Twitter Grows Up, Adds "Promoted Tweets" 149
CWmike writes "Twitter is finally taking off the training wheels and moving into the world where real businesses tread with the launch on Tuesday of its first advertising model, dubbed 'Promoted Tweets.' The microblogging phenom has long avoided coming up with a business plan or even talking about one. But the time has come for Twitter to figure out how to make money over the long haul. Analyst Dan Old isn't so sure that Twitter users will welcome the change. 'There will be a vocal minority of users who will hate any advertising at all,' Olds said. '[Many] users understand that it's necessary and will accept it as long as it doesn't interfere with their usage. But if the ads look like regular tweets, that could cause some serious outrage from users who feel that Twitter is attempting to deceive them.'"
freemium (Score:2, Insightful)
I would much rather see twitter remain ad free, and charge a fair monthly fee based on number of followers and following; they could charge dynamically: more for companies than individuals, and reduce fees if your tweets are retweeted beyond your local follower network.
Using a revenue model like this would allow Twitter to tweak user behaviors and increase the value of the discussion. It would reduce spam, encouraging insightful and fast information, and remove the incentive for zombie robot following coll
Re:freemium (Score:5, Funny)
I would much rather see twitter remain ad free, and charge a fair monthly fee based on number of followers and following;
The user base would drop ridiculously fast. Imagine if other social network sites charged to be used.
"Nah man, I didn't see your party on Facebook. I forgot to pay my bill on time"
Re:freemium (Score:5, Funny)
"The user base would drop ridiculously fast."
Then charging a monthly fee would be an excellent idea.
"Imagine if other social network sites charged to be used."
One can dream.
Re: (Score:2)
"Nah man, I didn't see your party on Facebook. I forgot to pay my bill on time"
Excellent idea! I'd love to see Facebook start charging so I could use that excuse to skip lame parties!
Re:freemium (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:freemium (Score:5, Funny)
"Twitter: the UDP of human conversation." -me
Re: (Score:2)
That's both the funniest and most insightful thing I've read in weeks.
Re: (Score:2)
You win 100 internets.
Re:freemium (Score:5, Funny)
Best quote ever. Can I follow your posts?
I lol'd (Score:2)
Parent deserves +5 Funny and +5 Insightful!
Here's the magic formula ... (Score:2)
s/promoted/porn/gi;
People really would be "all a-twitter about twitter."
@pr0n1: "Tweet me, honeybuns!"
@pr0n1: ""(Cheesy music)"
@pr0n1: "Oh, that feels SOOOO good."
@pr0n2: "who's your daddy NOW, b*tch?"
@pronAdserver "K-Y lube - up close and personal!"
Re: (Score:2)
What, twitter doesn't promote porn? The first three followers I got, almost immediately after signing on, were twitter-hos begging me to come visit them.
Re:Here's the magic formula ... (Score:5, Funny)
i wrote a daemonized twitterbot in Ruby a couple of weeks ago to scan posts for key words and respond to relevant ones with "that's what she said"... sort of on the same lines, I guess.
Re:freemium (Score:5, Informative)
Twitter isn't really based on encouraging insightful.
I use it as a democratic fan club. I follow celebrities I like (mythbuster guys, trek alumni, that kind of thing), web comic artists, people who are in the biz I am or who have jobs I'm working to get, and I sometimes reply, sometimes spout off random things.
But mostly, I use it like slashdot, but I get to choose the editors and the commenters. People post links, I follow them.
Re: (Score:2)
I use it as a democratic fan club.
You're thinking of Digg. They also like Ron Paul.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
As opposed to the rest of the Internet, including Slashdot?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Between an aversion to paying for things that used to be free, fear of giving out card details and a need to pay in relatively big blocks to keep the card fees manageable a LOT of users will be driven away by a paywall. This has happened many times over the history of the net.
Re: (Score:2)
Can you elaborate on this, please? I'm interested.
Re:freemium (Score:5, Interesting)
I would rather Twitter went into the offices of the CEOs of Sprint, T-Mobile, AT&T, and Verizon, and says "we want a third of your SMS-fee revenues; and don't raise prices. Otherwise, we'll turn off Twitter."
Those guys would shit their pants and break a nail grabbing for the checkbook.
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
At which point those companies will pass on the check balances to their customers. One way or another, we'll be paying. I'd personally rather have ads because there will always be a way to block them (with the worst case being some browser addon that I would have to install).
Re: (Score:2)
"At which point those companies will pass on the check balances to their customers."
Did you not read: "and don't raise prices."
They'd see it somehow, either through their own employees that use those networks reporting about the raise in their bills for SMS, or through other means, and they'd just shut it off for mobile phone users.
Mobile screens and browsers are crap for ad displaying, anyways.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I would rather Twitter went into the offices of the CEOs of Sprint, T-Mobile, AT&T, and Verizon, and says "we want a third of your SMS-fee revenues; and don't raise prices. Otherwise, we'll turn off Twitter."
Those guys would shit their pants and break a nail grabbing for the checkbook.
At which point, all of the Ceos will have the exact same reaction:
'How did you get into my office? You want what??!! HAHAHAHAHAHA...no.'
You know why? Because Sprint, T-Mobile, AT&T, and Verizon can all use their prebudgeted ad time to point out that users will still have access to SMS in order to send pointless messages about the most mundane points of their lives and the ability to blog and send automatic short messages to user groups via SMS every time their blog gets updated, all doable from their ph
Re: (Score:2)
Twitter manages your follower list and performs the fanout of your tweets automatically. And owns the patent on it.
You had SMS before twitter. How many people did you ever contact at once? Do you think Ashton Kutcher typed in 4 million follower addresses on any of his text messages before twitter?
How many "unlimited text" subscriptions do you think there were? I know I had a plan with about 50 texts per month on it. Went unlimited two weeks after following one person. I know I'm not alone. I also know
Re: (Score:2)
Twitter cannot own a patent on sending messages to a group of subscribers through a automated medium. Prior art exists well before email, but even with email the concept of a listserv is not owned by twitter simply because they employ the concept through sms (although if they did, you could get around it by simply sending email messages by using an excel spreadsheet of email addresses and importing the list into an automated emailer by running a script on your blog that sends the list and the message everyt
Re: (Score:2)
Hand over your geek card. A real geek would write a script to send AT commands [developershome.com].
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I would much rather see twitter remain ad free, and charge a fair monthly fee based on number of followers and following; they could charge dynamically: more for companies than individuals, and reduce fees if your tweets are retweeted beyond your local follower network.
That is totally contrary to one of the main purposes of Twitter, which is to allow anyone to spread information as widely as possible.
The zombie robot bullshit is largely due to their lacking security model. If I had to take a guess from their previous breaches, I'd say that it wasn't designed to be secure from the ground up. Facebook doesn't have nearly as bad of a bot problem as Twitter and myspace.
Tweets for twits and infortainment morons... (Score:1, Troll)
Re:Tweets for twits and infortainment morons... (Score:4, Informative)
Because historically speaking, eugenics programs haven't worked out all that well. [journalnow.com]
since you ask. kthxbye.
Re:Tweets for twits and infortainment morons... (Score:4, Funny)
The Mormons have done pretty well.
Re: (Score:2)
Who's the Kwisatz Haderach? Glenn Beck?
Re: (Score:2)
That would be me, you insensitive clod!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Tweets for twits and infortainment morons... (Score:5, Funny)
Because historically speaking, eugenics programs haven't worked out all that well. [journalnow.com]
since you ask. kthxbye.
Why do people only ever talk about the sterilization approach to eugenics? What about the "get pretty people drunk and alone in the dark" approach? That's eugenics too, but it's sexy instead of being nasty.
Won't somebody please think of the sweaty aryans?
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
CNN ( a supposed respected news organization ) is reporting on how jim carrey is getting his ass chewed out because he commented on another less interesting tigre woods scandal. Why do we let this crap out in the air waves?
Gotta fill out time in-between telling you who threw the ball the most yesterday and who ran the most.
Bread and games are what mainstream news are about, unfortunately.
Predictable (Score:5, Insightful)
I've never heard of a dot-com company before that:
1. Starts with an ungodly amount of free money from investors
2. Becomes very, very popular, all while losing many millions of dollars
3. When the investment money invariably begins to slow down, the company tries to "monetize" a money-losing idea.
4. People hop off to the newest fad, leaving this one to languish and to be used by spammers and people from the Phillipines.
5. The company is bought by some much larger company for a ridiculous amount of money.
6. The large company can't capitalize on the earlier popularity, and the brand dies.
Yawn.
Re:Predictable (Score:5, Insightful)
7) Many different imitators crop up, each trying to capture the former userbase, and the circle of life continues.
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Re: (Score:2)
People keep funding them though, because sometimes it works. See: Google and Facebook, both of which built very popular, money-losing free services, subsequently slapped ads on them, and are now raking in billions.
Re: (Score:1)
Facebook is raking in billions? Did I miss something?
Re:Predictable (Score:4, Informative)
Well, not plural billions yet, but estimates [insidefacebook.com] of 2010 revenues seem to be a bit over $1b.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Predictable (Score:5, Insightful)
Most of the business plans I've seen in the last few years go something like that.
1) Do something for free on the Internet.
2) Get lots of people using it, lots of 'eye balls'.
3) Sell to Google (or some other fool with deep pockets).
Re: (Score:2)
I like how you say "Or some other fool."
Some of the stuff Google has been doing recently has been fairly foolish.
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting, but in this case, the company has become a commodity to the point that 'twitting' is a mainstream verb. That's very valuable in many ways.
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
While I agree with you, I think technically its 'tweeting' which sort of goes against your argument that its a mainstream verb. (Although I guess /. isn't the mainstream so misuse here is okay)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
So was Napster, and Friendster, and Myspace.
In two years, Twitter will no longer be mainstream. Facebook is already in decline, and will tank once something "better" comes along. The Twitter phenomenon isn't new... it's just the newest version of the same thing.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Apparently not mainstream enough, because it's actually "tweeting".
(Disclaimer, my anecdotal data points are simply what I've heard people use + the fact that google's suggestions don't have any hits for "twitting", and do for "tweeting". They do have hits for "twittering", however.)
Re: (Score:2)
Or those of us who know the preferred term is "tweeting" but refuse to use it. It's called Twitter, and if they wanted people to "tweet" ra
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Alright, alright, they sound the same to a Spaniard :P.
Re: (Score:1)
7. ???
8. Profit.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
You left off a few steps...
7. ???
8. PROFIT!!!
This is New? (Score:1)
What I can't wait to see happen... (Score:2)
I want to see these networks unwittingly replay some of these "promoted Tweets". I want to hear Wolf Blitzer read something like the following: "and here we go to DoritosRGr8 - America is #1 LOL n I hear Obama luvs new Peppermint Ranch Doritos!" It would make my day to have a vacuous twat read some marketroid tweet on live TV.
Re:What I can't wait to see happen... (Score:5, Insightful)
It would make my day to have a vacuous twat read some marketroid tweet on live TV.
How exactly would this be different from the rest of their programming?
In other news (Score:2)
I'm confused?? (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
According to the article (Yeah I read it) they can delete "Promoted Tweets" that people don't find interesting.
That puts them above about five-nines of the Tweets that aren't Promoted.
Ads In Search Results (Score:3, Interesting)
I find it amusing that they think they have inventing something new here: Ads at the top of search results.
Regardless, as I rarely if ever search for anything on Twitter, I don't expect I'll ever see any ads. The day they start spamming ads into the tweets I'm following is the day I kiss Twitter goodbye.
Water my chickens... (Score:5, Funny)
This discussion makes me thirsty! (Score:5, Funny)
They have great snacks there, too, starting at just $1.49! you should try it!
Re: (Score:1)
Time to go to my closest Starbucks for a venti non fat latte. What a great way to round out the afternoon!
They have great snacks there, too, starting at just $1.49! you should try it!
187
Just sayin.
Re:This discussion makes me thirsty! (Score:5, Insightful)
Why would they be? After all, they're paying for that ad space.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not just a good idea, it's the law... err, a technical limitation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS [wikipedia.org]
taking off the training wheels (Score:2)
We used to call this kind of thing "jumping the shark".
(Or "selling out to the Man", but it's hard to say that with a straight face.)
Darn it! (Score:5, Funny)
I guess I'm missing out, having never seen the point in Twitter. But I have seen a few tweets, so I have a pretty good idea of how this might be implemented...
Johnny465: I just ate a delicious pastrami sandwich! Yum! (Brought to you by Jimmy John's)
Sally92: I'm so angry, my boyfriend forgot our date and took a nap instead! (You should try No-Doze)
Joe4ever: I'm in the bathroom right now (Sponsored by Charmin)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
No no, that would be:
Joe4ever: I'm in the bathroom right now (Brought to you by Carl's Jr.)
Ironic - I can share this on Twitter (Score:2, Interesting)
So if I send this to Twitter, does it create another Slashvertisement front page post, causing a Möbius loop of FAIL ?
Hmm (Score:5, Interesting)
However, although I dislike advertising, this doesn't seem so bad. Only one Promoted Tweet per page, and only in search results, it's clearly marked as an ad, and they have to meet a popularity threshold in order to stay. If all online ads were like that, I'd be less inclined to block them.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Use the API against them. (Score:5, Interesting)
Just block them and/or report them as spam.
Or just use a client that disregards the ads.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Whilst I'm sure there will be something like AdBlock for Twitter I can imagine them making the terms of use for the API so that doing so would be a violation of their TOS. Considering that many of the clients are ad supported already (and Twitter has mentioned that there might be a revenue sharing arrangement in the works) the larger majority would comply with the new ads, lest they get blocked and overtaken by another client that does.
Re: (Score:2)
Then the users will just flock towards a client that offers blocking and gets around pesky API keys.
Just like slashdot, google, and everyone else.. (Score:4, Insightful)
We'll have tools that will hide the adverts, and do our best to make them widespread.
May that infernal bird be devoured... (Score:3, Insightful)
Good! Splendid! If this means that infernal twitterbird gets removed from all those sites it has been showing up I'd say have them plaster all their twittertwatter with Re: herbal v14gr4 poker gambling ads 'till the cows come home.
Twitter is a bad idea. It might fit in the attention-span deficient, Idol-aspiring 5 minutes of fame ideal of a dumbed-down happy consumer society but I don't want that fork of the decision tree to become the set future. There is still time to change track.
Throw the switch! Kill the bird! Stamp it down!
Next on the menu: Holler, the new twitter! Scream out loud to all the world!
Oh look, another selling of selling business model (Score:3, Interesting)
Just once, I'd like to see a "web 2.0" company come up with a business model that does not depend on either: selling the attention of their users to the highest bidder, selling information about their users, or selling the ability for customers to try to sell things to their users.
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Re:vocal minority? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:vocal minority? (Score:5, Insightful)
"Grateful" is an interesting term to use when discussing the relationship of consumer to corporation.
I should be "grateful" that something I didn't ask for has intruded in my life to the point where many of the websites I visit for news or entertainment have live twitter-fed widgets that take up space but didn't cost me anything, until now that it creates yet another ad stream.
And just how is twitter better than IRC? Besides having the advertisements that I should now be grateful for?
Re:vocal minority? (Score:5, Insightful)
And just how is twitter better than IRC?>
It's better because a flashy dotcom startup can put themselves into the message loop for everyone on the planet, causing a single centralised point of failure for global communications, and add unwanted noise to your signal, while extracting and salting away millions of dollars in profit, making lots of business transactions less efficient in the process.
Oh, you meant better for the users? It's not at all. But they don't make the venture capital magazines, do they?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, IRC strikes me as a pretty good comparison - I started using Twitter when it occurred to me that it was a bit like being able to use IRC with people I would never be able to persuade to install an IRC client. One of the main ways people use IRC is idling in a common channel with a few friends, with people mentioning stuff occasionally as it occurs to them, which sometimes sparks conversation and sometimes just serves to keep you in touch with what your friends are thinking. That's exactly how Twit
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
only on slashdot would someone boil something down to it's most basic function, and then compare it to something else based on that criteria.
Er, yes? Because that's exactly what science and technology is, and what programmers do? Understand what the basic functions of things is? If learning and saying the truth about how things work makes us social pariahs, then something is wrong with society.
Yes we get frustrated when someone who doesn't understand how either Technology A or Technology B work looks at A and says 'what is this crap', looks at B and says 'oh wow this is amazing', and both A and B are fundamentally the same thing with a different
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't ask you how Twitter is different than IRC, I asked how it's better.
Re:vocal minority? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Just as the users don't owe Twitter anything for the use of the free, un-advertised service, they have no right to expect this free service to even continue for free, let alone "as is".
Yet, while Twitter aren't continuing entirely "as is", they *are* continuing to have the service for free, making your comment about charging
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I've always boggled why something like Twitter is a dotcom rather than a fundamental protocol. It's not adding any content - it's a pure message forwarding service. There's no apparent reason why 'forward short text message from point A to many points B' is something more value-added than 'retrieve HTTP' or 'forward SMTP' and needs to have a corporation managing it. Rather, it seems like a basic service that ISPs should provide. That would take care of the monetisation just fine.
Re: (Score:2)
lol. ISPs in control of Twitter. That'll work great after Comcast gets a hold of it...
Re: (Score:2)
Forgot to mention: the actual web page itself is kind of a last-resort (or super basic) leftover. Many (dare I say most) people use Twitter from clients on their desktop or mobile. It's treated kind of like a protocol sans the RFC.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. And there's all ready the compatible open source code for it in http://status.net/ [status.net]
But the only good thing about twitter, afaict, is the centralization that allows total strangers worldwide to follow an important topic. Instant reach to whomever it may interest in the world is pretty nifty for raising awareness of shit that affects people.
So, if ISPs got their respective "microblogging" servers, the worldwidedness of it all should be worked out somehow, through some sort of collaboration.
Re: (Score:2)
So, if ISPs got their respective "microblogging" servers, the worldwidedness of it all should be worked out somehow, through some sort of collaboration.
Usenet worked out quite well before it was left behind for centralised forums and seen solely as a source of dodgy binaries.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, a vocal minority will complain about the ads.
Everyone else will just stop using the service.
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Drink your Ovaltine.
Re: (Score:2)
Formatting is hard
Forget the HTML
and it will not grow
These fools write haiku,
Like children in summer time.
They don't understand.
5,7,5. Season Reference. It needs BOTH.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)