The Musings Of An Opinionated Sod [Help Me Grow!]


Social Media Behaving Like Mainstream Media …
July 8, 2009, 6:23 am
Filed under: Comment

By the time you read this, I’ll be in China, and whereas blogs like NP’s is accessible [because he’s a lovely and intelligent man … and probably a communist] mine is not, which means that whilst you’ll be able to ‘enjoy’ the rubbish I’ve pre-written for today, tomorrow and Friday, you won’t be getting any comments from me till next week.

Sounds like you’re in a win : win position to me.

Anyway, I was going to write about an Aussie company called uSocial who are offering to find Twitter addicts, “followers” for the bargain price of US$87 per thousand … however given I told Uncle George Parker about it – and he’s written a far more eloquent post than I could ever manage – I suggest you go there and read it instead.

Enjoy the Campbell silence for the next few days …


19 Comments

all hail those commie bastards for succeeding where every other fucker has failed. thank you china, now if you could find the strength and courage to keep the fucker for a couple of years wed all sign up for red hats.

my suggestion is no one comments on this blog while campbell is away.
think how the little bastards face will go from anticipation to tantrum when he logs on for the first time and realises he is billy no fucking mates. well it makes me excited.

but a word of thanks to rob. by giving george parker the scoop on this ‘find a friend’ twitter bollocks, hes made it that we dont have to waste another 30 seconds of our lives that well never get back reading his version of this shit. what a guy.

Comment by andy@cynic

fuck me dodds isnt first to post today. dont tell me the fuckers got a life. more like hes stuck on the shitter straining to snap off a log.

Comment by andy@cynic

Sorry Robert, I’m only following orders which is apt as Andy does remind me of Hitler. 🙂

Comment by Pete

stop trying to get in my good books planner boy.

Comment by andy@cynic

How can I not comment when Rob finally writes a post that’s interesting. Oh he didn’t, grumpy George did.

Comment by Billy Whizz

now i can see this really taking off if you could segment the list and choose the demographic profile of your followers. that would just quadruple the chances of ugly yet intelligent, eloquent and witty people getting laid. 87 bucks is a bargain!

Comment by Juanita

Does Juanita realise the danger she has put herself in with that comment given Andrew is free from Robert’s influence for a few days?

I agree there are some potential commercial benefits with this scheme, but at $87 per 1000, they are seemingly acknowledging their credibility as a credible business partner is small.

Comment by Lee Hill

Andy influenced by Rob? That’s fighting talk.

Comment by john

Not that I’m desperate, but I’ll drop $87 for usocial to find me 1000 hot and easy women to keep me amused.

Where do I sign and is this legal outside of Nevada?

Comment by Bazza

as much as i hate this fucking idea, here’s a thought:

brand needing some ‘augmentation’ (you know talkie talkie recognition shit) gets twitter. [brand-as-person-bullshit]
followers = 1000
tweets per week = 1000
online references = 1000 x 1000 (=1M)
search rating = increased by whatever the google factor is. say x 10
better recognition and increased visitors (on basic statistics and probability only) = cranking the machine.
machine cranking = greater leverage
greater leverage = bigger buy in from clients/prospectives/money

etc, etc, etc.

all of this is, of course if you base your poxy brand and online ‘presence’ on the old ‘how many people get to see my logo’ numbers (which of course nobody does anymore). and there you have your parasitic company from australia.

of course, i’m just an artist from said country, with no knowledge or expertise in digital strategy. it’s just a thought.

🙂

Comment by lauren

That’s how media people think. There’s lots of logic in what you say but people don’t always react in the way logic requires them to.

I think Lee’s comment is very interesting, because it’s all about the quality of the connection or it’s more a hit & hope strategy which is probably why they can offer $87 per thousand.

When Rob’s back, I’d like to hear how he thinks this idea could work because I am guessing he has an idea that is not pure numbers reliant.

Comment by Bazza

I know you weren’t saying your thought process was perfect Lauren, sorry for my patronizing tone, you can take the man out of cynic but you can’t take cynic out the man. 🙂

Comment by Bazza

bazza, i agree entirely. i know that people don’t work by numbers and that’s exactly how media people think. and because that’s how media people think, that’s how you get businesses like this selling the idea.
perhaps i didn’t convey my derision and patronising tone enough 🙂

it’s certainly not why i hang out on twitter, but given its mainstream status now in the US and UK, the old ‘size does matter’ mentality has obviously kicked in. [see under ‘chinese students paid to play your WoW character while you sleep’ and ‘pay just $220 for extra facebook friends’.]

Comment by lauren

Not sure it’s size that matters, but laziness. 🙂

Comment by Bazza

I quite like this idea. I’d see it as tactic for charities in the first place.

and I’d flip it. not how many people would join you, but for 87 $ u could join a platinum list of “cool kids’tweets” and get acces to some other cool shite” that they would donate.

in return a charity would get $. twitter should go from abundance to scarcity.

most people don’t want to be leaders, u know, but they like to follow one and “hang”. use that instead.

the business model is wrong, but the idea is nice.

Comment by niko

Just read Rob’s comment on George Parker’s blog, I think he’s agreeing with you Niko.

Comment by Bazza

i dont think you understood, my “dont comment” was an order not a fucking suggestion.

and who is this juanita chick and why do all the fiesty ones come to this blog? its like a one stop shop for my favourite kind of female. you lucky, lucky ladies.

Comment by andy@cynic

yeah. lucky us.

Comment by lauren

Oh my god, what’s going on – proper debate, well semi-proper debate.

I think I said on George’s post that whilst I think the idea is badly executed, I do think there is certain promise in the concept – but like Lee so nicely put it, at $87 per 1000, the quality of the respondents uSocial will offer makes the current concept almost totally redundant.

Comment by Rob




Comments are closed.