DISQUS

I as well. I as well.

It's our job to keep things light;-)

Love the predictions, but I think Facebook will likely by Twitter and integrate it into the status notifications. If you look at the mini-feed they have already started to make a fun at Friendfeed, so it would make sense .

Wow. If I knew how to spell:

*If there was something on the line here, like cash or Scoble linking to the winner's website, I would fully agree with your point here.

But as far as I can tell, and as someone who responded to Mr. Scoble's query, it was all in good fun.

If there was something on the line here, like cash for Scoble linking to the winner's website, I would be fully agree with your point here.

But as far as I can tell, and as someone who responded to Mr. Scoble's query, it was all in good fun.

Look at site's like Mashable, it's just the same group of egotistical sycophants commenting in a loud echo chamber. Now that is something to dislike. This? Not sure sure.

@Ryan

That was an excellent point.

@Ryan

Some people have a problem with advertising; No matter what forms, no matter how useful.

The allure to any new online frontier is the lack of advertising. There may be a correlation (and causation) to show that an increase in the amount of advertisements leads to a decrease in membership or desire to utilize a service.

That would be a great guest post for Mashable ...

I think the real issue comes down to this: Many Twitter users like using the services because it is a conversation between two people. So when a brand enters that conversation, even if it is in a helpful capacity (@JetBlue) or an informative capacity (@Marvel), it still constitutes advertising at a basic level.

This "ruins" the conversation because many online are constantly running from advertising and will run elsewhere.

So the question of whether or not a brand belongs on Twitter is not so much about Twitter acting like a phone book but because Twitter acts like a dialogue that is now being disrupted.

I showed my wife this post. Her response: "I wouldn't wear that!"

All I have to say is: About. Damn. Time.

I've found the people at Facebook to be pretty reasonable after speaking with them, so this doesn't seem like a big issue as it can be readily fixed.

Hi Eric,

As promised ...

1) I think, purely from an advertising and marketing perspective, that online media was able to supplant print media because of declining readership from the papers. Advertisers, the spine of the old media, decided to invest their money elsewhere.

I'm convinced if this did not happen, much (but not all) online media outlets would struggle for relevancy among mainstream Americans.

That said, I follow the shift workers and not the digerati, so I know I am in the minority on this one.

2) I always thought blogs were designed with the intention of being monetized. The second (the royal) we figured out we could publish and design, we searched for ways to cash in. Just think about banner advertising in its heyday, those things were everywhere, even on the smallest sites and blogs. The flexibility of the design lent blogs to be monetized as fast as they were created.

3) There is a contradiction in my argument. Essentially, Twitter (as far as the designers were concerned) was not designed to do anything beyond answering the question of "What are you doing?" I could be way off on this, but that's my impression.

The usage of Twitter in replacing blogs, I think, is limited to headlines and pithy comments. You're right in that it is open, but much of the innovation on Twitter has been user generated. Look at services like Mr. Tweet, Twitpics, Tweetlater, and Magpie. Twitter itself (as far as I know) does not participate in the creation of those services, so that lends me to think the service was simply designed for one thing, and we are grafting parts on to it. There's nothing wrong with that ... except for advertising ... and that's for now.

One thing I didn't touch on: When you follow a brand, and the brand converses back with you, that can be effective as a method of advertising through Twitter. In that case, people are choosing to follow the brand, whereas with Magpie the advertisement is thrust upon you.

Hi Matthew,

This was a thoughtful and intelligent roundup concerning the use of Twitter among the journalist set, which includes myself. Many in the profession are still struggling to pickup Twitter, but it is only a matter of time before they master the service and others duplicate.

I couldn't agree more.

The problem is: Advertisers buy American websites, not Australian. So the tech companies, which are essentially advertising firms, need different sources of income. That's why Australians get a different web experience then Americans (as an example.)

It's dumb, but that's the logic they use. Having attempted to purchase advertising on a mass scale via Google and others. I can vouch for this.

Build cash. Build cash. Build cash.

Too many people jump into business without the funds to support it.

I really like point #4. Willie Nelson is another good example (if you're willing to include his bus.)

The problem is, and I'm saying this as a trained organizational consultant, that the method of analysis often used to make decisions is poor. I don't think it is a question of a desire to change, but when you get skewed or inaccurate information, you don't see things as they are.

Ok. Maybe that's too optimistic.

I don't think I can stress the importance of using your name, if you're building a personal brand, when commenting on blogs or using social media services.

Using your name builds trust. If your (future) audience doesn't trust you, you're waiting your time.

I agree with @Geek Mommy, it certainly is a neat feature FF is adding, but you get overwhelmed with content on there. I don't think it is a viable Twitter replacement or competitor.

I kept thinking, "Man, is this going to show up in the new edition of the 4 Hour Work Week? Forget sex with the wife, be more efficient with your time and tell her to use the frozen stuff!"

But, no pitch on that front and for that I am thankful. Tim, this was useful and hilarious. Thank you.

I tried Magpie, and I found it to be a major annoyance, so I totally agree with you there.

But Twitter has replaced blogging, in many ways, so don't be too quick to throw them under the bus.

For Twitter, I would absolutely agree with you. I'm not yet sold on the long term viability of Friendfeed when Facebook can do virtually the same thing. Not to mention, Friendfeed hits that critical mass of "too much information". But who knows? I'm excited to see what dethrones Twitter.

I like the professor's response. Very funny in light of this mess.

Gross, the analogy, but good point.

Good stuff, but no Twitter Novel?

My God, this movie better be fantastic or I swear you'll see a fan boy meltdown like the world has never witnessed before.

Excellent poster though.

I'm afraid you're going to be spot on with The Spirit. It looks as good as "Disaster Movie". The Wrestler should have topped the list though, as good as Craig is as Bond, it's still another Bond movie.