Meanwhile, the people viewing the content would enjoy it too, since it’s good content. Creators and companies would be eager to spend a fair amount of money to get it to two million impressions, because that way they would get quality content in front of people and gather new followers in the process. If your tweet is getting a million impressions, many people are enjoying it. If instead you had an incentive to promote successful tweets, then brands would make a much bigger effort creating good content in order to promote it, and viewers would benefit from ads that are of good quality.įor Twitter to enable this, it would need to allow promoting tweets, but not the way it does today (paying for clicks or impressions), but rather as a viral boost. So you only have an incentive to pay if your tweet is bad! If you make a viral tweet, you have no incentive to pay, because you would need to spend a huge amount of money to get a fraction of the impressions you get for free. What if creators, when they finally hit a viral tweet, could boost their performance? What if brands tried really hard to create good content, and were rewarded for it? They represent the two marketplaces competing for attention.īut what if this didn’t need to be this way? What if these marketplaces could be the same? What if advertisers could be considered creators?Ĭreators try to get impressions through quality content, but that’s hard.Īdvertisers get impressions by spending money, but that’s expensive, and results in shitty content. The other one is an obvious viral winner 3. One is a crappy ad you can immediately identify and avoid. This, to me, is the most fundamental opportunity for Twitter Ads. If you’re a power user of Twitter, you’ll also notice that the format of Twitter ads is easy to recognize, so it’s very easy to avoid them. If they don’t know what to recommend to you, that’s because they don’t know you-so they can’t sell that information to customers. We’ve seen last week how it’s pretty dumb on content personalization. They only pay attention to customers’ actions. Similarly, Tiktok has shot up to the top of the social media companies in the world without people creating detailed profiles. They know by what you do on the platform. Facebook knows a lot about you, but not just by what you tell the company. Apparently, the problem is that you put much more personal information on Facebook than on Twitter. How much has Twitter played with new formats?Īnother glaring shortcoming of Twitter is targeting. What about Facebook and Instagram? You can get full-screen video ads, for example, which are so much better to catch the user’s attention. But we can gather some hints.įor starters, what type of ad do you get on Twitter? Promoted Tweets. Twitter probably had hundreds of people working on this problem for years. No wonder Facebook is so much more valuable than Twitter. So Facebook’s audience is 4x as big as Twitter’s, and each one of their ads is 130% more valuable than Twitter’s. You can see that Twitter’s ads are about 55% less valuable than Facebook’s 1. Advertisers on Twitter pay mostly for what’s called “brand advertising”, which basically means “pay to show your ad, because odds are people won’t click on it.” This is as opposed to “performance advertising”, where you don’t pay for somebody seeing your ad, but rather for people to make a specific action.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |