Who Tweets?
The latest data suggests that Twitter has stalled out at 17 million users. Here’s a good analysis.
Personally, I take this as a welcome sign that there is still some semblance of substance and sanity on the planet.
If someone in your nonprofit is trumpeting the urgency of getting on board the Twitter phenom, fire them. Hire instead a really good copywriter.
Ooops, am I revealing a bias here?
Tom
15 responses to “Who Tweets?”
Behavioral Science Q & A
Integrating an individual giving appeal with other communications from a charity can have both positive and negative effects, and the outcome largely depends on how it’s executed. Advantages of Integration Brand Consistency: Maintaining a consistent appearance and messaging across all communications can reinforce the org’s brand identity and strengthen brand recognition and trust among your […]
Read Full Answer
I’m not aware of any in-market tests specifically comparing recurring vs. gift frequency language. I suspect the answer might not be the same with all gift frequencies, nor with all people. It sounds like a great opportunity for you to test and find out what works for your audience. Based on the literature, here’s a couple […]
Read Full Answer
Based on what we know from existing data, those renewal notices can actually be pretty effective in getting people to donate. They tap into our psychology – creating a sense of urgency, reminding us of past support, and using personalization to make the message hit home. They’re playing on our natural tendencies to feel obligated […]
Read Full Answer
Interesting question. I had a quick look at the testing done on this topic. On the positive side, in all cases, over half of donors decide to cover the fee. In some cases, it goes as high as 65%. Not a negligible percentage at all. Here’s another test from iRaiser showing consistent results (see point […]
Read Full Answer
There’s just one thing to consider when designing a supporter journey: the supporter. More specifically, you need to take into account: Who the supporter is i.e. their identity, which is the reason they support this cause, and their personality, which describes the way they “see” and process the world. These will determine the kind of […]
Read Full Answer
I’m not an expert in this but a quick search surfaced this article on the effect of tax reforms on 2019’s charitable giving. The researchers didn’t find a reduction. Actually, they observed an “increase in charitable contributions in 2019, even with the lower tax rates and the dramatically smaller number of taxpayers who itemize their […]
Read Full Answer
Tom, first of all, can I just say we are HUGE Agitator fans? Your info is a constant source of goodness we share with many nonprofits here in Sarasota. Secondly, here’s the thing about Twitter: it’s not just a place to get your message out, it’s a great tool for research. By following other similar organizations across the nation, the stream of good ideas, comparative practices and resource sharing is phenomenal. It’s been very effective for us & has helped me do my job better.
Unless they were screaming about twitter when there were 500,000 users. All nonprofits need someone who is looking over the horizon. Your perspective is fair but kind of like betting on a game after you know the result. Way to keep posting good stuff!
You’re absolutely right. Twitter isn’t quite like hula-hoops (it’s probably here to stay, but who in the world has time for it? I wonder if there’s any data on how much Europeans, who have far more leisure time than Americans, waste time using Twitter?
I started using it but i still don’t get it. It is like another facebook or email thing. And it sounds like a truncated foreign language and sends you off to look at something else. I am not at all sure I have the “following” part down at all and I definitely don’t tweet all day long. Who has the time? I hope I will get it more as I practice with it. Can 17 million people be wrong?
I don’t think it has to be one or the other. If you hire a brilliant copywriter, they should be able to tweet well too.
Tom is Absolutely Right!
Let’s just all stick our heads in the sand and go back to communicating with our donors on stone tablets. I mean, there is no way that any of your donors are part of the 17 million people on twitter… And don’t worry, it’s not like they are talking about your brand without you.
I’ll be the first to say that you won’t ever be replacing your DM program revenue with twitter, but you are missing an opportunity to persuade and communicate your message to a new audience. Guess what? I don’t read Direct Mail, and I am sure I am not an anomaly. If you want to connect with me and convince me that I should support your valuable work, you need to connect with me where I am and if you really impress me, I’ll give you my email address.
Not participating in social media is the equivalent to not picking up the phone when it rings. I assume you don’t want to talk to me.
just saying.
Tom,
I’m totally in agreement with your comments about Twitter. The fact is I’ve probably given away my general agreement with you on any bias about this issue in past posts, too.
Maybe it’s simply a matter of the two of us being “older guys” (yes, I’m making a judgment about you based on what I know of your professional background) who typically are more cautious about the “next new thing” and a bit more skeptical about things that might prove to be just fads in the field.
I share nearly all the feelings about Twitter expressed by others here today. With all due respect to Susie Bowie, and trying to be honest and earnest about it, I have to say that I’ve been skeptical about Twitter and the other social-media platforms from the start. Of all of them, Twitter seemed to me the least likely to reinforce constituency relationships.
At the same time, however, I was open to giving Twitter and the other social networks a chance, just as we have with all new and emerging technologies that have come into play in nonprofit advancement. Are we now at the end of that trial for Twitter? I just don’t know for sure, but I doubt it.
It still appears that Twitter and similar media channels can be helpful as integrated components of the overall process of communicating and of creating and cultivating relationships with the constituencies of nonprofits. But, they alone cannot sustain it or, I believe, get to very deep levels of buy-in.
At some point, the process of nonprofit relationship management and productive fund raising must become a face-to-face, hand-to-hand, personal interaction, or it will fail in terms of solicitation, as least for major gifts.
Like you, I’d rather be, or partner with, a skilled writer who can compose “killer” copy for a case or brochure, or for a direct-mail appeal letter — or even a compelling thank-you letter that helps enhance relationship and pave the way for the next “ask!” Maybe it should be a writer who can also compose Tweets!
I will join Erik in agreement. As much as I love the agitator – i am feeling slightly agitated at the moment. I think it slightly irresponsible to disregard a channel or medium of communication because you don’t know how to use it or can’t be bothered to understand why people would want to use it. Do you know why I use it? I use it because I can connect with people who share my interests in: fundraising, graphic design, cooking and generally share my interests – oh – and don’t let me forget – it also allows me to THANK and INTERACT with the people who are talking about Agents of Good, or wanting more information about us, or wanting to work with us.
I am disappointed that with one magical wave of Tom’s hand, he dismisses a whole avenue of communication that some charities, individuals, businesses and communities are using to build stronger ties with the people that care about them. As people of influence and voices that are heard around the world, you need to think more carefully before you dismiss something that is working very well for a lot.
I would expect this post from Jeff Brooks – not you guys. Give your head a shake.
Marjorie: Are you using Tweetdeck or Hootsuite to build lists? Are you getting out and personally meeting with the people you speak to on Twitter? Have you segmented lists to better organize the flow of communcations? Do you prospect research people who are following you to see how they are connected or who they might be connected to?
Tom – I reiterate the first comment, You guys post some excellent stuf. However your attitude towards new forms of communiction comes across as fearful… and ignorant.
Have you sat down with someone to learn how to use it? Better yet, have you sat down with many people to learn how each of them uses it? Do you understand the ways in which these tools enhance major gifts, events, sponsorship and cause marketing?
I would be more than thrilled to connect with you gents personally to share how we use Twitter and why. How we organize our time, lists, track relationships, enhance existing fundraising, advocacy and awareness.
That goes for anyone… There are lots of great benefits to using Twitter, Facebook, Flickr, Slideshare and many other online communities… they’re useless if you’re unwilling to learn them and invest in them. But if you are – they have much to offer.
I worked in educational publishing for a decade. Nine years ago, I was advocating for more digital content and even a (gasp) ebook. Henry Hirschberg said “Nobody is ever going to read entire books on computer screens or hand devices… This is a fad and an abysmal waste of money”.
He couldn’t fathom a time when people would not want paper books. Well it’s less than a decade since that conversation…. I guess someone managed to convince old Henry otherwise. Here’s hoping you gents will be a little more openminded to the potential that these tools offer.
Why not hire a copywriter who loves to Tweet? #justsaying (that’s twitter talk)
I’m with Erik, John, and Laurie on this one. Twitter is a great cultivation, stewardship, learning and research tool. It’s not for everyone, nor does it try to be. There are people who will never get it and never use it, but that’s true of any communications medium.
And Laurie, I’m happy to help out with the show and tell. Let’s invite Tom to our next #frtweetup 🙂
@FLA_Leah
Let’s try leaving the word and company ‘Twitter’ out of the conversation, since it still breeds such reactions.
Let’s substitute it for ‘live search’. Is live search, the ability to find (and instantly connect with!) people who have talked about your nonprofit or the issues it faces in the past few minutes, useful for your organisation?
I see it as remarkably significant and useful, if used well. It doesn’t matter if Twitter the company thrives or dies – live search is here to stay and worth getting to grips with now.
Incidentally, although I should subscribe to your email updates, it is Twitter messages linking to specific posts on The Agitator that drive me back here frequently.
I’m still finding my feet with a twitter, but as someone who is trying to engage with a community of interest I am finding it incredibly useful, esp when combined with bitly. Its fascinating to be able to easily, for free, pinpint exactly how many people are clicking on my links or passing on my message.
And can I strongly echo Howard’s point: I’ve tried to keep up with many blogs using RSS feeds, which is good, but the twitterfeed is increasingly what makes me (or takes me?) go to a website like this.
One final point – Brian Solis has been writing some interesting stuff on twitter, from the point of being a sceptic at first – and he points out that the ‘stalling’ in new twitter traffic might actually reflect the fact that the availability of the API means people are using tweetdeck, linkedin, etc – and that this traffic isnt recorded in the numbers. Like Howard says, live search is here to stay, particularly in view of the shift from fixed to mobile access to the web.
Cheers
Karl (follow me @karlwilding on twitter)
I am fully on the side of Leah – that Twitter, or any soclal media platform offering a live search is an amazing cultivation and stewardship opportunity.
I do believe that this should only be undertaken with donors giving small to medium sized gifts, and whom you know are actively using social media. 140 characters could not possibly thank a major gift donor in a meaningful way (unless that donor is John Lepp perhaps).
(@brockwarner on twitter, FYI.)
I’m with Sara and John. A good copywriter is a good communicator – and why can’t a good copywriter tweet as well?
As I recently read Ken Burnett’s classic, Relationship Fundraising, it occurred to me how timeless it is … and that the strategies of donor centered fundraising can and should be applied to new media as well. The trick is the time management and using a vehicle such as Twitter to engage, rather than spew out an organization’s latest press release.