MackCollier.com

by

What Will the Next 12 Months of Social Media Look Like?

As I write this, CEOs from Twitter and Facebook are being grilled during a Congressional hearing, with censorship of content being a hot topic. It seems that user frustration with major social media sites like Twitter, Facebook an Instagram finally came to a head, for a variety of reasons, in 2020. The environment on these social sites has been increasingly toxic in 2020 as politics has become a dominant topic.

Interestingly, Twitter’s moderation efforts have led to the rise of Parler, which has emerged as the first viable competitor to Twitter in nearly decade. Top influencers who recently joined Parler have already seen their follower numbers surpassing their followers on Twitter.

I’ve been spending more time on Parler recently, but it’s clear that the toxic exchanges around politics that people are sick of on Twitter, are slowly migrating to Parler.

But I think (or rather hope) that the rise of Parler signals a potential shift in the future of social media. Parler is a social site where almost all of the conversation happening is around politics. But what if more sites similar to Parler arose, with each one focused on a particular topic. For instance, Twitter is a catch-all. You can find discussions about literally any topic you are interested in.

But what if there was a ‘Twitter’ just for people who are interested in your favorite hobby or topic?  What if there was a platform just for discussing sports, or gardening, or cooking, or Sherlock Holmes, or Pokemon, etc?

I’ve been using the internet long enough to remember when AOL switched from 10 hours a month for $24,99, to unlimited access for the same price. When AOL went unlimited, the experience on AOL changed dramatically. When AOL went unlimited, obviously everyone had a lot more time they could afford to spend on the site.  AOL had many forums and message boards, and when the service went unlimited, the activity levels went up, but so did the amount of arguing. The reality is, when you only have 20 or so hours a month you can use on internet access, you probably aren’t going to waste that time arguing. You are going to search for and share only the most important information. Which means the value of the content in those forums increases. But when you open the floodgates and let everyone in, you also let in a lot of people that have less interest and knowledge of said topic. Which led to more arguing and less informed viewpoints.

By the way, this is why Twitter chats work so well. Because you bring together people that are knowledgeable and passionate about a particular topic. As a result, the conversations that happen in these chats are so much more valuable than what we see on Twitter as a whole. I’ve had so many people tell me that chats are the only reason why they are still on Twitter.

So I’m interested in the success of Parler simply because I’m intrigued by the idea of having social platforms that aren’t a ‘catch-all’ like we have now with Twitter and Facebook, but which are focused on just one topic or area. I think such an approach would lead to much healthier conversations, and the quality of those conversations would increase dramatically, as well.

Here’s to new social media sites that offer us better and more valuable conversation and content in 2021.

by

Monday’s Marketing Minute: Social Media’s Uncertain Future

Happy Monday, y’all! Hope everyone is having a wonderful week and ready for Halloween! Here’s a few news stories that caught my eye over the last few days:

 

And it appears that the government crackdown on big tech and social media has begun. The DOJ has filed an antitrust lawsuit against Google. At the heart of this is the DOJ’s claim that Google takes the profits from its products and ad revenue, and then funnels them back into locking in exclusive agreements to offer its search engine and browser products. I saw one tweet that claimed that 15-20% of Apple’s global profits come from an exclusive agreement with Google to offer its search engine as the default on its devices! Immediately after the election, look for the CEOs of Twitter and Facebook to be hauled back before the Senate, which will mostly be a lot of hot air and pontificating from politicians, but some actual legislative action could eventually arise. As I’ve been saying for over a year now, the day of reckoning for social media is coming, I’d view Google, Twitter and Facebook as a short-term play, not a long-term one.

 

I’ve made no secret of the fact that my time spent on Facebook has decreased dramatically the last couple of years. At one time I was checking in multiple times a day, now I check the site once or twice a week. But while I see very little value on the site now, their Groups are one of the few bright spots. Building on their popularity, Facebook is testing a new concept called Neighborhoods, which would seem to be Groups organized around geographic area. I think this is a great idea and will be very popular. This would be a great way to discuss issues that affect a particular community, such as finding the proper polling location to vote in an election, or how to deal with coming weather issues. A rare smart move for Facebook.

 

And just because we all need a few laughs right now…

Have a great week, y’all! See everyone tomorrow!

by

Twitter Doubles Down on Censoring its Users

So less than 24 hours after I posted here about how Twitter’s political activism was threatening all content creators, Twitter validated my fears. Twitter spent most of yesterday actively censoring a NYPost story about Hunter Biden. Twitter locked the NYPost’s account for a time, then later started locking any accounts that shared the story, or disabled retweeting on the story so it was more difficult to share.

By the end of the day, CEO Jack Dorsey issued a mea culpa:

The general excuse given by Twitter is that sharing the story violated Twitter’s policy against sharing hacked material. But there was no evidence that the story was sourced by hacked material, and Twitter had allowed similar stories about Pres Trump to be shared without policing that content.

Earlier this morning, content creators were being censored by Twitter for even WRITING about the story:

As a result, I won’t be sharing this story on Twitter. Think about that for a second; a content creator can’t feel comfortable sharing their own content on a social media platform because they fear the company will censor the link because it includes information they don’t agree with. Is this 2020 or 1984?

Bizarrely, these actions by Twitter seem to be all but begging politicians to regulate them.  Carol Roth actually made this observation yesterday:

That take may be the correct one. Regardless, Twitter is clearly acting like it does not care if it upsets politicians or not.

Now, perhaps the most disturbing thing I saw yesterday as this event was unfolding, was how my timeline on Twitter responded. The people I follow are a good mix of conservatives, liberals and moderates or independents. I have a good idea of which way most of the people I follow lean politically. Almost all of the outrage I saw at Twitter’s actions yesterday came from my conservative friends.  A few moderate friends chimed in, and my liberal friends had absolutely nothing to say about this story. Maybe they simply weren’t following it, or maybe they don’t understand that this isn’t a partisan issue. Everyone I follow on Twitter stands to be NEGATIVELY impacted by what Twitter did yesterday. It doesn’t matter if you were outraged or thrilled by what Twitter did. Twitter all but forced politicians to take actions on them, and when that happens, individual content creators like you and I, will likely get stung.

When I wrote about this issue on Tuesday, I mentioned CDA 230. That’s short for Section 230 of the Communications and Decency Act of 1996. I also included this link that gives a wonderful summary of the protections that CDA 230 gives content creators.  Here’s how this law protects individual content creators:

 

“This legal and policy framework has allowed for YouTube and Vimeo users to upload their own videos, Amazon and Yelp to offer countless user reviews, craigslist to host classified ads, and Facebook and Twitter to offer social networking to hundreds of millions of Internet users. Given the sheer size of user-generated websites (for example, Facebook alone has more than 1 billion users, and YouTube users upload 100 hours of video every minute), it would be infeasible for online intermediaries to prevent objectionable content from cropping up on their site. Rather than face potential liability for their users’ actions, most would likely not host any user content at all or would need to protect themselves by being actively engaged in censoring what we say, what we see, and what we do online. In short, CDA 230 is perhaps the most influential law to protect the kind of innovation that has allowed the Internet to thrive since 1996.”

So if you remove the protections of CDA 230, you could suddenly see sites like YouTube, Facebook and Twitter that currently allow user-generated content, to either stop users from creating content, or severely change or alter what content they can create and share.

 

But that’s platforms, how does CDA 230 protect individual content creators such as bloggers?

“CDA 230 also offers its legal shield to bloggers who act as intermediaries by hosting comments on their blogs. Under the law, bloggers are not liable for comments left by readers, the work of guest bloggers, tips sent via email, or information received through RSS feeds. This legal protection can still hold even if a blogger is aware of the objectionable content or makes editorial judgments.”

So if CDA 230 is eliminated, you will also see many bloggers (especially ones that aren’t monetizing their blogs) being forced to either remove comment functionality, or severely restrict it. Many bloggers will likely see it as too much hassle and worry, and drop their blogs altogether. I think we all can recognize that the impact of eliminating CDA 230 protections would be catastrophic to the blogging community.

And unfortunately, BOTH Presidential candidates have signaled that they want to eliminate CDA 230. Biden has said it all along. Trump has said he wants to modify CDA 230 to give social media platforms less protections, but after Twitter pulled its stunt yesterday, he started tweeting that CDA 230 should be repealed:

This has been so frustrating to me because I think my liberal friends see this as ‘Trump vs Twitter’, so they just assume what Twitter is doing is something they agree with. Without realizing that Trump and Biden now essentially hold the same position on CDA 230. This *should* be Everyone vs Twitter as it pertains to censorship. Every content creator should be unified in speaking out against what Twitter is doing, because they are pushing us toward a repeal of vital protections that bloggers have enjoyed since 1996.

If CDA 230 is repealed, blogging as we know it is probably over. Now is the time to educate yourself on what’s happening today, and how it could impact your ability to create content, tomorrow.

by

Twitter’s Political Activism May End Up Costing All Content Creators

Over a year ago, Twitter launched its ‘Managing the Conversation’ initiative. This was adopted, according to Twitter, to start monitoring and moderating interactions on Twitter based on user intent or perceived intent. In other words, if a Twitter user was engaging another Twitter user in a way that didn’t break the current Twitter rules, but that Twitter felt was harassing or hostile, then Twitter would have the ability to censor that user.

This idea immediately grabbed me as being a bad one, because Twitter was creating a way to shift from one-size-fits-all rules that apply to the entire community, to Twitter having the power to make judgement calls and independently police content. It created a scenario where two users could engage in the exact same behavior, but only one of them be policed by Twitter, with Twitter saying that the first user had a a negative ‘intent’ behind his content that the second user did not.

I follow a small group of reporters on Twitter who have a track record for giving accurate and credible information. It’s how I keep up with national and political news. Earlier this year, I began to notice that they were mentioning with frequency that ‘conservative’ Twitter users were having their accounts banned or blocked for ‘no reason’. At first I didn’t really pay much attention to this, the person being banned rarely thinks they deserved it. But a few months ago, Twitter began actively censoring President Trump’s tweets.  That got my attention.

A few days ago, Pres Trump, upon beating covid, tweeted that he was now immune from catching covid. This is a claim that many doctors around the world agree with. There is no consensus, but many doctors believe that covid patients who survive do have immunity from catching it again, either for a limited amount of time, or permanently.

When Pres Trump tweeted that he was immune from catching covid, Twitter labeled his tweet as being a violation of Twitter’s rules and potentially ‘harmful’ information:

https://twitter.com/Alan46285607/status/1315347487004086273

 

And as we can see, other Twitter accounts making essentially the same claim, aren’t being censored:

 

Doubling-down, Twitter recently announced that it will be very aggressively moderating content created about the US Election in 3 weeks:

 

Twitter is saying that any content created on election day that claims that someone has won a race (either congressional or presidential) that hasn’t been called by a ‘credible’ source, can be removed by Twitter. Twitter says it will also add ‘restrictions’ to any content that Twitter deems to be ‘misleading’ concerning the election.  For instance, if on election night I tweet that ‘Wow, I really don’t think (candidate) can win’, Twitter could censor that tweet or identify it publicly as ‘misinformation’.

You can see how this creates an environment where Twitter’s team can let their own political biases cloud their judgment and literally turn the site into a platform for election interference. By creating these broad ‘guidelines’, Twitter is signaling that it can and likely will censor political content that it doesn’t agree with.  As we see above, Twitter has already shown to inconsistently apply it’s own stated guidelines toward political content.

Now, those of you that don’t like Trump or don’t like conservative viewpoints in general, I can hear you saying ‘So what? This sounds great to me!”  Here’s why you should care:  There’s a law called CDA 230.

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act is probably the most significant law protecting speech on the internet. In general, it says that content creators, whether they are individuals, or sites that host content from users (such as Twitter and Facebook), will be treated as if they are PLATFORMS, not publishers, under the law. But at the same time, they will have the ability to censor and moderate content left on their platforms by third-parties, as a publisher could.  If content creators were treated as if they were publishers under the law, then they would also be liable for content created by their users.  For instance, under CDA 230, as a blogger, I am not legally responsible for the content that a third party might create and leave here via a comment. Without the protections of CDA 230, I could be. That’s the advantage of being classified as a platform versus a publisher. CDA 230 was designed to shield us from legal liability for the content created by our commenters or users.

In essence, what Twitter is doing is skirting the good intentions of CDA 230. They are using the protections of CDA 230 to, it at least appears, censor content that supports certain political viewpoints. As we can all hopefully agree, this is not what free speech and open discussion is about. As you might guess, both President Trump and even the DOJ have signaled that they want to re-examine the protections that sites like Twitter have under CDA 230, and possibly modify it in ways that could hurt individual content creators like you and I, as well.

And before you take that as a reason to vote for Joe Biden, Senator Biden wants to go even further than Pres Trump, Biden wants to eliminate CDA 230 completely. Politicians on both sides of the isle have said they want to amend, change, or remove CDA 230 completely. As an individual content creator, that scares me.

So if you are a blogger like me, understand that your ability to create content and publish it as you have been could be on the ballot as well this November. Please educate yourself about what’s happening in regards to content moderation on social sites like Twitter and Facebook, educate yourself on CDA 230 and what it is, and finally educate yourself on what state and national politicians are proposing for the future of CDA 230. One of the most powerful aspects of the internet is that through tools like blogging, we all have a way to share our voice with the world. It’s vital that we maintain that precious freedom.

 

PS: This post gives a very mild recap of some laws regarding internet speech. This post is not offered as legal advice, and should not be taken as such. Please do your own research on these topics and consult a qualified legal professional if you have questions about how these laws might apply to you.

by

Monday’s Marketing Minute: Users Don’t Trust Facebook, How Covid Has Changed Shopper Behavior

Welcome to the start of another great week! Thanks for reading, on Wednesday my Movies and Marketing post will feature the movie with the greatest product placement of all-time (what do you think it is?), and on Thursday I’ll do a special post recapping what happened here in the month of September after relaunching my blog. Happy to see the stats are looking pretty good, and I’ll dive into that more on Thursday.

Now, let’s jump into the news!

 

eMarketer had some interesting research into which social platforms are the most and least trusted. eMarketer states that it is measuring trust as “the confidence users have in a social media platform to protect their information and provide a safe environment for them to create and engage with content.”

LinkedIn and Pinterest ranked at the top in first and second, while Twitter and Facebook ranked at the bottom in seventh and ninth. I think there’s two issues at play here, the first is privacy concerns and how comfortable users are in letting these platforms handle their data. But that’s not the only area, because LinkedIn ranked first, even though the platform has had security breaches in the past. So the trust factor also incorporates the actual environment and user experience on these platforms. This is what really hurts Twitter and Facebook, in my opinion.  These sites simply have toxic environments. Users argue and insult each other constantly, and neither site has developed an effective or consistent way to monitor and police content. LinkedIn has much user interaction, but its far more professional and business-oriented in nature. Pinterest is focused heavily on the content (pins and boards), not the user interaction.

 

I’ve been a big fan of the work BazaarVoice does as well as its timely research studies ever since I spoke at its headquarters a few years ago and got to spend some time with the management team. I look forward to their research studies and they have a new one on how shopper behavior is changing as a result of covid. Among the key takeaways, shoppers are becoming more comfortable with the idea of doing more in-store shopping, but want to see stores taking greater measures to ensure safety for shoppers. Honestly, I think this could be the big area where we could see a lasting improvement for the health of shoppers. Let’s be honest, prior to this year, whenever you went to a grocery store, you grab a buggy that’s been touched by who knows how many strangers that same day and who knows what germs are on that buggy. If retailers simply make a better effort to clean their buggies and offer hand sanitizer at store entrances, those changes alone would greatly reduce the change of shoppers catching a cold or other germs while shopping. Very simple changes can and should be made by stores to help promote a more healthy environment for in-store shopping.

 

And for you Pinterest fans, Search Engine Journal has a rundown of a ton of new features the site has rolled out for creators.  And yes, I do spend some time on Pinterest, have actually spent quite a bit of time there the last few weeks.  It’s fun to poke around and look for inspiration and just focus on the content!

Hope you have a fantastic Monday, see you in 24 hours!

by

Toolbox Saturday: Three Ways to Get Extra Value From Twitter

Every year in August, from Alabama to Ohio, there is something called ‘The 500-Mile Yard Sale’. People down a particular highway that runs from Alabama to Ohio will set up sales in their yards. I’ve always wanted to go to this as it sounds fabulous.

If you’ve ever been to yard sales, you know it’s a very hit-or-miss proposition. You can spend all morning going to sales and never finding anything of interest, then suddenly come across a yard sale that has everything you’ve been looking for.

Twitter, in the last few years, has become very similar to a yard sale. There’s still some good stuff, but there’s also a lot of useless crap that you have to wade through to find it.

There’s three ways I find the good stuff on Twitter:

1 – Twitter lists

2 – Twitter chats

3 – Twitter searches

 

1 – Twitter lists are a great way to keep up with a group of people that are organized by some common trait. Maybe they all live in a particular town, maybe they are all reporters covering a particular industry, maybe they are all fans of a particular hobby you enjoy. There’s some common thread that binds them, and makes it valuable for you to see their tweets.  Here’s a list of the Twitter Lists I have now:

As you can see my lists are private, and organized around cities, interests and business. I also like to keep a couple of lists of close friends so I can make sure I see what they are up to.  All designed to filter content on Twitter so that I don’t miss the ‘good stuff’.

2 – Twitter Chats are a wonderful way to connect with people that share a common interest. I still to this day think that Twitter chats are the best way to cultivate and grow a valuable Twitter network. Twitter chats are completely versatile, and cover literally every topic under the sun. If you want to use Twitter chats as a professional growth tool, just join chats around topics related to your industry or space and interact with your peers.  You will not only make professional contacts, you’ll learn a lot and stay up to date on what’s happening in that space or industry. You can also use Twitter chats as a way to connect with people that share a common hobby or interest. This is another way to meet and follow people that share similar interests to yours.  The one downside to Twitter chats is that they are typically only held for one hour at a time, once a week. So if you miss that hour, you miss the chat. For instance, I miss a lot of great chats because they occur from 10am-Noon during the week, when I am typically my busiest.

3 – Twitter searches are a great way to keep up with what’s being said and shared around particular topics or phrases. I use these to keep up on the latest news and articles around topics I am interested in, but I also use it to find new people to follow.

Here’s some searches I have saved:

As you can see, these searches are mostly people sharing links to articles they have written. But I’m searching for marketing terms, if you changed the term to something else you might get more conversational tweets versus promotional. Still, of these three tactics listed, I use this one the least often.

 

So there’s three ways you can extract more value from Twitter; Lists, Chats and Searches! Try these today and see if you don’t find Twitter more useful as a result!

by

Monday’s Marketing Minute: DOJ Targets Google, Twitch Thriving Under Lockdown, Burgers in the Sky

Happy Labor Day, y’all! Hope you had a great holiday weekend and are as ready for Fall as I am! The weather here has been about 10 degrees cooler than normal for the last couple weeks and looks to continue this for the rest of the month. Bring on Fall!

 

It’s been fascinating to watch how consumer behavior has changed during 2020 as we are all spending a lot more time at home. This is also altering how we consume content and the types of content we consume. This actually factored heavily into my decision to double-down on blogging, I think you will see more people spending more time reading and consuming blog content for the rest of this year and into 2021.

Another content source that’s thriving in 2020 is video-game streaming platform Twitch.

I’ve written about how content creators are leveraging Twitch in the past and will have more on this later in the week.

On a bit of a surprising note, the amount of time we are spending listening to podcasts is down slightly in 2020:

https://twitter.com/Claire_Harris82/status/1299678670622085121

This is actually quite revealing. At first blush, you would think podcast listening would go up as we are spending more time at home. But the fact that it will go down suggests that most of us listen to podcasts while driving to work.  The fact that eMarketer is projecting a rebound for podcast listening by 2022 helps support this thought.

What’s the key takeaway? If you are looking to start a podcast, 2021 could be the right to, as more of us return to offices for work, and the daily drive to and from work becomes a thing again.

 

One of the emerging stories I’ve been following the last couple of years is how the big tech/social media giants are increasingly making questionable moves from a censorship and free speech standpoint. I’ve talked before about how Twitter is confusing many of its users with inconsistent application of content policing, but sites like Facebook and YouTube have made similar moves. The reality is that as long as humans are policing content on social media sites, they need to be able to check their own internal biases toward that content, and apply rules evenly to all users. If they cannot, and a culture of bias is allowed to grow and fester at these companies, that can lead to an environment where users either leave, or worse.  I think we will see all big social media sites have few users in 5 years than they do now.

 

I love this. Burger King will be redesigning its restaurants to create more contactless options for food delivery, but also will be moving the kitchen and dining areas OVER the drive thru lanes! I think this is very innovative, Burger King is betting on the fact that people will continue to want contactless options for food payment and delivery after we move past covid, but they are also factoring in that when we do fully reopen, many will want to get out more, and putting the dining area over the drive thru lanes helps create a unique experience for dine-in customers. This will no doubt improve the mood of customers that dine in, which will also improve the mood of the BK workers.  I love this and I would be surprised if we didn’t see other fast food chains try to copy this design.

 

Hope everyone has a great Labor Day, see y’all tomorrow!

by

Dominos Shows You How to Respond to Trolls on Twitter

It seems everything is political during an election year. There was a great reminder of this recently when a ‘political activist’ dug through the old tweets of Dominoes on Twitter and somehow found a tweet from 2012 where Domino’s was thanking a customer for tweeting a compliment to the brand.

So what? This brand did what every brand should do, right? They acknowledged and THANKED a customer for complimenting them. How many times have I talked about how you ‘reward the behavior you want to encourage’? When a customer leaves you a compliment on ANY platform or via ANY channel, you thank them.

So what’s the problem? The problem is, the Domino’s customer in question who left a compliment to the brand in 2012, happens to be the Press Secretary for the Trump Administration in 2020.

That led to the ‘political activist’ tweeting to Domino’s that ‘you just killed your brand’.

Here’s how Domino’s responded:

Isn’t that the perfect response? They respond to the troll, but in a way that also shows how ridiculous their behavior is.

In my book Think Like a Rock Star, the 6th chapter is devoted to handling negative comments aimed at your brand via social media. In that chapter, I talked about how you need to identify the person leaving the negative comment to your brand, as that will dictate in part, how you respond. For instance, are they an actual customer of your brand, or do they appear to be a troll looking to draw attention to themselves and hassle your brand, as appears to be the case in the Dominoes example.

The problem I see many brands make when responding to trolls, is they treat them as if they were customers.  They engage them, they apologize, and they attempt to diffuse the situation as quickly as possible.  Which often has the opposite affect, trolls want and crave attention, and if they feel the brand is placating them, they will typically double-down on their efforts.

If you’re dealing with an upset customer, that upset customer will typically give you MORE details about SPECIFIC transactions with your business. They will often reference doing business with your brand on a particular date, maybe even at a particular retail location. Trolls tend to be very vague in their criticisms, as we see in the Dominoes example.

I do NOT envy social media managers having to manage brand accounts in 2020. It’s a mostly thankless job to begin with, but in today’s highly political environment, your brand may have to deal with people who are not your customers, leaving you negative comments in an attempt to make a larger political point or to simply troll your brand. It can be VERY upsetting to wake up at 6am and see 200 angry tweets toward the brand account you manage.

Just remember to act quickly, but act smartly. Figure out what happened, who is upset, and why they are upset. If the negative comments are coming from actual customers, absolutely address and do all you can to make it right for the customer. And clearly communicate to the customer what steps you are taking.  This communicates to the customer, and everyone following the exchange, that you take their concerns seriously. That also communicates to them and others that you respect your customers.

If you are dealing with an actual troll, in general, the less you respond, the better. Trolls feed off attention, if you attempt to engage and placate them, they will just double-down and troll you even harder.  And others will pile on once they see your brand is responding from a position of weakness. I know it’s hard to remember sometimes, but the Twitter/Social Media mobs get angry fast, and move on to something else just as fast. So many brands make the mistake of attempting to diffuse trolling by apologizing to the trolls or worse, changing behavior based on their demands. This typically has the opposite affect of what the brand intended, as changing behavior because of trolling will often anger your customers, since the change in behavior will often impact them.

Always keep two questions in mind:

1 – Is this negative comment coming from a troll or an actual customer?

2 – Is it more important that we do what’s best for the troll, or for our customers?

 

If you always do what’s best for your customers, your customers will always have your back when you defend them. Keep that in mind.

by

Social Media is Toxic, Broken, and it Needs to Go Away

Adversity doesn’t create character, it reveals it.

I had my first exposure to what could be called a ‘social network’ when I joined Prodigy.net in 1991  I have two main memories of being a Prodigy member:

  • The users were insanely nice and courteous
  • There were very few users

I remember there being many message boards and forums, organized by interests. Some of these had decent activity, others had little to none. But if a forum had posts, there were friendly and civil discussions to read and join. As I said, it was a wonderful environment, and I had no qualms about reaching out directly to users and it was quite common to share a physical address with members and continue conversations via mail.

Lately I’ve been thinking a lot about those online conversations some 30 years ago, the civil tone as a stark contrast to the toxicity that many social media sites swim in these days.

The Rise of the Shame Culture

In theory, 2020 should have been social media’s finest hour. Never before have we needed to have conversation, communication. Never before have we needed to listen to each other, to understand each other, to learn from each other. So at a time when we all needed to listen to each other and understand each other, instead these social media tools are being used by many to shame others. If you don’t hold a certain opinion, you are being shamed for it. If you don’t hold a certain opinion on a certain issue, you are told to unfollow that person.

I’ve disconnected from probably 25% of my online network simply because these people were being judgmental assholes. And we are talking people I have been connected to for years, some over a decade. But all it took were a few hot-button issues, and suddenly these people turned into tyrants. And they used social media to do it. Many of these same people have advised clients to NOT do the very things they were doing every day on Twitter and Facebook.

Why is This Social Media’s Fault?

It’s easy to look at what’s happening on social media sites right now and say that you can’t blame the tools, you have to blame the people using the tools. I can’t completely agree with that. The reality is that social media sites aren’t built to facilitate conversations, they are built to facilitate engagement.

Let’s look at Twitter. I’m a bit of an outlier, in that I started using Twitter back in the social media stone ages of 2007. If you talk to any long-time Twitter user that joined prior to 2010, they will tell you that Twitter was a completely different environment ‘back then’. Organic conversations that were CIVIL sprung up like kudzu in the South in the Summer. If a day went by where you didn’t get sucked into at least one engrossing 30-minute conversation on Twitter, then you probably didn’t get on Twitter that day.

So what changed?  The celebs discovered Twitter:

And those of us that had been using Twitter before they arrived began to notice something: Literally every silly thing these celebs tweeted got hundreds, even thousands of Likes and Retweets! And they gained thousands of followers every day! If you’re using Twitter every day and you only have 237 followers and nothing you tweet seems to get a Like or Retweet, well it’s natural to envy the huge engagement numbers the celebs were getting!

Which often led to a change in behavior. Many Twitter users stopped focusing on engrossing conversations, and started trying to drive higher levels of engagement.

The Birth of the ‘Twitterbyte’

I was speaking at a conference in 2008, and at one point found myself chatting with my fellow presenters. One of the speakers had come up with what they felt was a brilliant idea that they had to share. The speaker remarked how as the audience was tweeting out our talks, they would condense our ideas into 140 characters or ‘Twitterbytes’, So on the fly, this speaker had bought that domain name. But this story is a great example of how we, as content creators, were working within the parameters of the Twitter platform. We were trying to distill complex ideas down into 140 chars so they would be easily memorable and…drive engagement.

As Twitter’s growth exploded, the sheer volume of tweets went through the roof as well. It made it increasingly hard for each individual tweet to stand out.  So again, content creators adapted. They started working on how to make their tweets stand out in a stream where dozens of new tweets are coming in every second. So of the changes were innocent enough, like simply adding a picture or a link.

But somewhere along the way, we all figured out a basic truth of social media: If you say something inflammatory, it’s more likely to have higher engagement. Everyone stops to watch the trainwreck. If you are yelling, people will pay attention. So again, user behavior adjusted. Yelling and being outrageous resulted in higher engagement levels.

Notice that we continue to get further and further away from the one thing that made social media so appealing from the start: The power of organic, civil conversations.

Think about this for a minute: How would the way you use Facebook and Twitter change if you had no idea how many Likes a Facebook update received, or how many RTs a tweet on Twitter had received?  I suspect you would spend more time actually reading the content and paying closer attention to what was said in order to decide if it was worth your time. I saw this coming years ago and began arguing that social media sites should remove all public engagement metrics.  Don’t tell me how many friends or followers someone has, don’t tell me how many Likes or RTs their content gets, don’t tell me how many comments it has.  FORCE me to judge the content’s value on the content itself, not on engagement metrics, which can easily be inflated.

Are Blogs Also Social Media? Should They Go Away As Well?

I’ve always had a problem with classifying blogs as being social media. Yes, I get that in simple terms, it probably makes sense to call blogs social media. But I’ve never really felt comfortable with the description. I think the reason why, is that blogs are a space that YOU control. And they are a place where you have the ability to clearly and completely explain your opinions. Whereas social media sites are geared toward engagement, blogs are geared toward conversations. Think of the mess it would be if I tried to take this same post, and put it on Twitter. I’d have to create a thread of probably 50+ tweets that would end up being a jumbled mess that most people would never read all of. A few tweets would get some engagement and shares, the majority would be ignored.

We need less engagement-driven content, and more conversations. I’ve reached a point where I would be fine if Facebook and Twitter went away today. But don’t take my blogs, don’t take my conversations. That’s what we need. We need more opinions, we need less shame, we need more humility, we need fewer closed minds.

At one point, social media was offered as the solution to our problems. Now it IS the problem. And we need to solve it.

by

Twitter Begins ‘Fact-Checking’ President Trump’s Tweets

I try to avoid discussing politics in any shape, form or fashion here, but this story is too interesting to pass up,

For well over a year now, Twitter has been tip-toeing toward adding functionality that allows the platform to censor the content of tweets. Much of their ‘managing the conversation’ initiative was building toward this, and the suspicion was that one of the end goals was to limit President Trump’s ability to tweet. Love him or hate him, President Trump’s ability to use Twitter to get his message out is masterful, and it’s really interesting that most of the sites and blogs that cover case studies for great social media usage have completely ignored it. The President is able, via his tweets, to all but manipulate mainstream media into (accidentally) covering stories and issues that it would otherwise ignore.

And to be fair, a lot of what President Trump claims on Twitter is an exaggeration at best, and falsehoods at worst.

So yesterday, Twitter began ‘fact-checking’ President Trump’s tweets:

 

Note the ‘Get the Facts About Mail-In Ballots’ that Twitter has added to the bottom of the tweet. This is a very interesting development for three reasons:

1 – If Twitter is going to ‘fact-check’ President Trump, it will have to fact-check all politicians. Otherwise, it will lead to charges (rightly or wrongly) of election interference. And let’s be honest, an even application of its rules to all users has never been Twitter’s strong suit. This will simply lead to more yelling and screaming every time ANY major politician has a tweet ‘fact-checked’, but Twitter has backed itself into a corner where it almost has to start ‘fact-checking’ all politicians, in order to not give the impression that it is only targeting the President.

And already, there are questions about the objectivity of the person who is ‘fact-checking’ the President’s tweets:

2 – This opens the free-speech debate, as well as the discussion about if Twitter is a platform, or a publisher:

3 – President Trump is arguably the most influential Twitter user. The reality is, a lot of people are on Twitter mainly to read and follow the President’s tweets. And believe it or not, many of these people are his detractors, not his supporters. If this reaches a point where the President is either banned from Twitter or decides to move to another platform, it’s going to be a massive hit for Twitter, and a boon for whatever platform the President moves to. Which honestly might not be a bad thing for those of us that hate the political sniping that constantly plagues Twitter.

 

And just this morning, the President said he is revisiting the idea of regulating social media platforms like Twitter:

As you can see, all of this has created a huge mess for Twitter. Unfortunately, social media and mainstream media have become completely interwoven over the last few years. I remember around 2010 or so thinking how cool it was to see a CNN anchor reference what was being said on Twitter during a segment. “Look, they are showing actual tweets! How cool!” But over the years, the mainstream media has started to use social media posts as a proxy for public opinion, and that’s an incredibly inaccurate and potentially dangerous leap to make. It’s led to people rushing to Twitter and other social media channels to try to make a name for themselves by basically screaming the loudest about politics. It’s greatly polluted the entire Twitter community and it has made everyday interactions far more toxic. In the last few weeks I’ve started unfollowing people on Twitter, some that I had followed for over a decade, based on their political rants. But media is rewarding the voices that scream the loudest with coverage, and then says those voices represent what you and I think as well.

But perhaps the biggest takeaway from this episode is: Social media sites need to create simple, clear-cut rules for its users, and apply those rules evenly to all. As I said earlier, Twitter has been building up to this for well over a year. They began to talk about ‘managing the conversation’, or ‘taking into account the user’s intent’, or ‘how some people might be offended by certain topics’, and all of this sounds like code for ‘how can we make it so we can get rid of the people who say things we don’t like, but make it seem like we are still following our own rules?’

That’s not how you create trust among your users, that’s not how you build something that lasts. Twitter has had little to no direct competition for almost a decade. The days of also-rans like Identi.ca or Plurk are long gone. Perhaps it’s time for a new ‘micro-blogging’ site to enter the space.