Recently in Twitter Category

First off, again with the apologies. Major project in the works sucking away blogging time, combined with work. On the other hand, June is National Internet Safety Month, so we should have something to talk about sooner or later.

Meanwhile, Canada's version of EPIC isn't too happy with Facebook, according to various reports (including a particularly good one by a certain DC-based publication). The reason is privacy. Did you know Canada has a Privacy Commissioner? Now say it in French.

So, I'll leave you with a cool video, Roger McGuinn (of the Byrds, also a Twitter user) and his guitar.

Lately the meme on Twitter has been paying for the service. The problem is, Twitter doesn't stay up often enough to justify paying for it. Now, people are suggesting we pay for basic functionality. 

First, here's a little bit of the story that ran at CNN.com today

James Karl Buck helped free himself from an Egyptian jail with a one-word blog post from his cell phone.

...

Buck, a graduate student from the University of California-Berkeley, was in Mahalla, Egypt, covering an anti-government protest when he and his translator, Mohammed Maree, were arrested April 10.

On his way to the police station, Buck took out his cell phone and sent a message to his friends and contacts using the micro-blogging site Twitter.

The message only had one word. "Arrested."

After that one-word message was sent out James' followers started Tweeting and blogging about their friend's precarious situation.  One friend even got on the ball and hired a lawyer on James' behalf.  James was freed.

Less than 24 hours after he was arrested.

This is exactly the kind of thing that needs to be given the spotlight, and I'm super excited about seeing it on CNN.com.  It's the sort of thing that can further help to spread awareness of how Twitter can function as more than just a fun tool or even a professional one, both of which are hats it wears quite well.

The only failing I see is that it can only benefit Twitter.  If, as we rant about ad nauseum,  this good press could have benefited the entire social networking/blogging community.  We're always saying that Web 2.0 (And I'm caught playing Buzzword Bingo) companies, and those that are involved in social networking especially, should and need to form an industry organization to keep themselves safe from potential regulation hell.

Let's face it - Like it or not, a negative story will wash over an entire medium like wildfire.  Did Janet Jackson's nipple focus the ire of over-reacting, zero-responsibility, whack-job, non-parents on CBS and the NFL?  I think that we all know what the answer is there. As I've said about on-topic examples and as was discussed in our interview with Dr. Patrick Moore, it's true that forming an industry organization means working with your competitors.  But it's working with your competitors so that you can be allowed to compete and to keep your own set of rules.

I won't go into much more detail, because I'd basically be reposting old info (more than I have already).

I'll close by giving big ups to Twitter, of which Andrew and I are big old fanboys.  This kind of story is what can help to elevate a technology from "fun" to "professional" to that next level where it can be used for very serious situations.  The same way that text messages and mobile phones in general have, the latter over the past decade and the former over the past 4-5 years.

Twitter, great job!  Social Networking/Web 2.0 execs - Celebrate the good but team up and protect yourselves from the bad.

You know, I go to these conferences and hear the same people talk about new media and campaigns and getting their message across, blah blah blah but I never hear about how politicians get input from voters. Yes, there are grassroots campaigns but they are largely orchestrated and rarely come from "grass roots."

Enter Twitter. Just a few minutes ago Scoble wrote about how he uses the service versus how some people think it should be used.

But there +is+ value in having a great group of people you're following. Follow @craignewmark and you'll see what Craig is seeing or thinking (he's the founder of Craigs' List). Follow @pierre and you'll see what he's thinking (he's the founder of eBay). Follow HRBlock and you'll see what the team at H&R Block is thinking about taxes and such. Follow @newmediajim and you'll see what Jim Long, who is a camera guy in the press pool at the White House, is thinking about.

Now, do you start to get it? If you define yourself by who is following you you'll always feel inadequate. After all, you can't control your followers and any idiot can follow people. But, define yourself by who you are following and you can really build something of high value.

Do you get it? He's L I S T E N I N G. Remember when Sen. Clinton (D-NY) launched her campaign with a "listening tour?" Not much listening took place. Those town hall sessions you see? Participants are routinely screened and questions planted. We know this.

Robert has figured out what only a small number of politicians do, and those are the ones who aren't in the leadership. Remember Sen. Al D'Amato (R-NY)? He was known as "Senator Pothole" because of his commitment to his constituent services. Robert Byrd (D-WV) may be almost a century old, but he still cares about West Virginia enough to steer tons of federal funding there, and his "case work" staff is one of the best in Washington.

Talkers get headlines. Listeners get things done.

Another example? Comcast! They've got an entire program devoted to listening to social media and using new technology to connect with their constituents customers.

Listen. Listen. Listen.

If you're in @SiliconValley, you need to follow @Washington. If you're in Washington, you need to follow  @SiliconValley.  Then, you need to have a real conversation.

Patrick Ruffini is right. The next campaign managers will be online strategists who know how to listen to voters. Not pollsters, listeners.

You heard it here first.

Last weekend, Michael Arrington at TechCrunch had some trouble with his cable just as a New York Times article featuring him hit the front page. So, after a ton of frustration, he Twittered about it. What he didn't expect was that his "tweet" would lead to a phone call, and a resolution. He wrote about it here.

Shel Israel, who has a far larger of number of Twitter followers, friends, etc, than I do, has a rather straightforward Twitter following policy which he has posted on his blog, Global Neighbourhoods.

• If I do not know who you are, or what you look like, or where you are coming from I will not follow you.
• With very few exceptions, I will not follow brands, candidates, causes or company names. I wish to talk with humans, not brand icons, neither surveys nor bots. If you are a real person & you are passionate about your work, then I embrace you. If you are a Direct Marketer using Twitter to push you brand into my forehead, I will block you.
• Even if you are a real person, I may not follow you. I need to see that you are talking either about topics or people I care about.
• If you disagree with me, do it under your own name and I will respect you. If you personally insult me, I will block you. If you are consistently unpleasant or just boring, I will unfollow or block you.
• With extremely rare exception, I will not follow anonymous Tweeters.

I'll give him props. This is possibly the most brilliant articulation of a philosophy which, as a longtime Internet user, I have adhered to for as long as I have been online (which has been almost half of my life). Despite the warnings from doomsayers to "never give out personal information online," I have always posted under either my real name, my initials (see my Twitter username), or with some kind of link back to my real identity (Andrew Feinberg), location (whether it has been Washington, DC, Madison, WI or Philadelphia, PA) and other information allowing people to know who is behind whatever is being written. 

1. When I write or participate in an online community, I know that my words can be linked back to me. This is not self-censorship, but self-respect. I have enough respect for my name (or as Gary Vaynerchuk would say, my legacy) that I am willing to stand by my words and opinions. One of my main questions for social networking privacy or PR reps is how to deal with the "audit trail" you leave behind as you participate on communities or discussions. I think the middle ground that I can agree with many of them on is that honesty is the best policy, and that anonymity should be used when needed. The default should be to stand by your name.
2. I am easy to find and I have a reputation to protect. I make it a point to respect people because I never know when someone will want something from me, want to help me, or want me to help them. By putting my name and identity on the line, I allow myself to be more helpful since if someone likes what I do, they can ask me to help them. Case in point: last week, the guys at Mashable wanted some help covering TPS. Although it didn't work out in the end, they were able to get a hold of me because my identity is no secret.

Charles Cooper looks at Facebook's latest round of venture funding and asks if MarkZ and friends should look behind them...

But there's an interesting discussion around a Twitter versus Facebook faceoff looming. In a video post making the rounds, Gary Vaynerchuk riffs about the quickness of Twitter becoming a factor--at least among the early adopter crowd.

"The instant gratification. The world is moving so quickly. That the fact that we can get that response so quickly. Look AOL Instant Messenger--still around and strong, right? So is Twitter taking a lot from Facebook?"

As a Twitter user and a supporter of all things Al3x I can't help but be pulling for 'em.

Go Twitter, Go.

I first met Shashi Bellamkonda on the second floor of Six last Friday. I'm pretty outgoing when surrounded by like-minded people, but I was absolutely blown away by the sheer friendliness and warmth of this person, who turned out to work for what is to some people a great boogeyman of the 'net: Network Solutions.

I wasn't quite sure how to handle this, nor did I understand how his title, "Social Networking Swami" fit into the culture there, which is sometimes derided as cutthroat and anti-consumer.

On the other hand, Shel Israel, best known for his collaboration with Robert Scoble wrote a fantastic blog post/interview that sheds a ton of light onto why this guy is so cool and how one employee can change a company at the right place and time. Money quote:

The day when a company could communicate hiding behind walls and lobbing stuff over the wall to customers is over. My new position at Network Solutions will work toward empowering our customers to carry on conversations using social media. Companies always want to listen to their customers and are accountable to their customers.

I am already looking forward to meeting this guy again, and again.

Spent a few very fun hours over at BarCamp Austin where I finally got to hear  Al3x and his colleagues Ben and Blaine talk about Twitter, including their scalability and stability issues, cool metrics they've been using and stuff they might do in the future, and I stress the word might. Anyway, photos at Flickr