In critic’s film polls, Citizen Kane is usually voted the most important film of all time.
It doesn’t look anything special to us nowadays.
That’s because everything that first appeared in Citizen Kane has been copied so much, it’s become part of cinema convention.
It broke all the boundaries that existed in film before that time.
It changed cinema, and so it doesn’t look special anymore.
That’s what happens with truly revolutionary ideas.
They get absorbed and become the new basic ground rules.
Orson Welles said Citizen Kane was revolutionary, largely due to the fact that he knew nothing about film.
He was a stage actor and director from New York.
So all he knew about were stage sets and stage lighting.
When he got to Hollywood he was regarded with awe.
So no one dared question anything he said.
But Orson Welles didn’t know that.
He assumed if he was doing anything wrong, the people who knew about film would tell him.
But of course they didn’t.
They assumed all of his ‘mistakes’ were bold, daring innovations no one had tried before.
And they were right, but for the wrong reason.
He wasn’t restricted by the same conventional knowledge as everyone else. So he could question, reinvent, and change cinema.
He put ceilings on all the room sets, because he didn’t know that wasn’t done.
This meant the technicians had to use spot lighting.
Instead of the multi-directional lighting used in film.
He was the first to use whip-pans, breakaway sets, and sound across the cut.
Because he didn’t know it wasn’t done.
He ignored the rules and something really good came out of it.
So it’s okay to be different.
But not for everyone.
Apparently there’s a right way and a wrong way to use Twitter.
And I’ve been using it the wrong way.
I know this because the other day I saw some people having a conversation about me on Twitter.
It went something along the lines of, “Dave Trott has 1,300 followers but only follows 30 people. Doesn’t he understand how Twitter works?”
Several other people got involved and all agreed I was wrong in following so few people.
I thought this could be interesting so I asked why.
He said he would answer it on his blog.
The answer was, by following several hundred, or even several thousand, people you could tap into what was happening in the zeitgeist.
You follow trends amongst people in similar groups.
You could even set up your own groups to spot trends.
To do this, the more people you’re following the better.
Which is really interesting and definitely a good use of Twitter.
If you’re a planner.
But I’m not a planner.
I’m a creative.
I don’t spend my time spotting and analysing trends.
I spend my time trying to get messages to stand out in the massively over communicated media.
And for that I need to be different, I need to be impactful, I need to be interesting.
So that’s how I’ve been using Twitter.
To find things that interest me.
Things that make me laugh, or think, or learn.
Things that provoke me or amuse me.
Because I’m more like a magpie than a trendspotter.
If I follow hundreds, or even thousands, of people I’ll get bored.
So why do that?
Why not treat Twitter like creative people treat most things?
Experiment with it, see how I can use it.
Maybe I’ll turn up something new.
But even if I don’t, why must there be only one right way to use it?
Why would you want to stop someone being different?
It’s not a safety issue.
I won’t harm anyone by using Twitter the wrong way.
But I might learn something I didn’t know before.
Isn’t that a good thing?
RSS Feed
Twitter
Email
Whatever works for you, Dave. Following too many feeds of any kind can be overwhelming. But as a magpie I find that I discover more interesting things if I follow more people.
p.s. am I the only one who things CAPTCHA is getting too hard for humans?
This is the wrong way to use Twitter. http://bit.ly/4ya0jA
I just wrote about that on my twitter page, i wonder why famous people only follow famous people. I mean they are so engrossed in this celebrity world that i would have thought that they would want to know what the \common\ people are up to. After all it is the common people that made them who they are.
Dave, as a creative dont you think by following lots of different type of people it would give you some insight on your target audience?
If you had to do a huge campaign that targets say hip hop fans, what do you know abut hip hop and what hip hop fans get up to? I think Twitter can help in that and i think celebrities, especially pop stars should follow their fans and their target audience.
Dave, Orsen Welles’s ideas became commoditised. Simon Wardley does a great talk on this: http://events.carsonified.com/fowa/2008/london/videos/simon-wardley/highlights
There’s following with a small f.
That’s the number of people that Twitter thinks I follow.
And there’s Following with a capital F.
That’s the people whose tweets I look out for and read with any kind of regularity.
If you use a Twitter client like Tweetdeck, you organise the people you follow (small f) into groups to make the whole thing more managable.
For me, the further towards the left hand side of the Tweetdeck interface you appear, the more likely it is that I Follow you with a capital F.
The following number published by Twitter is pretty meaningless.
Hi Toufic,
Just to be clear, I don’t follow famous people I follow interesting people.
Badbanana is a really gunny guy, I’ve no idea who he is, but everything he writes makes me laugh.
Everything AbstractBuddha writes makes me think.
SamuelPepys is like getting tweets from the 17th century,
SethGodin is just old retweets, but they’re all brilliant.
I’m constantly looking through lists for more people to follow, but I don’t want to listen in on boring conversations.
Like I say Toufic, I’m not a planner I’m a creative.
So I don’t listen to groups, I listen to individuals.
I got told the same kind of thing when I started Tweeting, but as Phil says, I now just look out for certain people. Maybe I should unfollow some people, but I don’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings (as if they’d care). Also, if anyone follows me, I will now only follow them if their tweets look interesting and they write with some degree of regularity.
Hi Dave, in terms of following famous people, i wasnt referring that to you but to alot of celebrities out there who need to know more about their fans and what they like.
Michael Conrad from Leo Burnett once told us that if we want to come up with an idea for say a workers van then we should invite some real workers to join in a brainstorm session to get an idea of what they like and what they dont, a real insight from your real target audience.
A planner can only put into words who your target audience are but its not the same as hanging out or talking to them yourself.
Agree 100%
24 Following
252 Followers
Twitter is a channel, no more, no less.
It depends on whether you are the sort who goes to the pub to meet a few regular mates and have sometimes deep or inspiring conversations, or the poseur who wants to be known by everybody superficially.
As Phil Adams, use Tweetdeck to filter those you follow.
The right way (A right way) to use Twitter is to tweet about the right and wrong way to use Twitter, get retweeted to high heaven, stimulate a decent number of comments on the associated blog post, maybe get a few extra people to subscribe to future posts via RSS, probably pick up a few more followers on Twitter, and perhaps have a couple of people stick around to read other content on your site.
But I suspect that Dave knows that.
I agree. I follow what I think is too many people, and a huge proportion of it becomes background noise. The follow/Follow analogy from above really hits the mark.
2 different processes, or mind sets, or attitudes… I don’t think there’s a right or wrong approach just depends what information you are hoping to gather.
I personally want to know more about what might be going to happen in the near future and less about what is happening now. Because that’s what my current clients need. If I design against what lots of people are doing today then the message will be out of date by the time it reaches the market. Investing on the ascending side of the trend curve, before it peaks.
There’s probably a bit of self image wrapped up in the equation too. But I don’t want to be so immersed in the industry that I can’t see the wood for the trees. I prefer to feel like I’m on the outside looking in - picking influences with objectivity. It crossed my mind that when I left London I would be missing out on daily cultural influences - and there’s no denying I do miss it. But in some respects it’s easier to pick out genuine trends from the dead ends by visiting less frequently. Finding ways to maintain your objectivity has to be one of the most important skills for any creative.
Fair cop Phil.
Damn that’s an awful lot of comments for a post that considers the question “how many people on Twitter should I follow?”
I’m guessing you don’t get as many comments for most of your posts (can’t be bothered to check) - How about calling your next post “10 little known facts about people who tweet” - that should get the juices flowing nicely.
Love it. It’s been going on for the last 3 years, the right way to use Twitter. And the ‘right’ way changes, even from one person, if you look at how they write about it.
Just do what you want.
Dave, you’re a pillar of comfort. I don’t facebook or twitter.Why? Not that I don’t need to network, I do. But if guys won’t even reply emails or text messages, is facebook going to make a difference? I don’t need a thousand ‘friends’ who might help me. I need one friend who will help me. Years back, when email was new, my friend in the US apologized for not replying to my snail mail. He claimed if I had email, he would write regularly. Well, for the record, his record is worse than Bill Clinton’s. Bill sent one (test) email throughout his term as President. My friend sent me nothing.
On Orson…many innovations were borne out of cost considerations…Kane was a very low budget film…
Dave, it seems to me that what happens in so many “creative” fields is that creativity becomes institutionalized, self-referential, and self-conscious over time.
People are more worried about doing something like something else that’s regarded as creative rather than just doing something.
Clients also want “something like an Apple spot.” That’s not creativity.
But it’s what a lot of us wind up doing.
Just so you all know I wasn’t making it up, here is a link to blog where the guy explained his reasons why only following 30 people was the wrong use of Twitter.
http://www.head-first.co.uk/headblog/2009/10/twitter-can-improve-your-sex-life/#comments
Innit the old ’scatter gun’/sniper rifle chestnut?
Suspect that being um disciplined craftsman, you prefer the sniper approach.
Reminds me of what a famous photographer once said was the difference between getting a shot by motor-driving your way through and getting the critical moment - “like dynamiting the whole brook to get a trout or using a hook and using the right bait”.
Guess these days, the “carpet bombing” ways so popular across the Pond has caught on.
I am not a big fan of Twitter, its too much of a hassle to figure why I am Following. It is even in the name Following, a true creative leader does not follow, Dave put it nicely with Orson Welles who did not follow. He created!
That is why most celebrities only “Follow” a few people e.g. their friends. p.s. I do like the Idea of trying to spot trends on Twitter, which I will try to see how effective it is. It shall be a little social experiment.
Dave,
They weren’t reasons why only following 30 people was the wrong use of Twitter.
They were reasons why I thought following more could be beneficial.
There’s a huge difference.
And I hope to god I never use the term ‘zeitgeist’. I’m a creative, not a bullshitter
When forced to work within a strict framework the imagination is taxed to its utmost and will produce its richest ideas. Given total freedom the work is likely to sprawl. - T S Eliot.
Hi Dom,
That’s why I included a link to your blog, in case I was misrepresenting you.
Also I thought the comments on your post were worth reading too.
But I can’t seem to access them to put them up here.
Thanks Dave, appreciate that.
I really don’t believe there is a wrong way to use anything (except maybe a power tool).
I just believe we can find inspiration in the most unlikely of places.
But that means listening.
The comments weren’t working but they are now: http://www.head-first.co.uk/headblog/2009/10/twitter-can-improve-your-sex-life/#comments
It would be interesting to meet with you next time you are giving a talk or I’m down in London.
When you sit with a nice girl for two hours, you think it’s only a minute. But when you sit on a hot stove for a minute, you think it’s two hours. That’s relativity.
- Albert Einstein
“What might be right for you, might not be right for some”
– ‘Diff’rent Strokes’ theme
http://ex-blank-page.blogspot.com/2009/12/in-reply-to-daves-great-posts-100-101.html
dave for a quick way to see trends just go here http://trendsmap.com/
you can spend hours seeing what the hot topics are.
That’s fascinating Graham,
I love the way the biggest word over the entire UK is ‘factor’.
Wonder what that could be about?
I always thought it was less about trendspotting and more about what fundamentally makes people tick? That hasn’t changed since time immemorial. Unless there was a meeting that I missed?