Is automating one’s internet presence so very wrong? Maybe. But I have my reasoning.
You see, the problem is that when one has the will to inject a meme into the consciousness of mankind, there are so many places to put it, and yet so many places it can be missed.
For me, the centre of my shallow universe is this fine blog at christopherengland.com. Generally speaking (although not always) I put a bit of effort into my daily posts (which automagically appear at Midnight every single day), making them works of art for others to come and view and enjoy or nod in agreement with or laugh out loud about or get so angry about that they go away and bitch about me elsewhere. That’s why there’s only one a day.
In addition to my daily masterpiece (!) I like to spout the occasional comment about this or that, or add a funny that’s made me smile or think. So, instead of that appearing on my main blog, I now put it on Google+ (Find me at gplus.to/christopherengland).
However, there are audiences and interaction on both Twitter and Facebook, so it’s important to me to ‘tease’ and lead potential readers to my main missives, so for this I function with a bit of automation. Every time this blog updates, it is automagically ‘announced’ on Twitter and, with a considerable extract, on Facebook. If people see the automated post/tweet, and it seems to them that I’ve written something they’re interested in reading properly, then they’ll follow the link back to here in order to read the whole thing. For this I am very grateful to the couple of hundred each day who spare me some of their time!
Obviously, there are ‘Comment’ facilities here, or a person can add a comment or engage me on Twitter or Facebook if they prefer. I respond, if required, anywhere! I’m not proud.
The same is true of when I add something to my Google+ (or “G+” as we trendy early adopters call it) feed. It automagically ‘teases’ via Twitter and Facebook. If people wish to comment or engage me at G+ then great, or if Twitter or Facebook will suffice, that’s great too.
However, I have to say, if I didn’t also automagically copy or tease my stuff via Twitter or Facebook, then I wouldn’t be reaching my entire potential audience. Whilst there are crossovers, there are different types of people on Facebook to those on Twitter.
My experience tends to be that the main Facebook user thinks that Facebook is the internet. There is nothing of interest to them on the outside (Good news for Mr Zuckerberg, but bad news for the rest of the internet). I even had one chap stop being my ‘friend’ because he was fed up with having to click on a link that would leave Facebook and come to my blog in order to read what I’d written. He argued that my witterings should have been on a cosy little regimented Facebook page and nowhere else. Help! That’s communism gone mad.
Facebook does tend to be where the prolls are, though! Meanwhile Twitter is now more for the more savvy, and with more to say even though there’s less space to say it in.
Twitter’s now not really for Facebook-style inane conversations or fights and declaring you’ve just broken up from a relationship, or placing drunken photos of you and your mates doing stupid things, or playing endless games or filling up a stream with Youtube videos you like to watch again and again and again. Twitter is for ‘broadcasting’ quick bites of information, and showing people where to go to get more. This is why the celebs will entertainingly push out 140 character bursts, whilst largely ignoring Facebook.
Maybe everything will in some way converge in the future, or maybe the four different places (Blogs/Google+/Twitter/Facebook) will end up serving completely different demographics, but for now people like me have to spread themselves across all four in order to give our egos maximum coverage.