Since my last post about getting free traffic from Twitter, I’ve gotten a couple emails from concerned readers who believe I’m encouraging Twitter spam.
It’s a fair argument, so I thought I’d address it head on. Here’s the first email I received.
Hi Ryan,
Are these random @ messages sent to non-followers with a sales page at the end? Because if that’s what you are promoting, you’re likely to have people reporting you for spam left and right.
Twitter users are into social media – SOCIAL. Spamming links is not social. It is anti-social.
Know what I mean?
The second email I received was from Joel Comm, a well-known Internet marketer and the author of Twitter Power:
Hey Ryan,
I’m really surprised to see you promoting Twitter Diving.
It’s total and complete Twitter spamming. You have to set up multiple Twitter accounts, and Markus even says on his forum that Twitter is shutting down accounts that are using this tool. You would never risk your own account as it would get shut down.
I’m trying to figure out your motivation…
Eager to hear your reply. :-)
Joel
So the big question is, am I encouraging Twitter spam?
This is a question I asked myself. In fact, I was an original beta tester for Twitter Diving. Naturally, I was concerned about the whole spam issue. So I created a throwaway account to test the service and satisfy my concerns.
After testing Twitter Diving myself, I personally feel my recommendation is not encouraging spam. Here’s why I say that…
Let’s say you’re on Twitter and you come across a tweet about “quinoa.” You’ve recently written an article about quinoa, so you reply back and say something like, “Hey, I see you’ve got an interest in quinoa. You might like this article: [link]”
Is this spam?
No.
You’re providing useful and relevant information based on what a person is publicly talking about.
Twitter Diving lets you send personalized @replies to multiple people at once. This is why I view it as a productivity tool. Instead of replying to 10 people by hand, you can reply to those same 10 people all at the same time.
I have already sent lots of @replies by hand, many with links to articles that aren’t selling anything. I’ve received many @replies like this as well. I don’t view it as spam and I don’t think others view it that way either.
To me, it’s similar to somebody on Google searching for something specific and you say, “Hey, here’s what you’re looking for.” Except on Twitter, people are publicly talking about certain subjects and you can jump in and add to that conversation: “Oh, you’re talking about quinoa? Here’s an article you might like…”
Since I began using the tool, I’ve gotten extremely high click-thru rates, usually between 30-50% and sometimes higher. I’ve had some people retweet my @replies. And I’ve also had people reply back to thank me for the information I sent.
If I was spamming people, would they be clicking on my links, retweeting them, and personally thanking me? Probably not.
Obviously, Twitter Diving is like sending email; it can be abused. Somebody could blast out a bunch of irrelevant tweets all pointing to sales pages — but that would defeat the purpose of personalized @replies.
Not to mention, it would quickly backfire. (This is why Twitter Diving has a few safeguards built in to stop anybody who tries to use the tool for spamming purposes.)
Certainly, some will still see Twitter Diving in black and white terms and say that all automated tweets are spam.
Of course, if this is their position, then that means that many popular Twitter clients (like HootSuite) are tools for spamming Twitter. It also means all scheduled tweets are spam, all tweets auto-published via an RSS feed are spam, etc.
In the end, I guess it depends on a person’s definition of spam. Sending out unsolicited sales pitches is spam. Sending out on-topic @replies that aren’t trying to sell anything seems to make good sense to me. It’s something I’ve done by hand and will continue to do.
The only difference is that now I’m experimenting with Twitter Diving to be more productive.
This is all just my opinion, of course. I’m certainly open to hearing other arguments. I’ve been wrong before about a lot of different things in my life and I’m pretty sure I’m going to be wrong again!
What’s your perspective? Is sending personalized @replies with Twitter Diving spam? Leave a comment and let me know what you think. Thanks!
-Ryan M. Healy
Similar Posts:
- Free Targeted Traffic with New Twitter Tool
- How to Connect on Twitter
- Is It Spam or Is It Something Else?
- Sabotage! When Social Proof Backfires
- Why I Allow Only 14 Days for Comments
About Ryan M. Healy
Ryan Healy is a direct response copywriter. Since 2002, he has worked with scores of clients, including BoostCTR, Alex Mandossian, Terry Dean, and Pulte Homes. He writes a popular blog about copywriting, advertising, and business growth, has been featured in publications like Feed Front magazine, and is a regular contributor to WordStream.com, BoostCTR.com, and MarketingForSuccess.com.
Even the best copywriters sometimes get stuck for words and struggle to write winning ads. But what if there was a surefire way to smash through writer's block and write winning copy almost every single time? Good news -- there is. Click Here to Read the Complete Article » |
{ 19 comments }
Well Ryan, coming from you, this is an interesting perspective! (and good use of Quinoa, by the way.) I am all about productivity, but I still think the jury is out on whether or not this service reflects my personality. Maybe I just make too much work for myself. I think that when it’s clear the link is not selling anything, that it could make sense, especially if people tend to respect stuff just because of who it comes from.
It’s borderline. And to be honest, I’m shocked to see you promoting the concept.
Borderline or not: This kind of controversial info will be found on the internet in 5 years or much later when someone googles your name. Like a prospective client… It’s part of your positioning. Don’t do it!
Markus Trauernicht
Good point, Markus!
I totally agree.
Excellent point, Ian – “Being overwhelmed by it kills the platform.”
Also: A new thought I had this morning is that Twitter could actually limit @replies only to people I’m personally following or people who are following me. Presto – No more @replies from people outside your “Twitter bubble.”
Hi Ryan,
You could be right about limiting the @replies. They’re a real pain for me. As I have a lot of followers I get a lot of spam @replies (completely untargeted) just to get in front of my followers. I block/spam mark the big offenders but it’s a pain.
It could be that Twitter’s spam reporting button provides the solution. Those that “dive” with good value tweets have no problem – those that send spam get hit by the Block and Report as Spam button.
Ian
Interesting. Maybe it’s because I don’t follow many people, but I get basically zero spam @replies. I just never get any. I do remember auto DMs being a problem for a while — but that’s really only a problem if you mass-follow.
I think there is a more simple question to ask yourself here that will at least get you to think about the answer to your question Ryan…
“Am I, by sending one reply to 10, 100, 1000 people at a time, being social?”
Are you holding a seminar using Twitter as a platform? Or are you trying to communicate a relevant message to the person.receiving it?
IMO, automatic messages can be personalized, but not personal.
Hey Ryan,
I appreciate you tackling this.
So here’s my take…
If you are sending out automated messages to anyone with a certain keyword, there is no way to know for sure that the keyword is directly related to the subject. I can see two people using this Twitter tool following the same keyword and automatically tweeting each other. Funny, huh?
Social media is about being social. There is nothing social about a bot socializing for you. At no point have you actually entered the conversation.
I took a look inside the member site and immediately knew this was not a tool I would ever promote. Talks of people losing their Twitter accounts. Suggestions that you “deposit” a shared Twitter account so that all could send tweets from it.
I respect my account to much to risk losing it. In my opinion, Twitter Diving is just another person’s attempt to “game” Twitter and use it in a way that was never intended.
Joel
All good points, Joel.
On a side note, I do actually review who I’m responding to and what they tweeted about in the first place, so it’s not just a blind tweet based on a keyword search. Every tweet I send is reviewed by me first.
If you imagine the scenario playing out in a coffee shop, for example, where you overhear a conversation you have some useful insight on, it’s not so bad. Pretty normal, actually. If you have decent social skills and step in and out of their conversation smoothly, you’re a welcome interruption.
“Hey, if you’re looking for quinoa, there’s a great locally run coop down on Anderson Drive.”
Nothing wrong with that. Problem is usefully translating that to social media. And like everything else, it depends on the market. Among internet marketers, there is a heightened sensitivity to anything that might be perceived as spam. Many other markets are quite happy to get unsolicited but useful tweets.
As an example, look at the Locavore community on Twitter. From consumers who are more aware of where they buy their food to small scale farmers, this group is very interconnected and totally open to a friendly interjection from someone they may not know yet. I haven’t experimented with linking them to a sales page directly, but I have sent unsolicited links to blog posts to good effect.
I guess I am saying “it depends” and given your attitude and approach toward the tactic, Ryan, I think you’re alright.
Thanks for the response, Dan. Good reminder to bring the scenario to a local, face-to-face level. Changes the perspective.
If you imagine the scenario playing out in a coffee shop, for example, where you overhear a conversation you have some useful insight on, it’s not so bad. Pretty normal, actually. If you have decent social skills and step in and out of their conversation smoothly, you’re a welcome interruption.
“Hey, if you’re looking for quinoa, there’s a great locally run coop down on Anderson Drive.”
Nothing wrong with that. Problem is usefully translating that to social media. And like everything else, it depends on the market. Among internet marketers, there is a heightened sensitivity to anything that might be perceived as spam. Many other markets are quite happy to get unsolicited but useful tweets.
As an example, look at the Locavore community on Twitter. From consumers who are more aware of where they buy their food to small scale farmers, this group is very interconnected and totally open to a friendly interjection from someone they may not know yet. I haven’t experimented with linking them to a sales page directly, but I have sent unsolicited links to blog posts to good effect.
I guess I am saying “it depends” and given your attitude and approach toward the tactic, Ryan, I think you’re alright.
Ryan,
I’m thinking that if the content you’re sending people to is relevant isn’t simply plying people with sales messages (which I know you’re not), then it is not spam.
I say go for it.
- John
That’s good to know.
But let’s face it. Telling people to buy this tool and not use it to spam to get traffic is like putting a cheeseburger in the hands of a starving man and telling him not to eat it.
A small percentage of people, such as yourself, will use the tool decently. Most will not. Because its not designed for decent usage. It’s designed to drive traffic leveraging Twitter as a tool.
I kind of find the whole attack from Joel Comm on Ryan Healy about ethics a bit strange. Especially considering the whole MyGooglePayday/My Internet Payday (two of Joel Comm’s products) fiasco involving all kinds of hidden charges…and that after he had done the EXACT SAME thing two years earlier and got a pounding for it.
As to the Twitter Diving tool itself, I was a beta tester and it certainly is a tool that can be used correctly or abused.
There probably is a good analogy, but the “giving a starving man a cheeseburger and telling him not to eat it” is the quite basic logical fallacy of a false analogy…which also taps into the “reason why” effect.
Comments on this entry are closed.