For whatever reason my blog posts about social media (#socmed) have started to share a common thing: they were all responses to other people’s blog. Thinking about it for a few moments you understand that’s not too surprising though as being social implies that you are interacting (as in socializing).
As in real life (and by the way, this distinction starts sounding absurd in 21st century in my POV*) replying to something that somebody said is a good way to start a conversation or join an ongoing discussion during a public gathering. So, it’s got to be the media part of the word that makes some people think that it needs a social media expert to teach one how to engage on the web. It does NOT…
Matter of fact, it’s rather easy to get started as – in principal – it’s mostly common sense and just the same as in “real life” (RL). Simply imagine being in a big public space and behave exactly the same on the web. I’m sure your parents taught you how-to behave in public, right? So, no… the web should not be something to be afraid of.
I recently was asked for my opinion on what would be the most essential rules to apply when thinking about building a “personal brand” on the web. Here’s what I told Natascha:
- Be authentic. And behave as in RL (public space).
- If unsure what to do, let good manners be your guide. Think ‘What would @marilynpratt do!” #wwmpd
- See what others do – adapt what you like. Add your own spice!
First Impression
So, one of the most essential things you’d need to keep in mind is that the first impression is very important (again, just as in RL.) So, now taking this ritual of introducing yourself and – hopefully – striking a good first impression – to the Twitterverse is the topic of choice for today’s blog post.
See, following someone on Twitter seems to be a similar ritual as engaging other people … let’s say… on a cocktail party. It’s like stepping into a room, establishing eye contact or even tapping someone on their shoulder. It’s about establishing contact. So, if you mess up that very first moment (maybe w/o even knowing!) you’re up to a bad start. Especially if you really want to socialize!
Common sense, right? Maybe not for everybody?!? See, as the number of people I follow and who follow me grows I came to understand that there is indeed some sort of a #netiquette that most active tweeps would agree to. So, for instance, there are some general thoughts people apply when deciding on whether or not to follow back somebody. The other day, when I was going through my regular routine to browse through my new followers (btw, I use the BirdBrain app for that purpose) I realized that all I do is applying a pattern and got curious about how other handle this aspect:
Actually, I should have put Martijn on cc right away, as a lot of his recent work in the social network space was very interesting and thought-provoking like his analysis about Klout. Anyway, he got back to me right away; pointing me to The Follow-or-Not Flowchart:
I would say that most of the considerations or KO criteria Martijn incorporated into his flowchart are part of my reasoning as well. Yet, to people new to Twitter it may not be as obvious why some of the mentioned considerations may result in an immediate loss of interest. So, here are some no-gos plus background…
KO criteria
→ Courtesy by Martijn Linssen
- Name (Twitter Handle) – The more the name looks like a real human name, the more likely people consider following back in general. Hey, if it’s your real name I may even have heard about you, which may result in an immediate follow-back. The more artificial a name looks (think of generated names, brand names, bots…) the more unlikely people will follow-you back. Remember: most people are interested in keeping a descent noise-signal ratio and are out for socializing, not being spammed. So, the more human, the better. Now, nothing is wrong in using a nickname, yet it better not be “Jenny123″ … got my point?
- Profile Picture – Again, personally I prefer real photos: “gimme a face to the name”. An avatar is ok, yet using one of the Twitter default ones is … BORING! And while it may sound harsh, nobody is interested in someone they feel is boring. So, if you’re curious about engaging, then at least take the time to properly dress up.
- Bio – No bio? Again, boring. Why should I consider following you if you give me zero reasons why?
So, these are the first things that will get noticed. Frankly speaking it comes down to: “if you put that little effort in your digital persona, how much value may I expect from your tweets?”
The good into the pot, the bad into the crop
Now, once you passed that initial check, there are further ones being applied to distinguish between people. See, unfortunately lots of people are impressed by metrics, if someone has a following of 20k people he sure must be special. Not necessarily… there are people out there just trying to gather as many followers as possible to increase the sheer number. But these people are not necessarily out for real engagement, but for all the wrong reasons. And who would want to be associated with such folks? So, that’s when to look out for “real people.” And that’s my next advice, just be yourself! People are social beings, we are interested in people and real stories.
- Ratios – So, I’d also follow people back if they mainly listen to Twitter and are not actively tweeting themselves yet (see More tweets than people they’re following?) Maybe they are just getting started or more introvert or still just familiarizing themselves with social networks. At least I know they would not clutter my timeline and I may even miss those rare tweets altogether anyway.
- Lists – Lists are not part of any of my considerations. Would be interested to hear the reasoning behind this rule…
- Content Mix – Here I fully agree. @replies may indicate the person is participating in dialogues or discussions and not just broadcasting. Obviously, this is the most important aspect – have something interesting to say!
Other considerations
Well, it’s definitely more complex than this and many people may apply other rules. You know, the there’s an exception to every rule aspect is applicable here as well. So for me, I have a few more steps to filter out some of the noise.
- Language – I usually don’t follow people if the majority of their tweets is in a language I don’t understand. I don’t mind an occasional tweet in a foreign language, the opposite. But cluttering my timeline with tweets I don’t understand may make me miss a much more meaningful one.
- Followers – “Les amis de mes amis sont mes amis ok.” If I’m unsure about whether or not to follow-back I consult the tweep’s followers. Where is (s)he coming from? Do we have common friends? Peers? Interests?
- Quality over Quantity – It’s that simple see:
One last remark
Sometimes people may not follow us back. For whatever reasons… some may just want to see if you are interested enough to hang around w/o being followed-back immediately (just out for ratios.) Don’t sweat it… that’s the one thing about Twitter. It’s more about following, than being followed… and that you see value in engaging!
A time to mourn a time to rejoice….
vijay's thoughts on all things big and small
My algorithm is simple. If someone follows me I go look at their tweets. If they are interesting (which starts with some tweets existing), I’ll follow back. Voila (that’s French, I think, but usually tweet in English).
Thanks Jamie. Well, content is king… yet, sometimes I don’t even dig that far to actually check the last tweets.