Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Twitter Grows Up, Adds "Promoted Tweets"

kdawson posted more than 4 years ago | from the what-biz-means dept.

Advertising 149

CWmike writes "Twitter is finally taking off the training wheels and moving into the world where real businesses tread with the launch on Tuesday of its first advertising model, dubbed 'Promoted Tweets.' The microblogging phenom has long avoided coming up with a business plan or even talking about one. But the time has come for Twitter to figure out how to make money over the long haul. Analyst Dan Old isn't so sure that Twitter users will welcome the change. 'There will be a vocal minority of users who will hate any advertising at all,' Olds said. '[Many] users understand that it's necessary and will accept it as long as it doesn't interfere with their usage. But if the ads look like regular tweets, that could cause some serious outrage from users who feel that Twitter is attempting to deceive them.'"

cancel ×

149 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Tweets (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31839854)

for twits.

Re:Tweets (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31839950)

Stay away from people made from plastic in a mold,
And keep your stamped ideas inside your head untold,
Because ah,
ahaa babeh am protecting you,
against the,
kind of things that other people do now
ahaa, babeh, am protecting you
'Cuz I'm in
looooooove with yooooooooooou.
So come on babeh!

Let me get this straight (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31839870)

I've not read TFA because I have no interest in twatter or
the mundane crap people put on it but when they say 'Promoted Tweets'
they mean spam right?

How much will they charge to spam every twat (thats the correct
word to describe someone who uses twatter right isnt it)?

Re:Let me get this straight (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31840172)

People acting like
arrogant asshats
should not type
like they are
unable to figure
out a textbox
widget.

Re:Let me get this straight (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31840328)

Burma-Shave

Re:Let me get this straight (1)

Mashiki (184564) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840984)

Drink your Ovaltine.

freemium (2, Insightful)

drDugan (219551) | more than 4 years ago | (#31839882)

I would much rather see twitter remain ad free, and charge a fair monthly fee based on number of followers and following; they could charge dynamically: more for companies than individuals, and reduce fees if your tweets are retweeted beyond your local follower network.

Using a revenue model like this would allow Twitter to tweak user behaviors and increase the value of the discussion. It would reduce spam, encouraging insightful and fast information, and remove the incentive for zombie robot following collectives.

Re:freemium (5, Funny)

physicsmichael (1294958) | more than 4 years ago | (#31839930)

I would much rather see twitter remain ad free, and charge a fair monthly fee based on number of followers and following;

The user base would drop ridiculously fast. Imagine if other social network sites charged to be used.

"Nah man, I didn't see your party on Facebook. I forgot to pay my bill on time"

Re:freemium (4, Funny)

winwar (114053) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840108)

"The user base would drop ridiculously fast."

Then charging a monthly fee would be an excellent idea.

"Imagine if other social network sites charged to be used."

One can dream.

Re:freemium (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31840436)

Don't have to many friends then huh?
Can understand why with your attitude.

Re:freemium (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31841248)

Many is not a verb.

Re:freemium (1)

dn15 (735502) | more than 4 years ago | (#31842046)

"Nah man, I didn't see your party on Facebook. I forgot to pay my bill on time"

Excellent idea! I'd love to see Facebook start charging so I could use that excuse to skip lame parties!

Re:freemium (4, Interesting)

dskzero (960168) | more than 4 years ago | (#31839952)

Twitter isn't really based on encouraging insightful. It's based on people screaming in the dark hoping somebody does care about their dinner.

Re:freemium (5, Funny)

grub (11606) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840136)

It's based on people screaming in the dark hoping somebody does care about their dinner.

"Twitter: the UDP of human conversation." -me

Re:freemium (1)

c6gunner (950153) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840484)

That's both the funniest and most insightful thing I've read in weeks.

Re:freemium (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31840618)

Perfect summary of Twitter. Thank you!

Re:freemium (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31840704)

I'm happy because this is obviously the beginning of the end for Twitter, and I've never used it. I think that means I'm finally growing up.

Re:freemium (1)

GNUALMAFUERTE (697061) | more than 4 years ago | (#31841652)

You win 100 internets.

Here's the magic formula ... (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840684)

... if they REALLY wanted it to grow up AND make money, here's a simple one-liner:

s/promoted/porn/gi;

People really would be "all a-twitter about twitter."

@pr0n1: "Tweet me, honeybuns!"
@pr0n1: ""(Cheesy music)"
@pr0n1: "Oh, that feels SOOOO good."
@pr0n2: "who's your daddy NOW, b*tch?"
@pronAdserver "K-Y lube - up close and personal!"

Re:Here's the magic formula ... (1)

Obfuscant (592200) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840998)

s/promoted/porn/gi;

What, twitter doesn't promote porn? The first three followers I got, almost immediately after signing on, were twitter-hos begging me to come visit them.

Re:Here's the magic formula ... (4, Funny)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 4 years ago | (#31841566)

i wrote a daemonized twitterbot in Ruby a couple of weeks ago to scan posts for key words and respond to relevant ones with "that's what she said"... sort of on the same lines, I guess.

Re:freemium (4, Informative)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 4 years ago | (#31841170)

Twitter isn't really based on encouraging insightful.

I use it as a democratic fan club. I follow celebrities I like (mythbuster guys, trek alumni, that kind of thing), web comic artists, people who are in the biz I am or who have jobs I'm working to get, and I sometimes reply, sometimes spout off random things.

But mostly, I use it like slashdot, but I get to choose the editors and the commenters. People post links, I follow them.

Re:freemium (2, Insightful)

petermgreen (876956) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840128)

Between an aversion to paying for things that used to be free, fear of giving out card details and a need to pay in relatively big blocks to keep the card fees manageable a LOT of users will be driven away by a paywall. This has happened many times over the history of the net.

Re:freemium (1)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840270)

tweak user behaviors and increase the value of the discussion.

Can you elaborate on this, please? I'm interested.

Re:freemium (4, Interesting)

blair1q (305137) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840380)

I would rather Twitter went into the offices of the CEOs of Sprint, T-Mobile, AT&T, and Verizon, and says "we want a third of your SMS-fee revenues; and don't raise prices. Otherwise, we'll turn off Twitter."

Those guys would shit their pants and break a nail grabbing for the checkbook.

Re:freemium (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31840642)

At which point those companies will pass on the check balances to their customers. One way or another, we'll be paying. I'd personally rather have ads because there will always be a way to block them (with the worst case being some browser addon that I would have to install).

Re:freemium (1)

Khyber (864651) | more than 4 years ago | (#31841938)

"At which point those companies will pass on the check balances to their customers."

Did you not read: "and don't raise prices."

They'd see it somehow, either through their own employees that use those networks reporting about the raise in their bills for SMS, or through other means, and they'd just shut it off for mobile phone users.

Mobile screens and browsers are crap for ad displaying, anyways.

Re:freemium (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31840646)

i'd wager that most of the users who tweet from mobiles do so with an "all you can eat" text plan or at least some form of a metered plan. The reply from the telco is a simple "most users tweet with 'free' messages, so you get nothing"

Re:freemium (1)

psithurism (1642461) | more than 4 years ago | (#31841302)

I know one of those users has a 200text/month plan so around the 29th his 1 follower gets:
I have 122 texts left this month...
I have 121 texts left this month...
I have 120 texts left this month...

Who says twitter isn't useful?

Re:freemium (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31840654)

What you posted here is a death referendum.

Twitter was pulled off of some sites in Europe because of the immense "SMS" bandwidth fees. SONY could not stop off loading bandwidth when it hit the PSN.

Re:freemium (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31840660)

"we want a third of your SMS-fee revenues.."

- Yeah sure - because a third of global SMS usage lands on Twitter? - WTF! They (The CEOs) would shit themselves laughing, then break a toenail booting them out the door. Same argument (albeit in reverse) as Euro ISPs sueing Google because You Tube uses bandwith, with the common theme that both are non-starters.

Re:freemium (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31840986)

I would rather Twitter went into the offices of the CEOs of Sprint, T-Mobile, AT&T, and Verizon, and says "we want a third of your SMS-fee revenues; and don't raise prices. Otherwise, we'll turn off Twitter."

Those guys would shit their pants and break a nail grabbing for the checkbook.

I would RTFT (re-tweet this for truth), but I don't have enough characters.

Tweets for twits and infortainment morons... (1, Troll)

irreverant (1544263) | more than 4 years ago | (#31839884)

Great! ~ they got a business model, it's bad enough I have to read about how twitter finally got paid online, but it's worse when CNN ( a supposed respected news organization ) is reporting on how jim carrey is getting his ass chewed out because he commented on another less interesting tigre woods scandal. Why do we let this crap out in the air waves?! worse, why do we let the people that run this stuff breed?!

Re:Tweets for twits and infortainment morons... (3, Informative)

FooAtWFU (699187) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840206)

Why do we let this crap out in the air waves?! worse, why do we let the people that run this stuff breed?!

Because historically speaking, eugenics programs haven't worked out all that well. [journalnow.com]

since you ask. kthxbye.

Re:Tweets for twits and infortainment morons... (3, Funny)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840280)

historically speaking, eugenics programs haven't worked out all that well.

The Mormons have done pretty well.

Re:Tweets for twits and infortainment morons... (1)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840544)

Who's the Kwisatz Haderach? Glenn Beck?

Re:Tweets for twits and infortainment morons... (1)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840722)

maybe you should try posting some facts, instead of some shit which tries to push all the pop culture buttons?

Re:Tweets for twits and infortainment morons... (4, Funny)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 4 years ago | (#31841196)

Why do we let this crap out in the air waves?! worse, why do we let the people that run this stuff breed?!

Because historically speaking, eugenics programs haven't worked out all that well. [journalnow.com]

since you ask. kthxbye.

Why do people only ever talk about the sterilization approach to eugenics? What about the "get pretty people drunk and alone in the dark" approach? That's eugenics too, but it's sexy instead of being nasty.

Won't somebody please think of the sweaty aryans?

Re:Tweets for twits and infortainment morons... (2, Funny)

oldhack (1037484) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840536)

It's increasingly becoming our main economic output, that's why.

Re:Tweets for twits and infortainment morons... (1)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 4 years ago | (#31841176)

CNN ( a supposed respected news organization ) is reporting on how jim carrey is getting his ass chewed out because he commented on another less interesting tigre woods scandal. Why do we let this crap out in the air waves?

Gotta fill out time in-between telling you who threw the ball the most yesterday and who ran the most.

Bread and games are what mainstream news are about, unfortunately.

Tweet on this (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31839888)

Slashdot users are the scum of the earth. They should be forced to have aids infected nigger cocks shoved up their ass.

Re:Tweet on this (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31839992)

+5 insightful, it's under 140 characters.

Predictable (5, Insightful)

DogDude (805747) | more than 4 years ago | (#31839894)

Twitter is adding advertisements? Say it ain't true!

I've never heard of a dot-com company before that:
1. Starts with an ungodly amount of free money from investors
2. Becomes very, very popular, all while losing many millions of dollars
3. When the investment money invariably begins to slow down, the company tries to "monetize" a money-losing idea.
4. People hop off to the newest fad, leaving this one to languish and to be used by spammers and people from the Phillipines.
5. The company is bought by some much larger company for a ridiculous amount of money.
6. The large company can't capitalize on the earlier popularity, and the brand dies.

Yawn.

Re:Predictable (5, Insightful)

calmofthestorm (1344385) | more than 4 years ago | (#31839940)

7) Many different imitators crop up, each trying to capture the former userbase, and the circle of life continues.

Re:Predictable (1)

Trepidity (597) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840008)

People keep funding them though, because sometimes it works. See: Google and Facebook, both of which built very popular, money-losing free services, subsequently slapped ads on them, and are now raking in billions.

Re:Predictable (1)

Aliencow (653119) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840466)

Facebook is raking in billions? Did I miss something?

Re:Predictable (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31840542)

yes.

Re:Predictable (3, Informative)

Trepidity (597) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840576)

Well, not plural billions yet, but estimates [insidefacebook.com] of 2010 revenues seem to be a bit over $1b.

Re:Predictable (1)

Aliencow (653119) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840872)

Well I am quite surprised, it appears they're going to be profitable for 2010 !

Re:Predictable (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31840044)

How dare you, wait just one god dam last minute...

Re:Predictable (5, Insightful)

jo42 (227475) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840064)

Most of the business plans I've seen in the last few years go something like that.

1) Do something for free on the Internet.
2) Get lots of people using it, lots of 'eye balls'.
3) Sell to Google (or some other fool with deep pockets).

Re:Predictable (1)

Khyber (864651) | more than 4 years ago | (#31841944)

I like how you say "Or some other fool."

Some of the stuff Google has been doing recently has been fairly foolish.

Re:Predictable (1)

pablodiazgutierrez (756813) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840222)

Interesting, but in this case, the company has become a commodity to the point that 'twitting' is a mainstream verb. That's very valuable in many ways.

Re:Predictable (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31840394)

While I agree with you, I think technically its 'tweeting' which sort of goes against your argument that its a mainstream verb. (Although I guess /. isn't the mainstream so misuse here is okay)

Re:Predictable (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31842016)

I prefer twatting.

Re:Predictable (2, Insightful)

DogDude (805747) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840580)

"in this case, the company has become a commodity"

So was Napster, and Friendster, and Myspace.

In two years, Twitter will no longer be mainstream. Facebook is already in decline, and will tank once something "better" comes along. The Twitter phenomenon isn't new... it's just the newest version of the same thing.

Re:Predictable (1)

DavidKlemke (1048264) | more than 4 years ago | (#31841980)

Facebook is already in decline, and will tank once something "better" comes along. The Twitter phenomenon isn't new... it's just the newest version of the same thing.

I think you might be confusing Facebook with MySpace since the former hasn't showed any signs of decline. In fact they've been growing at a fairly consistent rate for the past year or so and are nipping at Google's heels for that number 1 most visited spot on the net. MySpace on the other hand has been in decline for well over a year.

Would you care to cite a few examples of a Twitter-esque service that came before Twitter? The only other microblogging service that's been around almost as long as them (off the top of my head) is Tumblr and even they were launched about a year later. There were of course those engaged in microblogging before such services existed, but Twitter was still arguably the first to market.

Re:Predictable (2, Informative)

mattack2 (1165421) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840936)

...the company has become a commodity to the point that 'twitting' is a mainstream verb.

Apparently not mainstream enough, because it's actually "tweeting".

(Disclaimer, my anecdotal data points are simply what I've heard people use + the fact that google's suggestions don't have any hits for "twitting", and do for "tweeting". They do have hits for "twittering", however.)

Re:Predictable (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | more than 4 years ago | (#31841826)

...the company has become a commodity to the point that 'twitting' is a mainstream verb.

Apparently not mainstream enough, because it's actually "tweeting".

(Disclaimer, my anecdotal data points are simply what I've heard people use + the fact that google's suggestions don't have any hits for "twitting", and do for "tweeting". They do have hits for "twittering", however.)

Or those of us who know the preferred term is "tweeting" but refuse to use it. It's called Twitter, and if they wanted people to "tweet" rather than "twit" they had plenty of opportunity to call it "Tweeter". No, they realized that people who'd use their site are twits, but know that if they called them that, people won't use their service.

Ah well, Twitter will soon follow the likes of other fads. Remember it was only a few years ago when second life was the hot thing?

Re:Predictable (1)

Phurge (1112105) | more than 4 years ago | (#31841056)

"tweeting"

/spelling Nazi

Re:Predictable (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31840226)

Insightful? Someone has the life cycle of all social networking apps down to a simple 6-step process? Please. I don't use Twitter, but it's obviously an application without precedent and nobody knows where attempts to turn a profit with it will go. I see that someone else here has invoked the "circle of life" to describe what's going on. This is out of control, people. NOBODY KNOWS where this stuff is headed, regardless of how much MORE hip you are than the average geek with a CS PhD, an MBA, and an electric shaver that runs Linux.

Re:Predictable (1)

bman (84104) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840254)

7. ???
8. Profit.

Re:Predictable (2, Funny)

severoon (536737) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840730)

You left off a few steps...

7. ???
8. PROFIT!!!

This is New? (0)

BJ_Covert_Action (1499847) | more than 4 years ago | (#31839900)

You mean all those tweets that involved guys talking about how long their penis is weren't Viagra and Extenze ads? Oh dear....

vocal minority? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31839902)

A vocal minority won't like getting bombarded with ads?

You mean most people will like getting ads sent to them?

IMHO, this creates an excellent business opportunity for new companies to expand into twitter's space, or existing larger companies to take it over.

Re:vocal minority? (4, Insightful)

Dogtanian (588974) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840028)

No, they mean that while most people don't particularly like ads, they'll accept them- as much out of passiveness and lazyness as the understanding that they're funding the site- but that a disproportionately noisy minority will whine and bitch about it, thinking that because they've enjoyed a free and adless service for so long that they're entitled to that forever, rather than being grateful that they got it for nothing for so long.

Re:vocal minority? (4, Insightful)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840356)

rather than being grateful

"Grateful" is an interesting term to use when discussing the relationship of consumer to corporation.

I should be "grateful" that something I didn't ask for has intruded in my life to the point where many of the websites I visit for news or entertainment have live twitter-fed widgets that take up space but didn't cost me anything, until now that it creates yet another ad stream.

And just how is twitter better than IRC? Besides having the advertisements that I should now be grateful for?

Re:vocal minority? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31840528)

And just how is twitter better than IRC?

Quote of the decade.

Re:vocal minority? (4, Insightful)

lennier (44736) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840588)

And just how is twitter better than IRC?>

It's better because a flashy dotcom startup can put themselves into the message loop for everyone on the planet, causing a single centralised point of failure for global communications, and add unwanted noise to your signal, while extracting and salting away millions of dollars in profit, making lots of business transactions less efficient in the process.

Oh, you meant better for the users? It's not at all. But they don't make the venture capital magazines, do they?

Re:vocal minority? (2, Interesting)

iONiUM (530420) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840836)

are.. are you really comparing twitter to IRC? only on slashdot would someone boil something down to it's most basic function, and then compare it to something else based on that criteria. sometimes developers need to pay a little more attention to the little things, even if it feels irrational.

Re:vocal minority? (0, Offtopic)

mattack2 (1165421) | more than 4 years ago | (#31841016)

Yeah, that comparison makes no sense. IRC would be a reasonable comparison to AIM or iChat (or whatever other messaging clients/protocols people use).

Re:vocal minority? (1)

eloki (29152) | more than 4 years ago | (#31841160)

If you don't use Twitter then you're not one of the people the GP is referring to. The relationship is between Twitter and Twitter users, not corporation to third party person.

Re:vocal minority? (3, Insightful)

clarkkent09 (1104833) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840486)

Grateful has nothing to do with it. If you offer a free service that I like (this SO does not apply to twitter, but speaking in general) I might use it. If you then start charging for it or bugging me in a way that in my opinion outweighs the value I get from it, then I might stop using it. Your business model is up you you but frankly I don't find it particularly ethically superior to offer a "free" service while having full intention in the back of your mind to changing the rules as soon as you got enough people hooked in, compared to just charging for it in the first place.

Re:vocal minority? (2, Insightful)

lennier (44736) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840560)

I've always boggled why something like Twitter is a dotcom rather than a fundamental protocol. It's not adding any content - it's a pure message forwarding service. There's no apparent reason why 'forward short text message from point A to many points B' is something more value-added than 'retrieve HTTP' or 'forward SMTP' and needs to have a corporation managing it. Rather, it seems like a basic service that ISPs should provide. That would take care of the monetisation just fine.

Re:vocal minority? (2, Insightful)

tompaulco (629533) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840710)

A vocal minority won't like getting bombarded with ads?
No, a vocal minority will complain about the ads.


Everyone else will just stop using the service.

Useless (1)

Drunkulus (920976) | more than 4 years ago | (#31839964)

This thread, and Twitter, is useless without pics.

Re:Useless (1)

tompaulco (629533) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840736)

Agreed. Twitter is doomed to failure. It can only REFERENCE porn, not actually DISPLAY it.

What I can't wait to see happen... (1)

Graymalkin (13732) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840010)

I want to see these networks unwittingly replay some of these "promoted Tweets". I want to hear Wolf Blitzer read something like the following: "and here we go to DoritosRGr8 - America is #1 LOL n I hear Obama luvs new Peppermint Ranch Doritos!" It would make my day to have a vacuous twat read some marketroid tweet on live TV.

Re:What I can't wait to see happen... (4, Insightful)

Fex303 (557896) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840524)

It would make my day to have a vacuous twat read some marketroid tweet on live TV.

How exactly would this be different from the rest of their programming?

In other news (1)

Jamamala (983884) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840026)

Slashdot continues to publish Promoted Stories, which could cause some serious outrage from users who feel that CmdrTaco is attempting to deceive them.

I'm confused?? (2, Funny)

rueger (210566) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840034)

How will I tell the "promoted Tweets" from the everyday Twitter spam?

Re:I'm confused?? (2, Insightful)

yotto (590067) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840152)

According to the article (Yeah I read it) they can delete "Promoted Tweets" that people don't find interesting.

That puts them above about five-nines of the Tweets that aren't Promoted.

Ads In Search Results (2, Interesting)

Rantastic (583764) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840040)

I find it amusing that they think they have inventing something new here: Ads at the top of search results.

Regardless, as I rarely if ever search for anything on Twitter, I don't expect I'll ever see any ads. The day they start spamming ads into the tweets I'm following is the day I kiss Twitter goodbye.

Water my chickens... (4, Funny)

cosm (1072588) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840050)

I hope the Farmvillle admins' servers are prepared. When people can't microblag their life for free, they resort to obsessive compulsive virtual farming.

This discussion makes me thirsty! (4, Funny)

bennomatic (691188) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840180)

Time to go to my closest Starbucks for a venti non fat latte. What a great way to round out the afternoon!

They have great snacks there, too, starting at just $1.49! you should try it!

Re:This discussion makes me thirsty! (1)

Dragoniz3r (992309) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840242)

[dragoniz3r@phoenix ~]$ wc -c
Time to go to my closest Starbucks for a venti non fat latte. What a great way to round out the afternoon!

They have great snacks there, too, starting at just $1.49! you should try it!
187

Just sayin.

Re:This discussion makes me thirsty! (4, Insightful)

Kenz0r (900338) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840874)

You're assuming that advertisers would be held to the same limit as users.
Why would they be? After all, they're paying for that ad space.

Re:This discussion makes me thirsty! (1)

mattack2 (1165421) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840954)

It's not just a good idea, it's the law... err, a technical limitation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS [wikipedia.org]

taking off the training wheels (1)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840236)

We used to call this kind of thing "jumping the shark".

(Or "selling out to the Man", but it's hard to say that with a straight face.)

Darn it! (4, Funny)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840310)

I guess I'm missing out, having never seen the point in Twitter. But I have seen a few tweets, so I have a pretty good idea of how this might be implemented...

Johnny465: I just ate a delicious pastrami sandwich! Yum! (Brought to you by Jimmy John's)

Sally92: I'm so angry, my boyfriend forgot our date and took a nap instead! (You should try No-Doze)

Joe4ever: I'm in the bathroom right now (Sponsored by Charmin)

Re:Darn it! (1)

a_fuzzyduck (979684) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840548)

Ian496: OMG!!!!! Train just derailed, bodies everywhere (Brought to you by First Group)

Re:Darn it! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31840670)

OK POOP IS COMING OUT

Re:Darn it! (1)

Graff (532189) | more than 4 years ago | (#31841214)

No no, that would be:

Joe4ever: I'm in the bathroom right now (Brought to you by Carl's Jr.)

Ironic - I can share this on Twitter (2, Interesting)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840346)

So if I send this to Twitter, does it create another Slashvertisement front page post, causing a Möbius loop of FAIL ?

Hmm (5, Interesting)

Andorin (1624303) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840372)

This doesn't really affect me as I hardly ever search Twitter. The rare exception is when I want to follow someone and don't already know their username. I also use Twitter from a client instead of my browser- and on that note, TFA mentions that they may be adding support for Promoted Tweets to appear in third-party clients in the future, which makes me unhappy. I'm only following a handful of people (mostly friends and maybe two well-known/famous people) and if I started getting ads in my tweet roster from corporations I don't care about, I'd abandon Twitter in a heartbeat.

However, although I dislike advertising, this doesn't seem so bad. Only one Promoted Tweet per page, and only in search results, it's clearly marked as an ad, and they have to meet a popularity threshold in order to stay. If all online ads were like that, I'd be less inclined to block them.

Re:Hmm (3, Interesting)

Phil06 (877749) | more than 4 years ago | (#31841402)

Searching Twitter is useless, any trending topic is going to be loaded with spam posts. If there was a way to exclude anything with a link I would use it. 99.9% of all messaging links (email, chat, tweet) are spam yet nobody seems to notice. When was the last time you clicked on a link from your "bank"?

Use the API against them. (4, Interesting)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840584)

Just block them and/or report them as spam.

Or just use a client that disregards the ads.

Re:Use the API against them. (2, Interesting)

DavidKlemke (1048264) | more than 4 years ago | (#31842018)

Whilst I'm sure there will be something like AdBlock for Twitter I can imagine them making the terms of use for the API so that doing so would be a violation of their TOS. Considering that many of the clients are ad supported already (and Twitter has mentioned that there might be a revenue sharing arrangement in the works) the larger majority would comply with the new ads, lest they get blocked and overtaken by another client that does.

Just like slashdot, google, and everyone else.. (3, Insightful)

Improv (2467) | more than 4 years ago | (#31840622)

We'll have tools that will hide the adverts, and do our best to make them widespread.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>