1. 3 DISCUSSING
  • Steve Morgan   Jul 19 2012   Flag

    Interesting, although a little confusing... I take it they mean auto-publishing vs. not publishing at all? Surely it's a given that the former would be more successful. However, I can't see how auto-publishing can beat manual publishing. Half of the auto-published tweets I see turn out badly and/or don't work properly. I avoid automation if I can - it may be the more time-consuming option, but at least you're 100% in control of how the content/tweet is presented. I'd be interested to see a study comparing auto vs. manual publishing... Or have I missed something here...?

  • Paul Gailey   Jul 19 2012   Flag

    I think I missed the same thing you missed Steve. There something a little nauseating in the claim of a headline that pushes the automaton agenda so far. I'm not sure users really like to be treated en masse and subject to endless automation versus receiving individual customer service attention which they are then more likely to amplify a good message and be heard by their trusted peers.

  • Jon Lim   Jul 19 2012   Flag

    It's a link-bait article with a misleading title. They seem to attribute the success to automation, but in reality, it's from the five tips (at the least) that they include in their post. Like you said, publish vs not publishing seems to be the actual comparison based on the title, which would be a no-brainer and non-comparison. These sorts of articles make my blood heat up a little.

You must login to post comments.