After recently reading Mullen head creative honcho @edwardboches' post about why CEOs should get on Twitter, this morning I spotted an @link plug in a company's executive announcement and upon checking it out, I started thinking even more than I have been about Twitter as a 'tool.'
Conflict.
My daytime-description requires me to consider how it and other online applications can serve as 'tools' while my non-9-to-5 mind sees it simply as an activity to connect.
Merge. It's both.
True - there are marketing folks out there tweeting for their clients...the must-jump-on-the-bandwagon-regardless-of-how-it's-accomplished method versus the do-it-because-it-fits method. Hint: the second will, (and has proven to) be more valuable in the long run, which seems to be something most of us in the industry have realized by now. For some though, it's not so black and white. There are many, in this case, several of those we counsel, who are still trying to find their online comfort level so we in turn find ourselves on a sliding scale of how to help them be there and feel OK about it.
Getting executives online is smart, but the answer for we whose job it is to encourage is not in how to fake it. If you, Mr. CEO, are thinking about starting a personal Twitter account, use it to be yourself. No one minds a little brand building - it's necessary - but we like it better if it's honest. Reminder, that the first rule in having an online presence is transparency. If it's a clearly corporate account, personalize it, it's more genuine when you do. But so long as your actual face has replaced the o_O standard, and your actual name, (or a version of it) has been @-ified, please, just be real.
It isn't something that should be forced, yet we're starting to see an attempt to do so. The case of the scripted 140 characters. The line here has been blurred for a long time. If ghost writing isn't on the up-and-up, why does PR draft contributed content and simply place an executive's name on the author line? Definitely not a rare occurrence, so technically, isn't 'ghost-tweeting' the same idea? -- Let's recall for a moment, the upset caused by the blogging fiasco involving a well-known PR firm and its giant retail client...
Perhaps here lays the line with companies -- in traditional methods, it didn't much matter who the content was coming from, so long as it appeared credible. Readers only wanted the information. Now, online, they want the information and a touch point, and many cases the relevancy of the information doesn't matter as much as what it means to them. Being able to connect directly to that other person in a real way - be it a friend, colleague or corporate executive.
We've learned it's necessary to understand how best to speak/write in our executive's voice in traditional practices - in theory, one could modify this to blog or microblog using another's voice...except it's so much easier to see through. When an executive has recently appeared on Twitter, does anyone actually believe they immediately understand the jargon, have 100 followers, host Tweetups, etc.? It's a learning experience. Any true #newbie I know is still learning after only 5 updates, despite how much they've heard or read about the Twitter culture - they've got to feel it out for awhile.
Reiterate. Use Twitter because you want to, and then tweet it like you mean it. Don't worry if you look or feel a little silly at first, lost even, it comes with the territory of trying something new.