Capping IT Off
If you are on some social networks you might notice that are
different economics: the one who posts first, the one with the most
posts, the one with the most karma (or kudos on other networks) and on
Twitter there is the one with the most followers. However all of these
economics are not about the first poster, or the one with the most
followers or the superdude (or whatever obscure label one might get
when one has the most karma / kudos), it is all about attention.
Attention economy does exist and is creating bigger revenues than ever.
The fact that I have 600+ followers on Twitter does not mean a thing. It matters how much attention I can get them for my tweets. Mr Kutcher
might be a bit more successful since he has 1.6 million followers,
which is just a numbers game. If I only can get attention of 1% of my
followers, it means that 6 people will read my Tweet and make an
action. If Mr Kutcher can get attention of only 0.1% of his followers,
it means that he got 1600 people who do something. This is just a game
of numbers, however it might be clear that the number of people who are
following you does not make the difference, nor the number of posts /
tweets you produce on a certain platform, it is about how many people
you can really reach, of how many can you get the attention and how
many people can you inspire to take action.
Same goes for music, anybody can download a copy for free (which
does not necessarily mean that it is legal!), however not everyone can
make something that freely available into something that catches the
attention of the public and is worth paying for. A great example is the
iPhone application from the Presidents of the United States, you can
download their music for free (again, this does not mean that you are
performing a legal action), however they also offer a paid application
in the Appstore for 5 euros. You can pay 5 euros for a box, a piece of
user experience and listen to the music. The box is about creating
attention and seems to be worth paying for, the copy of the music which
is leveraged by the box is not unique and already available for no
costs.
You can make money if you can create awareness and capture one’s
attention, you probably make no (or less) money on copies and on vague
big numbers such as the number of followers. It just matters of how
many time people give to you when you capture their attention.
Rick Mans is Information Architect and a social media evangelist within Capgemini. You can follow and connect with him via Twitter or Delicious
About the author
Rick is on a day to day basis working on social media (strategy) cases for several (Fortune 500) clients. He lives and loves social media, helping people and enterprises in using social media in a way that adds value for them. He also gives guest lectures at several universities to make students aware of the impact social media will have on their life in general and on enterprises in particular in the near and not so near future. Is he a geek? Well… yes. A geek with a social life though. Even one with a wife and a young son, who’s first English words were ‘Social media’.
- More at
Good article Rick, I’d like to add that online users have different objectives and are different character types. Just a small percentage is active and adding content to the web. The majority is passive, applying to all sorts of channels, but that’s it.
Interaction creates attention, though a small part creates interaction.
Spot on Rick. I have been very amazed by the value people attach to the number of followers on Twitter. I, for one, appreciate the real contacts and information I get from basically a handful of people.
And the example of the Presidents of The United States is a very good one. The technology available today calls for new business models, especially in the entertainment industry.
Great post.
Gianluigi
You are completely right with your addition of the 1-9-90 rule, only small part creates interaction.
Arjan,
I do have the same experiences as you described. The entertainment is really in need for new business model, however they tried to block the video recorder at first and when they did not succeed in blocking it, they started to use it, with as result that 50% of their revenues came from the video they sold or offered for rental. They will eventually, probably after they maximized their profits in the old business model.
Spot on. If nothing else we’re learning at a rate never before witnessed by mankind. We’re becoming an instant sociality based on relevant real time feeds of information. Gap Gemini is a beacon of such a feed to those willing to consume.
Great post Rick. It is the old quantity versus quality discussion again. I wonder if spammers have already considered trying to break into twitter and use the accounts of Mr Kutcher and the likes for convincing their followers to buy things I will not mention in this blog.