There was a lot of talk yesterday at AdTech about Twitter, and how people would be twittering at the conference about what was going on. this was supposed to be a good way of keeping people who weren’t able to attend the conference up to date.
One of the (many) tags for following it was AdTechSyd#. However, when you search that in Twitter , like most Twitter streams, you get a lot of random thoughts which are not easy to read and the disjointed manner makes it difficult to identify and hold onto the useful or interesting pieces of information.
The Tweets include such useful lines as “at AdTech”, “Big night last night at AdTech”, “, “Wifi isn’t working”, “Great comment by Matt”.
While others had longer comments, and even coherent sentences, they were either taken straight from the speech or were a random thought of the writer, both of which need context for understanding. A bit like trying to read the doodlings in someone else’s lecture notes, you try to guess what they are talking about.
Which begs the question – when it comes to wanting to know what went on at a conference – do I really need a real-time stream of random sentences, or would it be better to read a thoughtfully composed (after the fact) blog post? I suspect strongly the latter. Real time isn’t a necessity for some situations, such as reporting on a speech at a Digital Marketing conference!
There were some good tips for those agencies who could be bothered trawling through all the Tweets. For example, some comments along the lines of “Why do agencies always have to be the leaders, why can’t they be team players?”.
This was rebutted with the line “Because agencies want to say: we are gurus of the bleeding edge, instead of gurus of the bleeding obvious.” It was also echoed with other comments in agreement from, I assume, Client companies, not agencies.
This is a good insight into the disenchantment clients might feel with their agencies, and shows how Twitter can let you know about mood or opinions on your brand/industry, and from replies, how widespread those opinions might be.
With all the different information sources on the web nowadays, you need to know the strengths and weaknesses of each, and for Twitter it seems to be:
- Good for ascertaining mood/vibe
- Suboptimal for getting the facts
- Good for multiple-opinions in one place
- Good for real time updates on time-critical topics
- Lacks context