Cc Multiple Social Networks and Annoy

March 3, 2011 |  by  |  Marketing, Social Media
Share

Multiple Social Networks

Services that simultaneously post updates to multiple social media networks have become more popular. The first time I took issue with this was when LinkedIn added the ability to copy Twitter on a status update, and enabling vice versa by adding the hashtag #linkedin to a tweet. Some people abuse this: LinkedIn is simply not Twitter. The only updates on LinkedIn that you should duplicate on Twitter are few and far between. One acceptable category is professionally related posts, e.g. conference or event information/learnings. However, as wildly insightful and disruptive I felt my tweets at the last Atlanta Interactive Marketing Association (AiMA) Email Marketing event were, no one on LinkedIn would want to see ten tweets within two hours about email marketing. Further, Twitter jargon pasted onto other sites can lack translation and context:

AiMA Atlanta Interactive Marketing Association Email #aima twitter emilybinder

Check all those social sharing boxes and disperse your status with SEO greed — I will unfollow you. Remember that social = human. With all the noise, why follow one person on six networks if this social superstar carbon copies even half of their posts? I know Dino Dogan says content isn’t king. But shouldn’t it be?

Location-Based Social

Posting Foursquare check-ins on Twitter is usually annoying. The marketing folks I love following who typically tweet excellent content cheapen themselves by announcing check-ins to Taco Mac. Maybe some people think they are giving their online persona a personal touch by sharing places they visit. However, realize that spamming your followers with your every move is not analogous to the heralded Sharpie Susan act of uploading a thoughtful, personal avatar instead of a sterile logo (or worse, of course: the unthinkable dreaded egg head).

The reason different social media platforms exist is that each offers a different experience, and the parameters for participation vary. The expected candor on LinkedIn differs from Facebook. The demands of my beloved Twitter are greater (and arguably more challenging) than a blog that has free reign on length. Twitter is more forgiving about punctuation, spelling, and abbreviations because everyone understands 140 characters is limiting. Actually, this makes Twitter harder and more fun. Economy of words is powerful. If Twitter ever increases the character limit, I will quit. Besides, we have found ways to get around it. For example:

TwitLonger

twitlonger emilybinder

(Notice the Facebook button at the bottom. This is fine: it’s just Facebook.)

How many networks do we really need to share things on? It would be less of an eyesore to have five top networks: Facebook, Twitter, Digg, Delicious, and Google available for one-click sharing, with the rest hidden. Better yet, just download the AddThis plugin to your browser and go to town checking every single box; I have no reason to follow you on every network if your posts are carbon copies from all the other networks. At least it will cut down on noise for me.

Share

Recent Posts

  • http://diyblogger.net Dino Dogan

    So…you’re a chess player, ey? Are you ranked? I was meaning to make chess playing analogous to business planning, and think it would work, but I need a confirmation from a chess master.

    • Emily

      Of course I play chess. It’s the best way to be humbled and humiliated while also finding unique inspiration for silly marketing blog posts.
      No, I am not ranked. I’m completely recreational but obsessed.
      Writing about business using chess analogies is the most intuitive thing in the world- I can’t believe more people don’t do it. Have at it and link me over… on one appropriate social network.

  • Larry Dalliapoulos

    So… you’re a girl. How can I ask you out without seeming like a total douche?

    • Emily

      The spambots are getting so witty. Look at Larry Dalliapoulos’s parallel phrasing of Dino Dogan’s human comment above it. I had to read Larry’s brilliant comment twice, searching for some implicit genius. Then I realized “So… you’re a” was a coincidence. But what are the odds?

      Spammy Larry, thank you for posting proof of my conclusion: Automation is horrible.