Twitter: a profound waste of time for marketing

[Martin Gill]

Just checked my Twitter. I last posted new content on my blog and then tweeted it 3 days ago. I have 1500 followers. It hasn't been retweeted by our corporate account yet. It's been retweeted by 9 people. It's resulted in me gaining 9 new followers, one of which was a personal friend so I can't attribute her follow to my post, I'd say that's random. One retweeter has 10k followers. The others are all in the thousand or less region.

What I can't track unfortunately is how much Twitter activity drives blog readership, which results in conversion to paying customers. I suspect the web dudes at work could. But I'm dealing with business writing here selling to companies for hundred if not thousands of dollars. I suspect the dynamic will change when the content is on sale for a few quid, but I don't know how much.

 

[Martin Gill]

This might be a diversion, but kindle doesn't give you data as an author about sample downloads to sales conversions? That's disappointing.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

This might be a diversion, but kindle doesn't give you data as an author about sample downloads to sales conversions? That's disappointing.

If they do I don't know how to find it. They show me sales and KU pages read. The sales updates within about half an hour of it happening. KU readthroughs are odder. I've just jumped 80,000 places in the rankings (this is for my self published book - for my published book the only data I see unless I ask my publisher is my ranking places and my royalty statement) but have no sale to account for that (a sale takes about 12 hours to affect your ranking) so that must be KU readthroughs. Sometimes they show before a jump, sometimes (more often recently) I go to bed with nothing showing and wake up to hundreds in the morning. Since most of my activity is in the UK where I'm based either I have a dedicated squad of midnight readers, or they're earlier sales showing with a lag.

 

[Brian G Turner]

20 hits in the first five minutes

If you mean "hits" and only "hits" then it's a useless metric - the web is absolutely swarming with bots. Usually powered by Google, Russian hackers, and Asian spammers. Most bots don't (or didn't use to) process Javascript, though, so something like Google Analytics is usually good for identifying human users.

2c.

 

[Martin Gill]

That's frustrating. Kindle offers the potential for so much data about how people actually read, both on aggregate and on an individual author or book perspective. Wouldn't it be so interesting to know that you are getting thousands of sample downloads but no sales? Or 50% of your readers give up after chapter 12? Or whatever. So much data.

As a retailer, Amazon are notoriously secretive with customer data for resellers. But they do support partner retailers with a lot of activity data, like which products sell and which don't, because it in their own interests to drive conversion.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

If you mean "hits" and only "hits" then it's a useless metric - the web is absolutely swarming with bots. Usually powered by Google, Russian hackers, and Asian spammers. Most bots don't (or didn't use to) process Javascript, though, so something like Google Analytics is usually good for identifying human users.

2c.

Yes, I'm aware of that. However normally if it's a spamming boost I see that boost in Russia, the Baltic states and Asia primarily. When I'm getting genuine hits (evidenced by comments, shares etc) they tend to be in the UK and US - and that has been the case today. It's crude, but the short story - the Belfast burning one - has been shared an awful lot.

That's frustrating. Kindle offers the potential for so much data about how people actually read, both on aggregate and on an individual author or book perspective. Wouldn't it be so interesting to know that you are getting thousands of sample downloads but no sales? Or 50% of your readers give up after chapter 12? Or whatever. So much data.

As a retailer, Amazon are notoriously secretive with customer data for resellers. But they do support partner retailers with a lot of activity data, like which products sell and which don't, because it in their own interests to drive conversion.

I'd love to know how many read on past the sample. And how many reach the end. Hey-ho.

 

[Brian G Turner]

Building a social media presence on just one touchpoint is pointless. The most effective brands do it through a comprehensive mix of paid, owned and earned presence on their own branded properties and the large and small social platforms.

Indeed, sites such as Twitter and Facebook are simply microcosms of the larger internet. Social interactions have been happening online through email lists and forums such as this long before those two platforms appeared.

The difference is simply that they have concentrated some of those conversations into their verticals through having such a large user base. But both Facebook and Twitter are still just forums, and that determines the users state and readiness to engage with advertising messages - which is very little in themselves.

At least with PPC on Google you can try to filter to users through transactional keywords - ie, people who demonstrate a ready interest to buy a particular product. But forums are informational, which means that people want information, and are rarely in readiness to buy. That's why opportunist coupon and voucher offers can work with social platforms, but other marketing campaigns may struggle.

But although they are essentially forums, Facebook and Twitter are distinct in that they allow its members to personalise the experience, and determine the level of engagement with other users. In effect, this makes Facebook and Twitter pages also perform like personal websites. This is where direct marketing by Twitter users especially fails, because it's usually in the form of one-way communication, not engagement. Imagine running a Wordpress blog solely in the hope that it would get a link through via Wordpress.com?

And attempts to manipulate numbers of followers through follower exchanges backfires because those users are not engaged ones. It's like having a blog where link exchanges are the top headlines every day - it's just not going to provide any positive result.

2c.

 

[JoGunnar]

Check out AC Fuller Writer 2.0 podcast. He has a few episodes about how to market your work. Like not just starting a twitter account to spam people with posts that they should buy your book but to let your followers get to see you as a person because someone who feels like they know you a little is more likely to check out your work than a random follower.
Also its a good idea not to be on every social media platform but pick a couple that you actually like to post on.
I've listened to just about every one of his podcasts it's an awesome resource for writers.

 

[Dave]

...let your followers get to see you as a person because someone who feels like they know you a little is more likely to check out your work than a random follower... ...pick a couple that you actually like to post on...

I think that is good advice, but it is not a marketing plan. What you are saying is that if you like being on social media in your spare time and you enjoy it, then it can do your book sales at lot of good. I think what Brian is saying is that if you are not on social media yet, and you want to promote your book, this is a very time consuming task that produces any result very slowly. There must be much more profitable uses of your marketing time. As Martin Gill said, large companies have teams of employed people and computers working on targeting people and still get varying results. As I already said, if you have a Blog (or a Podcast) then using those in conjunction with Twitter seems to work well. The reason Ricky Gervais has so may followers is down to his podcasts.

 

[cyprus7]

Twitter can be good for connecting a social profile with a real person eg I was in god's wee country last summer and saw a tweet about Jo Z's Abendau's Heir signing... so I went along.

If and when Jo hits mainstream bestseller author mode, then those types of interactions will scale up appropriately.

I find that the #amwriting hash tag is particularly annoying on Twitter. I mean, why r u interrupting your writing to tell me you're writing? I don't care. It's probably a BS autotweet and you're down the pub. Now, that is funny. Cheers, dude.

 

[JoGunnar]

I think that is good advice, but it is not a marketing plan. What you are saying is that if you like being on social media in your spare time and you enjoy it, then it can do your book sales at lot of good. I think what Brian is saying is that if you are not on social media yet, and you want to promote your book, this is a very time consuming task that produces any result very slowly. There must be much more profitable uses of your marketing time. As Martin Gill said, large companies have teams of employed people and computers working on targeting people and still get varying results. As I already said, if you have a Blog (or a Podcast) then using those in conjunction with Twitter seems to work well. The reason Ricky Gervais has so may followers is down to his podcasts.

I've heard that it's a common misconception that publishers promote novels. I've heard that it's mostly up to the author to promote their own work.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Twitter can be good for connecting a social profile with a real person eg I was in god's wee country last summer and saw a tweet about Jo Z's Abendau's Heir signing... so I went along.

If and when Jo hits mainstream bestseller author mode, then those types of interactions will scale up appropriately.

I find that the #amwriting hash tag is particularly annoying on Twitter. I mean, why r u interrupting your writing to tell me you're writing? I don't care. It's probably a BS autotweet and you're down the pub. Now, that is funny. Cheers, dude.

And it was lovely to meet you! (I use amwriting a lot - it's a very active one. Oops.) @Dave 's post here last week made me wake up and look at my account. I now have nearly twice as many follow me as I follow. I used to have about 500 followed and 100 following. That's been a big shift over the last six months or so - probably nearer three. I'm also adding followers regularly and being added to groups. So, perhaps my profile is higher. In which case, anyone's can be, with time. there is hope!

I've heard that it's a common misconception that publishers promote novels. I've heard that it's mostly up to the author to promote their own work.

It depends on the publisher and their budget but this is the case for the vast amount of writers I know. Even the big names.

 

[Boneman]

Here's something enormously heartening: in Waterstones, there's always a table displaying recent books, their recommendations etc, and two days ago I saw 'Rain' by Barney Campbell. I liked the cover, picked it up, perused it and bought it. Simply put, it was, for me, an astonishing book: it's a novel, yet I was so completely caught up in the character, that it moved me enormously, and left a deep impression.*

That aside... I went looking for the author on twitter. Nada. Nothing. (Okay, one Barney Campbell who may or may not be the author, who hasn't posted anything yet.) Went looking on Facebook. Niente. Rien. Don't know how to look on Tumblr or any of the other social network thingys but I'll bet he's not there, either. Did the same for the title. Zero. Nichts. Sales of this book are rising, reviews that you can find on the internet are equally praiseworthy, all achieved without social networking.

Would it be facile to say that a truly good book will inevitably rise, despite the insistence of those in the know that social media must be employed, or else? Would more sales have been achieved if twitter and Facebook and the others were wielded? I wonder if Penguin put him under pressure to do those things? Can't ask him of course, 'cause he's not on FB, twitter, etc...

It occurs to me I'm using a social media platform, which may have the effect of promoting it (though it's word-of-mouth) but I love the thought that authors don't HAVE to be social media experts to promote/sell their books. Those that can, do. Those that can't, don't have to.

*The best book about the experience of soldiering I've read since Robert Graves's First World War classic Goodbye to All That... a heartbreaking, brutally truthful first novel. The Times

 

[Jo Zebedee]

But Penguin are a big publisher with multiple platforms of their own - none of which an indie or small press publisher (which, frankly, most of us will be with based on the law of averages) have.

 

[Boneman]

But Penguin are a big publisher with multiple platforms of their own - none of which an indie or small press publisher (which, frankly, most of us will be with based on the law of averages) have.

Agreed. But the author has no presence at all, which does surprise me enormously. I read an interview that said it was a hobby, he was still working in bridge-building. Expect that to change if he becomes a best-seller?

 

[Brian G Turner]

the author has no presence at all

Sunday Time best selling author, David Gemmell, never even had a website. I remain astonished that his publisher never did one, so I've been tempted to do one.

 

[Denise Tanaka]

I think that is good advice, but it is not a marketing plan. What you are saying is that if you like being on social media in your spare time and you enjoy it, then it can do your book sales at lot of good. I think what Brian is saying is that if you are not on social media yet, and you want to promote your book, this is a very time consuming task that produces any result very slowly. There must be much more profitable uses of your marketing time. As Martin Gill said, large companies have teams of employed people and computers working on targeting people and still get varying results. As I already said, if you have a Blog (or a Podcast) then using those in conjunction with Twitter seems to work well. The reason Ricky Gervais has so may followers is down to his podcasts.

I dove into social media about 2 years ago as an author trying to market my upcoming book(s) someday. I never touched this stuff before. It has been a HUGE learning curve and I've wasted an enormous amount of time just getting up to speed with the tools and the etiquette. Observing what other authors do, especially those at the big conglomerate commercial publishing houses, I've noticed some who do not have a strong social media presence. For example, Carol Berg has quite a few novels to her name. I saw her do a reading at last year's Worldcon in Spokane and she has a new one released this year. However she only recently set up a Facebook and a Twitter.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I'd advise against engaging on any SM platform if you don't like it. People ask me this sort of question all the time these days because I have a wide and building platform.

There is no strategy. There is no plan. No specific time. No planned online persona - just me, warts and all.

I'm a chatty person. I work in a job that is often repetitive, from home, unsupervised. If I want to break between tasks and check in I can, and I do. I rarely watch tv so am happy chatting in forums in the evening while my husband watches telly and it"s all very companionable.

The moment it becomes a chore, I'll stop because it will shine through in every post and be more damaging than not posting. Which is why - if you hate it, don't do it. Find other platforms (library networks, writing and reading groups, radio, conventions, anything you enjoy.)

 

[Dave]

There is no strategy. There is no plan. No specific time. No planned online persona - just me, warts and all.

Yes, and what if people decide they don't like you?

I'm obviously not talking about Jo here, and no names will be mentioned either, but there are authors who have put me off reading their books because I found them to be obnoxious people.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Yes, and what if people decide they don't like you?

I'm obviously not talking about Jo here, and no names will be mentioned either, but there are authors who have put me off reading their books because I found them to be obnoxious people.

Yes, there is that. I'm sure my bounciness puts some people off, but I think you have to hope the good outweighs the negative. I certainly think I'd rather follow people I like and there are certain people - also naming no names - that I will not buy a book from ever due to their online persona. But there are more who I want to support because they're real and I like them.