I'm not even sure if the @tide account is run by P&G. Even
if it is, what's to say they don't come out tomorrow with a strategy
that makes the approach different.

While I would agree that the spam approach (unless you're a celebrity
apparently) makes it hard to gain followers, there IS an audience even
for those accounts. I do follow that local Raffertys account because I
like the restaurant and am interested in specials there. I don't like
how they use Twitter, but that doesn't stop me from following them.
Tide's activity here isn't interesting to me, but if someone digs
Tide, loves coupons, etc., they'll follow this account. I'd bet if
they had more activity (even spammy type) and publicized the fact you
could get coupons and other deals on the Tide Twitter account, they'd
have a lot more followers.

Fair?

Despite all the marketing advice on brand, authenticity and finding your voice, etc., given the ease and immediacy of social networks, I think there are a lot of “Shape-Shifters” out there as well. Is that a bad thing, or is it just a reflection of the ever-evolving nature of the medium?

Despite all the marketing advice on brand, authenticity and finding your voice, etc., given the ease and immediacy of social networks, I think there are a lot of “Shape-Shifters” out there as well. Is that a bad thing, or is it just a reflection of the ever-evolving nature of the medium?

I think that's a good thing, both because of the evolution of the
medium (shows the brands are paying attention) and that it's human. I
don't use Twitter the same way today that I did a year ago. I also use
it differently from day to day sometimes. A brand that follows a
script is a brand that isn't really engaging in a genuine fashion.
Evolution and shape shifting is almost required, I would think. You?

I think that's a good thing, both because of the evolution of the
medium (shows the brands are paying attention) and that it's human. I
don't use Twitter the same way today that I did a year ago. I also use
it differently from day to day sometimes. A brand that follows a
script is a brand that isn't really engaging in a genuine fashion.
Evolution and shape shifting is almost required, I would think. You?

I'm definitely the conversational marketer and think that's the best type out there. As long as you are honest with the audience, and interact on a human level, I don't think there is anything wrong with promoting your own stuff from time to time. If you do a good job, others will actually then help you promote it as well.

I'm definitely the conversational marketer and think that's the best type out there. As long as you are honest with the audience, and interact on a human level, I don't think there is anything wrong with promoting your own stuff from time to time. If you do a good job, others will actually then help you promote it as well.

Certainly agree, Craig. Thanks for the feedback!

Certainly agree, Craig. Thanks for the feedback!

Hi Jason. A lot of media outlets fall into the “spammer” category, but people follow them because they broadcast news. I am not sure I like the term “spammer” (I acknowkledge your caveat about it not being a bad thing), since the connotation implies that people do not want their information. The original reason I joined Twitter was because it is like RSS on steroids. First and foremost, I want Twitter to be my ear to the ground, and so I value some of these “spammers”. I don't expect to converse with the Globe and Mail or Maclean's. And I don't think it's fair to call them a word with such a meaning, just because they use Twitter for broadcast.

Let's flip this on its head now. There are many great conversationalists who I would be tempted to label spammers. These are people whose tweets are mostly directed at a single person. In some cases, they can go back and forth all day in private conversations that with a few dozen private conversations they are having with just a dozen people. DMs are for private discussions, not tweets. I might follow some of these people on someone's recommendation or because I hear they have a great reputation, but then my tweetstream (and all the tweetstreams of their 5000 followers) is bombarded with their private conversations. I would be more tempted to label these types of tweets as spam than those who broadcast news.

Hi Jason. A lot of media outlets fall into the “spammer” category, but people follow them because they broadcast news. I am not sure I like the term “spammer” (I acknowkledge your caveat about it not being a bad thing), since the connotation implies that people do not want their information. The original reason I joined Twitter was because it is like RSS on steroids. First and foremost, I want Twitter to be my ear to the ground, and so I value some of these “spammers”. I don't expect to converse with the Globe and Mail or Maclean's. And I don't think it's fair to call them a word with such a meaning, just because they use Twitter for broadcast.

Let's flip this on its head now. There are many great conversationalists who I would be tempted to label spammers. These are people whose tweets are mostly directed at a single person. In some cases, they can go back and forth all day in private conversations that with a few dozen private conversations they are having with just a dozen people. DMs are for private discussions, not tweets. I might follow some of these people on someone's recommendation or because I hear they have a great reputation, but then my tweetstream (and all the tweetstreams of their 5000 followers) is bombarded with their private conversations. I would be more tempted to label these types of tweets as spam than those who broadcast news.

Excellent perspective, David. I certainly can see how some friendly
convos can come across as senseless interruption. Point taken there.

On the notion of using “spammer.” You hinted at it and someone on
Twitter pointed out earlier that it's probably better to label them
“Broadcasters” since there is usefulness to some in their tweets and
“spam” has such a negative connotation. When I have time, I'm going to
change the labeling.

Excellent perspective, David. I certainly can see how some friendly
convos can come across as senseless interruption. Point taken there.

On the notion of using “spammer.” You hinted at it and someone on
Twitter pointed out earlier that it's probably better to label them
“Broadcasters” since there is usefulness to some in their tweets and
“spam” has such a negative connotation. When I have time, I'm going to
change the labeling.

Excellent perspective, David. I certainly can see how some friendly
convos can come across as senseless interruption. Point taken there.

On the notion of using “spammer.” You hinted at it and someone on
Twitter pointed out earlier that it's probably better to label them
“Broadcasters” since there is usefulness to some in their tweets and
“spam” has such a negative connotation. When I have time, I'm going to
change the labeling.

I would say i fall somewhere between the Conversationalist and the Conversational Marketer. I engage most of the time in the conversation and RT when I see something my followers might find useful. But I do promote my personal blog as well as my company – http://jonmikelbailey.com and http://woodstreet.com respectively. I think there is certainly room to market on Twitter as long as you remain authentic in your approach. The way you have these broken out really illustrates the varying levels of marketing done on Twitter quite well, thanks!

I would say i fall somewhere between the Conversationalist and the Conversational Marketer. I engage most of the time in the conversation and RT when I see something my followers might find useful. But I do promote my personal blog as well as my company – http://jonmikelbailey.com and http://woodstreet.com respectively. I think there is certainly room to market on Twitter as long as you remain authentic in your approach. The way you have these broken out really illustrates the varying levels of marketing done on Twitter quite well, thanks!

Good thoughts, Jon-Mikel. Thank you!

Good thoughts, Jon-Mikel. Thank you!

Yes, I agree. Especially given the communal nature of what we *now* call Social Media. And I count myself among the Shape-Shifters. Still in process of figuring out what I can offer in the greater conversation.

Yes, I agree. Especially given the communal nature of what we *now* call Social Media. And I count myself among the Shape-Shifters. Still in process of figuring out what I can offer in the greater conversation.

Well done. What I particularly like about this post – and you – is the realization and endorsement that just because a modality isn't pure, it can be successful. Ultimately, this is business, right? And while I hope I never become a broadcaster, I recognize their right to do Twitter how they want to do Twitter, not how I prefer it to be done. We all need to remember that social media is the only form of marketing that is 100% opt-in. You don't like someone's tweets? Vote with your unfollow button.

Well done. What I particularly like about this post – and you – is the realization and endorsement that just because a modality isn't pure, it can be successful. Ultimately, this is business, right? And while I hope I never become a broadcaster, I recognize their right to do Twitter how they want to do Twitter, not how I prefer it to be done. We all need to remember that social media is the only form of marketing that is 100% opt-in. You don't like someone's tweets? Vote with your unfollow button.

Do you have a larger version of the “Twitter Marketing Styles” graphic – I'd like to refer to it in an upcoming presentation – giving proper credit, of course.

Do you have a larger version of the “Twitter Marketing Styles” graphic – I'd like to refer to it in an upcoming presentation – giving proper credit, of course.

Jason: This is a terrific post! I like your framework. And, thanks for mentioning our company, Zoetica. Where do you think people fall who share links and insights via their Twitter feed and use it to crowdsource? Where does that fit? As a sub-set of the conversationalist?

Jason: This is a terrific post! I like your framework. And, thanks for mentioning our company, Zoetica. Where do you think people fall who share links and insights via their Twitter feed and use it to crowdsource? Where does that fit? As a sub-set of the conversationalist?

I agree with many others although with conversational and conversationalist I find little distinction. The Brain Solis example does not ring true as he does not drop his blog link that often on Twitter. I feel he is more word of mouth among other marketeers.

I agree with many others although with conversational and conversationalist I find little distinction. The Brain Solis example does not ring true as he does not drop his blog link that often on Twitter. I feel he is more word of mouth among other marketeers.

Great post, and spot on categorizing of twitter styles. I will say that I don’t think your graphic is entirely representative of your post though. It seems to imply a progress, whether chronological or status. As if most twitter accounts start out conversational and move horizontally across the arrow to eventually grow into broadcasting. That is obviously not the case, as your post clearly explains. I just wonder if there’s a more accurate way to represent it visually. Well written, definitely.

I'm a conversationalist but I should probably work towards being a bit closer to conversational marketer. I don't think it would hurt to promote a wee bit more often. I think the way you've broken this down is nice because it shows that the salesmen and broadcaster approaches are not entirely evil. They can work, but I think it takes a very clear content strategy matched to the appropriate audience. One can't just broadcast or push a sales message without a plan.

I do follow some broadcast only accounts such as weather reports or humor. If an account is regularly posting content that provides value to me, then I don't mind if they aren't replying, following me back or whatever. They're filling a need, be that one for information or entertainment. I think people fail at this approach when they don't put the needs of the audience in mind. For instance if I have a favorite brand of dog food, I'm not going to follow the company just to hear about dog nutrition or the latest products. But I might follow them if they were offering a regular mix of good advice for dog owners that happens to include a small mix of product placement. As with so many things, content tends to be the driver that will differentiate between success and failure no matter which Tweeting strategy is in play.

I'm a conversationalist but I should probably work towards being a bit closer to conversational marketer. I don't think it would hurt to promote a wee bit more often. I think the way you've broken this down is nice because it shows that the salesmen and broadcaster approaches are not entirely evil. They can work, but I think it takes a very clear content strategy matched to the appropriate audience. One can't just broadcast or push a sales message without a plan.

I do follow some broadcast only accounts such as weather reports or humor. If an account is regularly posting content that provides value to me, then I don't mind if they aren't replying, following me back or whatever. They're filling a need, be that one for information or entertainment. I think people fail at this approach when they don't put the needs of the audience in mind. For instance if I have a favorite brand of dog food, I'm not going to follow the company just to hear about dog nutrition or the latest products. But I might follow them if they were offering a regular mix of good advice for dog owners that happens to include a small mix of product placement. As with so many things, content tends to be the driver that will differentiate between success and failure no matter which Tweeting strategy is in play.

Hey, Jason, I did see this first thing this morning, but did not comment because I am really humbled by this designation! There are so many great conversationalists out there who do this. It's the right way, according to Doc Searls and the Cluetrain.

You are kind to choose me. I for one am continuing to evolve my style so I can be of maximum service to my community, and in particular I hope to deliver a more gentle debate in the future. Thank you again for this post, and in general for being a great intellectual in my life.

Hey, Jason, I did see this first thing this morning, but did not comment because I am really humbled by this designation! There are so many great conversationalists out there who do this. It's the right way, according to Doc Searls and the Cluetrain.

You are kind to choose me. I for one am continuing to evolve my style so I can be of maximum service to my community, and in particular I hope to deliver a more gentle debate in the future. Thank you again for this post, and in general for being a great intellectual in my life.

Where do the people who primarily share information they think others would be interested in fit in your model?

Where do the people who primarily share information they think others would be interested in fit in your model?

[...] more from the original source: Four Styles Of Marketing On Twitter | Social Media Explorer Share and [...]

Jason; What a great article! Your segmentation of Twitter marketing based on interactive communications really helps clarify the various groups. Your article forces us to think in terms of providing our readers with better content in this really new information age. RD Twitter/RDWORKS Excitingtwitter@earthlink.net

Jason; What a great article! Your segmentation of Twitter marketing based on interactive communications really helps clarify the various groups. Your article forces us to think in terms of providing our readers with better content in this really new information age. RD Twitter/RDWORKS Excitingtwitter@earthlink.net

[...] a strange post here: Four Styles Of Marketing On Twitter | Social Media Explorer Share this on BlinklistShare this on del.icio.usDigg this!Share this on RedditBuzz up!Stumble upon [...]

[...] Skavish commented with this great article on various styles of business Twittering: Four Styles of Marketing on Twitter – thank you [...]

[...] Four Styles of Marketing on Twitter | Social Media Explorer | Jason Falls | January 18 2010 Share and Enjoy: [...]

[...] Es una adaptación de un articulo de   Jason Cataratas [...]

[...] original post here: Four Styles Of Marketing On Twitter | Social Media Explorer Tweet This Or Share Through Other Social [...]

Very interesting post, I think I fall under the “The Conversational Marketer.” I engage my audience with high ratios, but I also put out links to my blog and outside activities. It's a part of my value proposition to them. They give me great insights, news, information, and traffic, and I continue to provide them with the same.

To add to your post, I think it's a fair question to ask one-self, “what's my social media value-proposition?” How am I going to add value to my followers no matter which style of marketer I have?

Very interesting post, I think I fall under the “The Conversational Marketer.” I engage my audience with high ratios, but I also put out links to my blog and outside activities. It's a part of my value proposition to them. They give me great insights, news, information, and traffic, and I continue to provide them with the same.

To add to your post, I think it's a fair question to ask one-self, “what's my social media value-proposition?” How am I going to add value to my followers no matter which style of marketer I have?

Very insightful article. As a company that is fairly new to the twitterverse we're still learning the ropes. The ultimate goal is to be a conversational marketer however after reading through your descriptions I think that in my enthusiasm I've crossed the line into salesman bordering on “broadcaster”. These breakdowns are going to serve as a nice reminder for me in the future! Thanks for the great information.

Very insightful article. As a company that is fairly new to the twitterverse we're still learning the ropes. The ultimate goal is to be a conversational marketer however after reading through your descriptions I think that in my enthusiasm I've crossed the line into salesman bordering on “broadcaster”. These breakdowns are going to serve as a nice reminder for me in the future! Thanks for the great information.

I think I teeter the line a bit between being a conversationalist and a conversational marketer. I have days when all I want to do is engage in chitter chatter and then I have days when I am more of the conversational marketer bringing my followers into the conversation and sharing valuable useful information.

I am such a proponent of being who you are in social media marketing and teetering between the two is sooo me!

This was a great post. I think this is first time I have visited your blog but trust me when I say I will not be the last.

I think I teeter the line a bit between being a conversationalist and a conversational marketer. I have days when all I want to do is engage in chitter chatter and then I have days when I am more of the conversational marketer bringing my followers into the conversation and sharing valuable useful information.

I am such a proponent of being who you are in social media marketing and teetering between the two is sooo me!

This was a great post. I think this is first time I have visited your blog but trust me when I say I will not be the last.

I'll email you later today!

I'll email you later today!

Good observations and post. I'm solidly in the conversationalist arena now, but will likely transition to the conversational marketer when I have additional activities that I'd like to post and promote.

Good observations and post. I'm solidly in the conversationalist arena now, but will likely transition to the conversational marketer when I have additional activities that I'd like to post and promote.

I think the marketing styles are tied to marketing strategies. For some of the feed-oriented accounts, the strategy may be to just “touch” Twitter by pumping through feeds. This could be in lieu of investing resources to actually engage Twitter users. The question is whether it's better to have to only have a feed presence than to not be on at all. The answer is, “it depends.”

I think the marketing styles are tied to marketing strategies. For some of the feed-oriented accounts, the strategy may be to just “touch” Twitter by pumping through feeds. This could be in lieu of investing resources to actually engage Twitter users. The question is whether it's better to have to only have a feed presence than to not be on at all. The answer is, “it depends.”

Jason,

You know, I really think spammer fits the bill sometimes. So maybe there are broadcasters and spammers, with the later burping out all sorts of useless junk.

Best, Rich

Jason,

You know, I really think spammer fits the bill sometimes. So maybe there are broadcasters and spammers, with the later burping out all sorts of useless junk.

Best, Rich

Jason,

I like this list. However I think you forgot one, “The Educator” This would be the Twitter user who primarily uses Twitter to educate followers on topical subjects.

Jason,

I like this list. However I think you forgot one, “The Educator” This would be the Twitter user who primarily uses Twitter to educate followers on topical subjects.

Thanks, Jason, for this construct! Agreed with other commenters that there may be a fifth designation – those that primarily use Twitter for link sharing, pointing to (3rd party) news & events, and crowdsourcing. Not sure where it fits, though – maybe it's a combo of #1, 2 and 4?

Thanks, Jason, for this construct! Agreed with other commenters that there may be a fifth designation – those that primarily use Twitter for link sharing, pointing to (3rd party) news & events, and crowdsourcing. Not sure where it fits, though – maybe it's a combo of #1, 2 and 4?

Great question, DH. If you're a share-er then you're solidly in the
first two sections — Conversationalist or Conversational Marketer. If
you share links to your own stuff, you'll move toward the second of
those two a bit more. Your sharing is your conversation, though I'd
bet you're conversing a bit more than never. Thanks for asking.

Great question, DH. If you're a share-er then you're solidly in the
first two sections — Conversationalist or Conversational Marketer. If
you share links to your own stuff, you'll move toward the second of
those two a bit more. Your sharing is your conversation, though I'd
bet you're conversing a bit more than never. Thanks for asking.

Excellent added thought, Rod. And I agree with you … if you can
answer the value proposition question, you can better justify your
classification and how you're serving your audience. Well done, sir.

Excellent added thought, Rod. And I agree with you … if you can
answer the value proposition question, you can better justify your
classification and how you're serving your audience. Well done, sir.

Thanks Ron. I appreciate the encouragement. Glad to have your thoughts
here, too.

Thanks Ron. I appreciate the encouragement. Glad to have your thoughts
here, too.

Definitely, Beth. And honored you stop by. I think crowdsourcing is
probably between conversationalist and conversational marketing. You
are, after all, using your network for information (gain) but it's not
like you're asking them to buy something. Still, it's a marketing
activity. And sharing is just another form of having conversations in
my book. A link is almost as good as added value in conversations.
Sometimes moreso.

Thanks for the questions. What do YOU think, though? You're more
qualified to answer than I! (Congrats on Zoetica, by the way. Excited
for you.)

Definitely, Beth. And honored you stop by. I think crowdsourcing is
probably between conversationalist and conversational marketing. You
are, after all, using your network for information (gain) but it's not
like you're asking them to buy something. Still, it's a marketing
activity. And sharing is just another form of having conversations in
my book. A link is almost as good as added value in conversations.
Sometimes moreso.

Thanks for the questions. What do YOU think, though? You're more
qualified to answer than I! (Congrats on Zoetica, by the way. Excited
for you.)

I call 'em like I see 'em, my friend. Thank you for being a leader
among us all in this space. We learn from you a lot.

I call 'em like I see 'em, my friend. Thank you for being a leader
among us all in this space. We learn from you a lot.

A question about your process based on something you wrote:

“…I have noticed four major types of marketing styles emerge among those using Twitter as a marketing platform, each with examples of large followings, audiences and (probably) successes.”

Did you look first at the number of followers or the content produced? Asked differently, if X has 20,000 followers and Y has 100 followers, but Y produces a greater degree of Z than X, but followers leads you to include X, what about Y?

A question about your process based on something you wrote:

“…I have noticed four major types of marketing styles emerge among those using Twitter as a marketing platform, each with examples of large followings, audiences and (probably) successes.”

Did you look first at the number of followers or the content produced? Asked differently, if X has 20,000 followers and Y has 100 followers, but Y produces a greater degree of Z than X, but followers leads you to include X, what about Y?

Amen to that, Jesse. Nice way to nail that point.

Amen to that, Jesse. Nice way to nail that point.

Thanks Jason! This post is filled with great information. How about one more type of marketers, who just have their profile up on Twitter because they have heard that “Twitter is the next cool thing to do”? I feel there would be many who will fit in this category.

Thanks again, your post was very good read.

Thanks Jason! This post is filled with great information. How about one more type of marketers, who just have their profile up on Twitter because they have heard that “Twitter is the next cool thing to do”? I feel there would be many who will fit in this category.

Thanks again, your post was very good read.

LOL! I read somewhere that 96% of all people on Twitter have less than 100 followers…so maybe you are right!

LOL! I read somewhere that 96% of all people on Twitter have less than 100 followers…so maybe you are right!

Agreed, Rich. But like the Stephanopolous example, sometimes it works
for people. Thanks for chiming in.

Agreed, Rich. But like the Stephanopolous example, sometimes it works
for people. Thanks for chiming in.

Didn't forget. I consider that part of conversation. You're sharing,
which is as good as speaking. And you forget that an educator with a
call to action or end result in mind is also a marketer! But thanks
for the feedback.

Didn't forget. I consider that part of conversation. You're sharing,
which is as good as speaking. And you forget that an educator with a
call to action or end result in mind is also a marketer! But thanks
for the feedback.

Thanks, Stephanie. Perhaps there is a fifth category. I just think
sharing fits into conversations nicely. Happy to give it some thought,
though.

Thanks, Stephanie. Perhaps there is a fifth category. I just think
sharing fits into conversations nicely. Happy to give it some thought,
though.

Thank you for this great information! I am brand new to internet marketing and had no idea Twitter could be useful for marketing. I will do more research right here as I see there are many links to more info.

Thank you for this great information! I am brand new to internet marketing and had no idea Twitter could be useful for marketing. I will do more research right here as I see there are many links to more info.

Thank you, LaTara. I'm glad you came and can't wait to have you back.

Thank you, LaTara. I'm glad you came and can't wait to have you back.

Awesome! While I don't want to imply the far right of that spectrum is
bad in all cases, I have a personal preference for conversational
marketing and conversationalists. Sure is nice to see the scale opened
your eyes to how you use Twitter. Best of luck as grow into it!

Awesome! While I don't want to imply the far right of that spectrum is
bad in all cases, I have a personal preference for conversational
marketing and conversationalists. Sure is nice to see the scale opened
your eyes to how you use Twitter. Best of luck as grow into it!

I looked at content produced because the number of followers has
nothing to do with marketing methodology in content. An I couldn't
answer the second part of that if I tried. Sucked at algebra.

I looked at content produced because the number of followers has
nothing to do with marketing methodology in content. And I couldn't
answer the second part of that if I tried. Sucked at algebra.

Amen, brother Jay. Thanks man.

Amen, brother Jay. Thanks man.

Thanks Daragh. Certainly welcome the push back. Just did a check of
Brian's stream. I counted five of the last 20 Tweets with links to
either BrianSolis.com or Bubilicious – also his site. Not that it's a
competition, but I just wanted you to know I don't think I labeled him
unfairly. Brian is a great guy and a pseudo-mentor of mine. I admire
the hell out of him. I also don't mind at all when he drops his own
links because his content is always worth reading. But thanks for the
input.

Thanks Daragh. Certainly welcome the push back. Just did a check of
Brian's stream. I counted five of the last 20 Tweets with links to
either BrianSolis.com or Bubilicious – also his site. Not that it's a
competition, but I just wanted you to know I don't think I labeled him
unfairly. Brian is a great guy and a pseudo-mentor of mine. I admire
the hell out of him. I also don't mind at all when he drops his own
links because his content is always worth reading. But thanks for the
input.

Glad to help, Myron. Twitter can be used for marketing, but should be done with care and planning. Good luck as you do both!

Glad to help, Myron. Twitter can be used for marketing, but should be done with care and planning. Good luck as you do both!

Good one, Anish. You're right. There are lots here just because someone told them they should. They'll figure it out one day.

Good one, Anish. You're right. There are lots here just because someone told them they should. They'll figure it out one day.

Thanks, Mat. Glad we could give you food for thought.

Thanks, Mat. Glad we could give you food for thought.

Awesome line cool:

“very clear content strategy matched to the appropriate audience”

Couldn't have said it better.

Awesome line cool:

“very clear content strategy matched to the appropriate audience”

Couldn't have said it better.

Interesting. I really didn't expect this response. It seems to me that there is a difference between a Conversationalist and an Educator (or Sharer or pick some other term). To me, based on your description of a Conversationalist, I have a vision of exactly who you pointed out, Geoff Livingston. He covers a ton of topics, regularly shares a point of view, and “participates” in a conversation. I see this as distinctly different from the people (myself included) who primarily pass on information to others as aggregators of information from multiple sources. There's some editorializing to create a point of view, but by and large it is really about educating or sharing. Am I splitting a hair here?

Interesting. I really didn't expect this response. It seems to me that there is a difference between a Conversationalist and an Educator (or Sharer or pick some other term). To me, based on your description of a Conversationalist, I have a vision of exactly who you pointed out, Geoff Livingston. He covers a ton of topics, regularly shares a point of view, and “participates” in a conversation. I see this as distinctly different from the people (myself included) who primarily pass on information to others as aggregators of information from multiple sources. There's some editorializing to create a point of view, but by and large it is really about educating or sharing. Am I splitting a hair here?

By the way, very interesting post. Thanks for the conversation.

By the way, very interesting post. Thanks for the conversation.

great post and amazing to see you respond all of the comments…

great post and amazing to see you respond all of the comments…

Thanks, A.J. You folks take time to react to something I wrote. The
least I can do is say thanks. I enjoy the conversations that ensue as
well. Thanks for noticing.

Thanks, A.J. You folks take time to react to something I wrote. The
least I can do is say thanks. I enjoy the conversations that ensue as
well. Thanks for noticing.

Perhaps, but it's a matter of opinion and perspective. I think sharing
info is participating. It's also hard to find people who share only
and don't converse as well. I'll give it some more thought but an
altruistic share-er or aggregator is a conversationalist in my brain.

Perhaps, but it's a matter of opinion and perspective. I think sharing
info is participating. It's also hard to find people who share only
and don't converse as well. I'll give it some more thought but an
altruistic share-er or aggregator is a conversationalist in my brain.

Thank you for making it better!

Thank you for making it better!

As always a good break down Jason. I would agree with you for the most part, but their are likely a few other types out there as well.

As always a good break down Jason. I would agree with you for the most part, but their are likely a few other types out there as well.

Probably are. It appears many want me to add “aggregators/sharers” to
the list. Are there others?

Probably are. It appears many want me to add “aggregators/sharers” to
the list. Are there others?

[...] No so coincidentally, we talked about a marketing category of “Conversationalists” in Monday’s four methods of Twitter marketing post, along with one called, “Conversational Marketers.” The fact Forrester now recognizes [...]

Jason – I found your blog via @nicobrx and enjoyed your thoughts. It is all about the conversation and being authentic about it!

Jason – I found your blog via @nicobrx and enjoyed your thoughts. It is all about the conversation and being authentic about it!

Awesome, Rich. Thanks for coming by. Appreciate your thoughts.

Awesome, Rich. Thanks for coming by. Appreciate your thoughts.

I'd like to read more about twitter. keep it coming! Thanks for the post. @marklatimer

I'd like to read more about twitter. keep it coming! Thanks for the post. @marklatimer

What strikes me is that their is an audience for all four styles. Nice way to present that Jason.

Great post, thanks for sharing with us!

RM – InBoundMarketingPR

Thanks Mark. Appreciate the comment.

Thanks Mark. Appreciate the comment.

Completely with you here, Jesse. It seems as though the different Twitter feeds cited are associated with different marketing strategies and different sized brands. The conversationalists are more personally branded, social media focused tweeters, which makes conversational engagement more feasible as opposed to the larger companies listed in the other categories. The conversational marketers group does seem like the goal and ideal mix for self-promotion and engagement in my opinion.

And while spammers/broadcasters do not engage in content, I find it useful as other posters mentioned as an RSS feed of sorts. Also as other posters have noted there exists conversational spam as well in back-and-forth tangents/flame wars.

Completely with you here, Jesse. It seems as though the different Twitter feeds cited are associated with different marketing strategies and different sized brands. The conversationalists are more personally branded, social media focused tweeters, which makes conversational engagement more feasible as opposed to the larger companies listed in the other categories. The conversational marketers group does seem like the goal and ideal mix for self-promotion and engagement in my opinion.

And while spammers/broadcasters do not engage in content, I find it useful as other posters mentioned as an RSS feed of sorts. Also as other posters have noted there exists conversational spam as well in back-and-forth tangents/flame wars.

I also make that point because there are people like me that are totally Conversationlists on one account, but then do the “mostly feeds” activities on another biz account because that's the current company strategy. Of course I'd like to engage much more on the second account but my efforts are directed otherwise.

I also make that point because there are people like me that are totally Conversationlists on one account, but then do the “mostly feeds” activities on another biz account because that's the current company strategy. Of course I'd like to engage much more on the second account but my efforts are directed otherwise.

Thank you for saying so!

Thank you for saying so!

[...] Four styles of marketing on Twitter – Jason Falls makes a great case for the types of Twitter marketers. Marketing folks are now catching up to what has been going on in social media.  After seeing Dell making oodles of money has now become, What is this Twitter that you speak of, and how do we make money from it. This may also be the best description of folks in the space as well: [...]

[...] http://www.socialmediaexplorer.com [...]

[...] uns dias atrás li um post do Jason Falls no Social Media Explorer que falava sobre alguns possíveis posicionamentos que [...]

[...] Four Styles Of Marketing On Twitter Published: January 18, 2010 Source: Social Media Explorer Marketing on Twitter continues to be one of the most talked about subjects in social media today. The social media purists still sing campfire songs about how you can’t do it. Dell is up to $6.5 million dolla… [...]

[...] Read the Full Article. [...]

[...] 19. Four Styles Of Marketing On Twitter [...]

I really need to catch up on your blog. I've been so wrapped up in my offline life that my reader is full of “must read Jason's post about…” unread but still marked as unread posts!!

Can't wait to see you at SXSW.

P.S. I need a second SME sticker – have one on my netbook, but need another for the laptop. I'll trade you!

I've got as many as you'd like. Will see you next week!

[...] these kinds of tweets, I think it’s important to stress natural conversation. In fact, when Jason Falls recently analyzed types of Twitter Marketing, he dubbed my approach the epitome of Conversationalist [...]

[...] isso que o blogueiro Jason Falls faz na sua página, ele diferencia 4 modelos de mraketing praticados pelas organizações no twitter. Os [...]

I think to market successfully you should really focus on what you shouldn't do rather than what you should. I have in the past sent out automated tweets but I make sure in between those to tweet things that are relateble or interesting and to always respond to comments from people. It's not that difficult even if someone has 10 Twitter accounts. All they need is a desktop Twitter client which is logged into all their accounts.

People unfollow those who just spam like the clappers. Never think that people are stupid, seriously.

[...] uns dias atrás li um post do Jason Falls no Social Media Explorer que falava sobre alguns possíveis posicionamentos que [...]

thank you for sharing the post,it is really good @, i just got a best present,
MTS変換 Mac 10
Mod変換 Mac 7
mts変換 mac
VOB 変換Mac
M2TS変換 Mac
M4V 変換for Mac
動画変換mac

you can have a try

[...] To become well-liked by the Fifth Estate, you must become a member of the Fifth Estate. Consider the difference, the traditional method has your spokespeople — in the modern parlance community manager — talking from an ivory tower delivering messages. But in the most social communities, this is considered spamming. Instead, you need to get out there and have real dialogue with people. [...]

“Broadcasters” (which I still call spammers) have cause me to (largely) abandon Twitter.

Why? You don't have to follow them. Follow the people that are meaningful to

you. Ignore the rest of them (or us … heh.)

[...] people who use Twitter as a social media marketing platform, you might fall into one of the four categories of Twitter marketers mentioned [...]

[...] Connie Chan, James Chartrand, Patrick Crane, Anil Dash, Todd Defren, Peggy Duvette, Eric Eggertson, Jason Falls, Allison [...]

[...] Estilos de Marketing no Twitter Há uns dias atrás li um post do Jason Falls no Social Media Explorer que falava sobre alguns possíveis posicionamentos que [...]