Could Advertising Pollute Twitter?

 
Click Image for full size version

Now that I’ve been getting in a groove on Twitter, it has me wondering.  Could advertisers swoop in and taint a very grassroots movement?  My disclaimer to this post is that I haven’t been using Twitter for very long and I haven’t worked at a big traditional Ad shop, so this perspective may indeed be naïve.  However, I’m wondering if what we’ve seen with Advertisers intruding on YouTube and in Second life could happen on Twitter (assuming it’s not already).

Why?  If you think about how Twitter is used, it’s always nice to throw in some quick details to add context and tell a better short story.  For example, take a look at two ways I could say something on Twitter:

1. Reading a bedtime story to my six year old...
2. Reading “Where the Wild Things Are" to a very sleepy 4-year-old but he’s loving it...

The second blurb provides a little more detail, and naming the book helps paint the scene.  Here’s where advertising could potentially come in.  A classic model for advertising is to make an arrangement with a celebrity to talk about their stuff—maybe in an Ad or promotion.  Or there’s always the option to pay for product placement.  So let’s look at a hypothetical situation.  Let’s say a popular celeb who is a symbol of the Attention Economy and maybe even has a blog starts Twittering.  And let’s say that celeb X  makes several agreements with a number of brands to mention their products/services by name in their Twitters.  It could be something as seemingly innocent as this.

“Out with friends, sipping on Bacardi and Coke.  Gotta go, Justin just pulled up in his hot new S-Class...”

There.  Three brands/products all mentioned by name from an influential celeb.  Now this little message could be picked up in the following ways:  Online, Instant Message, Mobile, and through the use of Widgets.  All of a sudden you’ve got a highly influential person talking about your products in context.  And it’s getting picked on a variety of highly relevant media channels which cost NOTHING.  And think about how interested everyday people would be to know what a celeb is doing “right now”.  Think about why all the celeb rags and gossip columns are so popular.

Like I said, I’m coming at this a bit naïve.  So if you are a Twitter pro and can cite reasons why this fictional scenerio could or would never happen, I would love to hear it.  Or if you are in the Ad industry and can articulate why this would never work, I would like to hear that as well.  And there’s nothing to say that a celeb can’t use Twitter.  What I’m talking about here are deliberate ways to integrate a product or service where a celeb is given some kind of payment in return. 

Personally, I hope it never happens.  Twitter’s magic is that it helps us celebrate the “mundane” through the sharing of short stories.  I hope this never becomes commercialized.

Comments

[Ryan Karpeles]

I like your thinking here, but...

If celebrities were paid to promote certain brands via Twitter, wouldn't consumers eventually find out? If they did, this would most likely dilute the value of the product mentioned and also diminish some of the brand equity.

It's somewhat similar to the 'fake' Wal-Mart blog. In order for someone to be persuasive, it has to be completely authentic.

Consumers are becoming smarter, more aware and more opinionated as they continue to gain access to more information. The dissemination of that information also occurs much more rapidly and on a much wider scale.

In other words, as soon as the public finds out these are paid endorsements--the jig is up. (This might not be true for everyone, since some people are addicted to celebrities and can still be influenced by their lifestyle choices, even if there's money behind them.)

Perhaps if there were some way to enter into a secret contract agreement with a high profile celebrity...

It's definitely an interesting idea that provides a lot of room to work with, but like you said, "I hope it never becomes commercialized." Me too.

-Ryan

[Eric Rice]

I could totally see this-- I'm using Twitter as a creative writing tool and posting under 'fake' pretenses. There's also the notion that a few select communities of the more sophomoric variety could get involved and pollute the river with spew of various grades, and spammers could use it as a splog app, turning a twitter into a spwitter.

The system is THERE, and that's one of the unfortunate sides of all these great media tools. Either lock it down and get the same ol same ol, or open it up, and get introduced to the new same ol'.

(Ever tinfoil about the idea about some things that are so cosntant in our society, like Starbucks, that we'd never know? How would we know if someone as big as Starbucks did this, since it's perfectly naturally to use that as a reference point?)

[DA]

Ryan,

What if the celebs were really good at keeping it under under the table? I agree that someone's credibility is shot once they do this, but last time I checked, there are still Flogs polluting the blogosphere even after they fail time after time after time...

[Ryan Karpeles]

David,

I definitely agree with the idea, the execution, and the potential for bottom line results. I was just trying to throw a little devil's advocacy into the mix in hopes of generating ways to avoid the potential for backlash.

There are plenty of methods to keep people from finding out “the truth,” but I simply wanted to highlight the fact that this form of advertising flies in the face of the whole word-of-mouth theory about authenticity and trust. In essence, this is no longer word-of-mouth. It’s an endorsement. If certain brands are OK with that, then by all means, go for it. However, if a lack of authenticity presents a problem for your brand, maybe Twitter isn’t the best medium.

I also think this approach would be much more effective if the paid celebrity actually used/consumed/owned the items he or she wrote about. That said—here’s a new way to look at these endorsements:

Rather than contacting Paris Hilton and paying her X amount of dollars to mention Coke for 3 months…

Find out what Paris actually uses/drinks/drives/etc. and then pay her X amount of dollars to mention those brands on Twitter in a comfortable and casual manner. That way it’s not forced and the celebrities can speak openly and honestly about the things they actually use and enjoy. In essence, it allows for more elaboration that just a name-drop or brief product placement.

Many thanks for your sharing of ideas, knowledge, and everything else. It’s always greatly appreciated.

-Ryan

[Alex Nisbett]

Nice comments Ryan. Authenticity and trust; so if Celeb x was twittering on about Mercedes / Pepsi / Lego, I'm possibly not going to believe a. that's it's really her and b. that she is not gaining from that product placement. And I don't care - she's not an opinion former as far as I'm concerned.

Now if Friend x, who I've known for years is twittering on about car / drink / toy then I'm more likely to take notice as (for me) the source is more valued.

And this valued source approach speaks to bottom up rather than top down marketing. I like the opportunity to advocate, and benefit from other's advocacy of products and services, but not so I become some kind of brand junkie. Then I'm no longer a trusted source.

[Christopher Penn, Financial Aid Podcast]

The nice thing about Twitter is that if someone is sending out garbage, you can just unsubscribe from them. There's a built in incentive to remain relevant.

[Nathan]

Interesting thoughts on Twitter, and an interesting perspective of perhaps what is a good estimate of where it will go.

There is a post over on Stowe's blog (http://www.stoweboyd.com/message/2007/02/twitter_and_the.html) that mentions his use of Twitter and how he got companies to respond. If that kind of power is there, then what you mention can't be too far off.

[Keith Fletcher]

Have you seen www.celebritytwitter.com. Someone has registerd all of the famous stars and follows them using twitter.

[Becky Blanton]

Reminds me of pro-wrestling. There are audience members who KNOW it's fake and like the fantasy. There are audience members who believe it's real and like the drama. There are people who know it's fake and think it's stupid and you couldn't pay them to sit through even one "pro" wrestling match.

Twitter isn't that much different. There are already pretentious spammers - and then there are those who know that there are some folks who are just being honest about what they're doing - and who name drop a brand, or a friend's tweet to "help them out."

That's life.

Will advertising find its way to the party? Hell yeah. Will it take it over? No. Not as long as those who value authentic communication don't foll inauthentic. When celebs learn that being an ad shill can cost them fans (if it does) they won't do it either. The natural flow. It will all work itself out. The secret is not to get distracted in telling the story that "The good times/grassroots of twitter are gone." They're not.

Part of being a celebrity, or an early adopter/sneezer/leader or what have you, is your ability to influence. True influence is diminished when you can be bought. I think the *market* for authenticity will control itself.

There will always be fans who believe whatever someone feeds them. Ignore them. They wouldn't recognize a good thing if it bit them in the butt. Focus on your tribe, those who follow you because you are authentic, and everything else will be okay.

[gianandrea facchini]

I suppose that we can't do anything to avoid advertising intrusion wherever there is a chance to get in touch with a consumer.
I agree with Ryan about authenticity and trust and would add that the discerning consumer will make the difference. Maybe, next generation consumers are more clever than us and can spot better the fake and the reality.

[david cushman]

It might be like that - for a short blip. But the celebs are going to end up co-created too?
http://fasterfuture.blogspot.com/2009/04/can-we-stop-patronising-susan-boyle-now.html

You moved to a new gig cowboy?

[Rahel Bailie]

Ahem, this already happens, all the time, on Twitter. Off the top of my head, I can think of Robert Scoble waxing poetic about the Nokia N97, Zeldman talking about the delights of Dropbox, Kindle, Alltop, Guy Kawasaki and the loaner car he was driving ...whatever it was - it's all product placement. That this didn't register as advertising just goes to show how hardened we've become to it. (Kind of like people commenting on my techno-fails - we all get them; I'm just the person who calls it instead of accepting it.)

[David Armano]

Rahek

Ahem, I wrote this in Feb, 2007. Your comment in 2009 is proof that this was coming... :-)