TwitterHawk, Spam or Not?

Twitter is receiving almost as much attention as Google receives at industry events. In this interview from SES New York, Jeff Ferguson of Napster talks about TwitterHawk and the marketing power of it.

TwitterHawk is a new tool for Twitter that is still in the developing stages. It is keyword-based and allows users to create a variety of reply phrases to respond to people with. TwitterHawk usage costs 5 cents per tweet (reply) but can be purchased in advance through a variety of packages.

In an effort to build up a client’s Twitter base, Jeff decided to use the tool for a DJ for iGlobal Radio. He used keywords such as Radiohead, alternative music, Indie-Music, etc. When someone tweeted one of those keywords, they were sent an automated response that said something similar to “If you like Radiohead, you’ll love iGlobal Radio…”

As a result, TwitterHawk helped Jeff’s client to receive many more Twitter followers and created more interactivity with his followers. On the negative side, there were a couple of people that accused Jeff’s client of spam. Jeff responded to one user and found that he didn’t like that fact that a robot was responding to him and that it was a paid service.

Jeff countered the argument by explaining that his client wrote his own copy for his responses. Also, his client’s actions were completely human but simply carried out in an automated fashion.

If users only use TwitterHawk and are not personally active on the service, then Jeff says those users could be classified as spammers. His client however, is active on Twitter and used TwitterHawk to better target his market.

What are your thoughts on TwitterHawk? Do you think it is pure marketing or does it cross the line and create a spam issue?

More WebProNews Videos

Will Monetization Models for Social Media Ever Come?

Dave Naylor is never shy to share his opinion on matters and this interview with WebProNews is no exception. As evidenced by several of our videos from SES New York, social media was a hot topic. One area in particular that raised a lot of discussion was monetization of social sites.

According to comScore, YouTube is the second largest search engine next to Google. It however, does not have a solid monetization model. Dave says YouTube users don’t care what’s going on around them. They simply want to watch a video. YouTube users turn advertisements away much like they do on television, by either flipping to another channel or leaving the room until their program comes back on.

Twitter is a whole different story altogether. Look at all the applications it provides such as TweetBerry, TweetDeck, and our very own Twellow. Dave then raises the following question: what if Twitter would start charging for their usage? How would that change your business strategies on Twitter?

Twitter recently announced that Pro accounts are coming this year but has yet to disclose what they consist of.

Moving right along to Facebook. As discussed in our interview with Tim Kendall, contextual advertising on Facebook is based on the freely submitted data Facebook users provide. On the contrary, Google and the other search engines base their advertising on the searcher’s past history.

Facebook’s model is much more accurate than the search engine’s technique. Most users conduct many searches at work, which does not reflect their actual behavior. Facebook uses the information users readily give to them as part of their preferences.

On a final note, Dave points out that Google needs to incorporate a “business account” for Google accounts since sometimes many people are logged into one person’s account. He suggests giving the account holder the ability to choose who can have access to what.

More WebProNews Videos

“Blending” Viral Marketing into Your Marketing Strategy

Are you familiar with the ever-popular Will It Blend campaign from Blendtec? If not, you’re depriving yourself from one of the best viral marketing campaigns ever.

George Wright, the Vice President of Marketing and Sales at Blendtec, gave a keynote at PubCon, in which he explained the strategy behind their campaign. In the above WPN video, Barry Schwartz of RustyBrick, Inc. tells how Blendtec had to go out on a limb to get their brand name out there.

Blendtec offers high performance blending and dispensing equipment for restaurants, but also has home editions. George realized their need to raise brand awareness. He knew they had great products, but no one knew about them. The concept was there for the “will it blend” idea, but they didn’t have a big budget to do a commercial.

George took his budget of $50 and bought the domain name willitblend.com, a lab coat, a six-pack of Coke, and supplies to blend. The first experiment included marbles, a rotisserie chicken, a rake, and a McDonald’s value meal. Their small budget only allowed them to use social media outlets, so they launched their campaign over YouTube.

Now, some 70-75 videos later, they’ve made history. Blendtec blends iPhones, iPods, and even rake handles just as George did in his keynote address! The only item that has been too powerful for them to blend is Chuck Norris…

Since their campaign launched, Blendtec’s sales have been up 700 percent. George realized Blendtec’s need to prove that their product was better than the others by actually showing it instead of simply talking about the mechanics. Viral marketing is creating fun content that people want to talk about and putting it into social media sites.

Ironically, Blendtec pitched the Food Network prior to the campaign with no luck, but after the campaign began, the Food Network contacted them.

More WebProNews Videos