When quality blog content becomes Spam

It sounds funny to say that content isn’t King when referring to a blog site or any information that you are seeking about a particular topic. The information stored within a site/blog/book is paramount to learning something new and furthering our minds. But when that content is put in front of you time and time again, every day multiple times a day, with no other option but to delete it, it is no longer helpful or wanted. It is SPAM.

My example of this is Jeff Bullas, and his tweet’s that ran at a rampant 90 or so a day (yes i have checked this) of his blog articles. Now don’t get me wrong, the content that Jeff has is brilliant, I will be one of the first people to should his praises for his insight into Social Media and how effective it is. I have garnered much knowledge from his postings and will stay tuned in to his future blogs.

What I will say though is Jeff, if your listening, tone down the barrage of tweet’s that we have all seen 100 times already and engage with us. I say this with respect to Jeff and his knowledge. Auto Tweets, and more importantly auto DM’s simply are not effective, not at the rate they come through. They reek of laziness and show little respect for your network. I want to hear more of what Jeff has to say and although with his large following it can be difficult to reply to everything, surely a few “human interactions” would be better then the bot approach we see now.

Jeff, I actually received an Auto DM from your account saying “Thanks for the RT”, whilst this may be a nice gesture, I did not RT any of your tweets, I in fact said to you “why do you repost everything 100 times”?. This to me is a contradiction of everything engaging and interactive about Social Media and clearly not in tune with my tweet. I felt cheated.

I encourage everyone to read Jeff’s blog, there is some brilliant content there and we can all learn a lot from his knowledge and insights into Social Media.

Jeff I love your work but please talk to us, turn off the Auto Posts that are starting to become SPAM and join in the conversation.

P.S This is not a personnel attack on Jeff and his work, just highlighting the need for engaging interactions rather then Spam like tweets.

2 comments

  1. Thomas Shaw says:

    I don’t agree. The reason behind the multiple tweets is because with all the noise and competition of other followers – users tweets become obsolete as they are pushed further down the list.

    If you are using twitter on the web, you only see the latest 20 tweets of your following list. Tweetdeck = 150.

    If you are a casual twitter user (maybe log in once a day, every second day perhaps?) you would NOT be spending an hour or 2 scrolling through 100′s or 1,000′s of previous tweets.

    If you don’t like what people say… don’t follow them. Easy.

  2. Sorry Thomas you seemed to have missed the point. Social Media is about engaging with your community and getting involved, sharing of information and contributing to the community, it is not all one way traffic.

    By constantly tweeting and replicating those same tweets over and over again, the only thing you are contributing is noise. I do not think for one minute that my followers or those that I follow are in competition with each other, that is a very odd way to look at it.

    If you are using Twitter on the web you have the option to see “more” and you can do this many times so that is not an excuse. Seesmic also allows you to see well beyond 150 of the latest tweets.

    And never once did I say I didn’t like what Jeff said, I simply stated the methodology of constant tweets are becoming spam and perhaps a different approach is worth considering. I encouraged people to read Jeff’s blog as the content is brilliant, the tweeting strategy however is not.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*


*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>