Terrific post, and the most cogent thing I've seen anyone write on the topic beyond typical new-feature praise and pillory (i.e., "Lists are great," "Lists are evil," "Ban lists!").
Beyond the great points you've made, I'd say lists also complicate the calculus of influence significantly. For example, if there are ten lists on "venture capitalists" (with the usual disambiguation problems), then how do you judge which list is the most influential? Is it the number of followers of the list creator? The collective number of followers of the list members? The collective number of lists of the list members? The whole discussion of metrics and ROI hasn't even begun on this topic yet (at least, not that I've seen).
A last thought: I wonder if at some point the FTC will step in and regulate the kind of "list payola" you describe as a form of paid endorsement. :-)
Ricardo Serrano
· 1 month ago
Check this article http://mashable.com/2009/10/27/social-media-roi/, especially Oliver Blanchard's slide presentation. The ROI topic in social media intiatives very nascent, but I have a feeling will be addressing this issue soon (can't go forever investing in social media hoopla without getting something in return!).
bitstrategist
· 1 month ago
Funny, I just stumbled on Olivier Blanchard's presentation today and am looking forward to reading it. Lots of good discussion (on mashable and elsewhere) about social media ROI. It will be interesting to see how it evolves with the addition of lists into the mix!
hyperlocavore.com
· 1 month ago
Really interesting, Thank you.
thedrake
· 1 month ago
Great synopsis. I don't know if I think its game changing, but it certainly is a strong vanity marker ;>)
Josh Chandler
· 1 month ago
@thedrake - Vanity is a perfect word to use for Twitter lists. We can use services such as Twitter in a very egoistical way at times.
I.E those who are concerned about getting more followers aren't really valuing those who already do so. The addition of lists increases these select users ego, and gives them the impression that they are gaining more popularity, when realistically the user could place them under "annoyingpeopleonTwitter" :)
MikeSaliban (Mike Saliban)
· 2 months ago
Why Twitter “Lists” Change Everything — Dave Troy: Fueled By ...: RT @sotirov: Hmmm… interesting thoughts about.. http://davetroy.com/?p=644
Why Twitter “Lists” Change Everything — Dave Troy: Fueled By ...: So, instead of “following” Ashton Kutcher, yo.. http://davetroy.com/?p=644
adamd (Adam D)
· 2 months ago
Finally read "Curatorial Economy" post by @davetroy. About Twitter Lists, but much bigger lesson in there. http://bit.ly/1yHkyg
Paula Thornton
· 1 month ago
Half of the fun of the lists are to see 1) what labels people are using for their lists and 2) how some people categorize you (sometimes on multiple lists of their own)
Chris Jones
· 1 month ago
Glad to see the impact of Lists rippling so quickly.
If they'd just give us the ability to tag someone's profile, we'd be good to go. Maybe that's next month. The early adoption thing is compounding a bit; we'd just started to figure out hashtags .. life in the fast lane, I suppose.
Looking forward to new and accelerated 'tipping points' ..
Urs E. Gattiker
· 1 month ago
Dave
Thanks so much for this. We have addressed this issue a while back about how many you can follow and that what matters is who you follow and how much attention pay to your urls (e.g., what percentage of your followers clicks on them)....
You have captured my reticence perfectly. Thank you
guarionex88
· 1 month ago
Excellent analysis.
Dan Collins
· 1 month ago
Dave, This is an excellent post. I was particularly interested in your phrase 'curatorial economy' which describes the next shift (also the view of this simple guy) very well. http://www.asimpleguyblog.blogspot.com/
asgoodandbetter
· 1 month ago
Ooh, I like "curatorial economy." You should trademark that gem and turn this blog into a full-length book by next week, while you still can! :)
Thanks for the lucid analysis. It's certainly going to be interesting to see what this move leads to on the part of users. At first glance it seems like the groups people can build on TweetDeck, Seesmic and HootSuite, but reading blogs like this has made me realize its impact will be much greater...
suzyoge
· 1 month ago
Living in a country that is a bit slow on the twitter uptake, (the Netherlands) and working with traditional small business owners who are slow to see the potential for their business, it is a shame to see the lists "change everything". The direct & indirect followers, listed etc. take away the simplicity of twitter, especially for newbies.
The crowning of curators marks the beginning of the end of the democracy of twitter. At least, as you mentioned, the "little people" still have the option to create douchebag lists, for now! (That made me laugh out loud.)
ursulas
· 1 month ago
Thanks! I didn't realize that you can put someone in a 'list' without following them. This was helpful!
myrnatheminx
· 1 month ago
Love this post Dave. I usually describe the people in my stream as my curators so I am so on board with "curatorial economy." To add, my problem with lists in general is that they often leave off some really great people thanks to a lack of diversity and thoughtfulness. Lists are often made by the same people pushing forward the same people--replicating what I hate about all of those stupid "Top Ten People in Social Media" like lists. The ubiquity of Chris Brogan is a case in point--no offense to Brogan of course--it's not really his fault. I am making private, functional lists at this point. And when I make public lists, they will be "anti-lists," or lists that don't push forward the same people.
alisoncreamer
· 1 month ago
GREAT Post ! Im sure this list will create a big buzzzzz. I for one am excited to see how many I make it to so far Im up to 12 so Im pretty happy anyone even wants to follow me.
texasholly
· 1 month ago
genius.
andrewmueller
· 1 month ago
Dave,
Great post, you made some very insightful connections and I agree most everything you mentioned. I am in 100% agreement that the quantity of lists that one is on is of little importance, but certain specific lists you are on could be very important.
I also wrote a post about list wherein I touch upon the idea that twitter lists may create a duality of twitizen and amplify the power imbalances between those who are selected to be on the lists of influential people and those who are not.
I would love to hear what you think of my premise, If you are interested to read it, it resides here: http://bit.ly/1glydV
wedding invitation boxes
· 1 month ago
Great article! Guess we never learn out about twitter. :)
Zoe
· 1 month ago
Thanks, Im pretty new to twitter and it's interesting to know. I only just found out what RT means.
All Comments
Beyond the great points you've made, I'd say lists also complicate the calculus of influence significantly. For example, if there are ten lists on "venture capitalists" (with the usual disambiguation problems), then how do you judge which list is the most influential? Is it the number of followers of the list creator? The collective number of followers of the list members? The collective number of lists of the list members? The whole discussion of metrics and ROI hasn't even begun on this topic yet (at least, not that I've seen).
A last thought: I wonder if at some point the FTC will step in and regulate the kind of "list payola" you describe as a form of paid endorsement. :-)
I.E those who are concerned about getting more followers aren't really valuing those who already do so. The addition of lists increases these select users ego, and gives them the impression that they are gaining more popularity, when realistically the user could place them under "annoyingpeopleonTwitter" :)
If they'd just give us the ability to tag someone's profile, we'd be good to go. Maybe that's next month. The early adoption thing is compounding a bit; we'd just started to figure out hashtags .. life in the fast lane, I suppose.
Looking forward to new and accelerated 'tipping points' ..
Thanks so much for this. We have addressed this issue a while back about how many you can follow and that what matters is who you follow and how much attention pay to your urls (e.g., what percentage of your followers clicks on them)....
http://commetrics.com/articles/five-steps-to-tw...
And I found out the hard way that keeping up with too many people results in weak ties, these are, unfortunately, not very satisfying:
http://commetrics.com/articles/four-new-habits-...
Thanks for sharing this important post
Urs
@ComMetrics
This is an excellent post. I was particularly interested in your phrase 'curatorial economy' which describes the next shift (also the view of this simple guy) very well. http://www.asimpleguyblog.blogspot.com/
Thanks for the lucid analysis. It's certainly going to be interesting to see what this move leads to on the part of users. At first glance it seems like the groups people can build on TweetDeck, Seesmic and HootSuite, but reading blogs like this has made me realize its impact will be much greater...
The crowning of curators marks the beginning of the end of the democracy of twitter. At least, as you mentioned, the "little people" still have the option to create douchebag lists, for now! (That made me laugh out loud.)
Great post, you made some very insightful connections and I agree most everything you mentioned. I am in 100% agreement that the quantity of lists that one is on is of little importance, but certain specific lists you are on could be very important.
I also wrote a post about list wherein I touch upon the idea that twitter lists may create a duality of twitizen and amplify the power imbalances between those who are selected to be on the lists of influential people and those who are not.
I would love to hear what you think of my premise, If you are interested to read it, it resides here: http://bit.ly/1glydV