Are paid tweets appealing to more brands?

There seems to be a lot more interest in paid Tweets at the moment, whether it’s discussing SponsoredTweets, Ad.ly, or Magpie. It certainly seems like more adverts are being placed by these services, judging by the testing I’ve done of Magpie over recent weeks and months.

And apparently brands like KMart are using these services top pay Twitter users either on a per-click or flat fee basis. Meanwhile a host of celebs have signed up for Ad.ly.

Which is fair enough in many ways – after all, it’s down to each individual whether they want to put paid advertising into their Twitter stream, and down to each individual whether they’ll continue to follow someone publishing paid advertising.

But why are so many people trying to dress it up as engagement, relationship building or starting a genuine conversation?

It’s advertising.

If you pay me to post about a product, it’s advertising – that what sponsorship is.

It’s not creating a conversation – that would involve creating something which people might talk about for themselves, or creating an event where people can get together and initiate their own discussions.

Which takes more work than assigning a few thousand pounds or dollars to pay a few tweeters.

I have no inherent problem with anyone accepting paid tweets – I’ve done it to test Magpie, and continued to occasionally do it to cover my hosting costs etc – and it has resulted in a few complaints and un-follows.

And I completely understand why people have exercised their right to un-follow.

The frustrating thing is that so many people are talking so much rubbish about how a sponsored tweet can help you engage, that few people are bothering to actually try to find a model which rewards content/network creators in a way which actually builds on what they are doing, rather than interrupting it!

Ad.ly targets celebs with the same old sponsored Tweet model

Ad.ly is a self-serve Twitter advertising network matching advertisers and celebrities to tweet about products. The celeb gets to approve or decline messages, and advertisers get tracking for click-through rates, retweets and geographic locations for Retweeters. The celebs set their own price, but Ad.ly gives suggestions, and the celebrity has to tweet four times in the course of a week, netting them five figure sums for each message if they have more than a millions followers.

So that’s Magpie or Izea Sponsored Tweets system just with only celebrities. And apparently that’s enough to have attracted Kim Kardashian, Brooke Burke, Nicole Richie, Brody Jenner, Dr. Drew and Samantha Ronson for the launch.

It’s potentially a good move to only have celebrities involved – that way you only go for the big ticket advertising to generate the share for Ad.ly. But it’s not exactly an evolution of monetising Twitter for individuals.

I’m not going to rant about sponsored tweets as having tested them, I’ve continued to use Magpie on the odd occasion – within a few days each year it effectively pays for my hosting costs, and with a young family and little time to monetise Twitter in other ways, I can just about justify it to myself.

But surely celebrities actually have far more to lose? And less to gain considering the myriad ways which they can effectively monetise their followers and fans through their products? Particularly the hypothetical example Ad.ly is using

image