jump to navigation

“I’m following the social marketing experiment, doofus.” April 18, 2011

Posted by thesporkgirl in Why Unfollow Charlie?.
trackback

By far the most overwhelming reasons people on twitter are giving for unfollowing Charlie Sheen (by a factor of 3 to 1 at least) are either: “You’re boring now,” or “all you do is promote your show.”

I feel these two are actually the same reason, and you could also toss in “You aren’t funny [anymore or ever].” These are all aspects of what a few have picked up on: this is now a publicity machine. And publicity machines are boring. And phony.

You’re not a stooge, twitter-verse. You can see what this clown is selling now, can’t you? Even if they aren’t articulating it, people are definitely sensing the calculated tone here. When this whole thing first started, many people lauded the “social marketing experiment” going on here. And at first, I guess I was curious too. But the tone changed very quickly. It went from a few interviews going viral, to 2 million followers, to a few efforts at being entertaining/crazy/goofy/fun interaction online, to immediately:

“You have 2, now 3 million followers on twitter – how can we turn that into money?”

The short answer to that was selling tweets. Internships.com paid Charlie Sheen to promote their services to look for an “intern” which resulted in 80,000 people to sign up for internships.com, making them a lot of money for no benefit to themselves.

I think the PR machine realized at that point that selling tweets was not an effective use of the twitter base. People were already seeing through the ruse, immediately skeptical of the stunt. But then how better to make money off the sheer numbers of people paying attention for free? Solution: get them to pay money for what they were previously getting for free, the tour.

The problem is (ok, “a” problem is, lol) that as soon as the tour was announced, there is now a very large disincentive for him to be entertaining for free on twitter. Why would he be? No one will pay if the can get it for free online, but simultaneously, no one will pay if they have no reason to believe it’s worth paying for, if they can’t get a taste for free online.

The total lack of substance precludes any possibility of “teasing” the show online and delivering more on stage. The only selling points were cherry-picked and edited-down soundbites that are actually totally perfect for twitter, and there is nothing else entertaining about it. So it became either-or. Either the twitter feed is entertaining and genuine, or the twitter feed becomes nothing but calculated promotions for those same catchphrases to be heard on stage for money, but not both. Also it turns out half-seconds-worth of catchphrases cannot carry a live show, not with no script, no director, and a performer with no stage presence or improv ability, but that’s another matter.

So people are taking notice now. “Hey, this feed used to be fun. Now it’s just telling me fun can be had for money on stage and that’s not true anyway, everyone said it sucked.”

I couldn’t be happier this “social marketing experiment” is failing. Think of the implications if it had been a huge success. What celeb wouldn’t sell tweets (the amounts of $ being thrown around are enough to tempt even the most stalwart celeb tweeter)? What celeb wouldn’t stop being genuine and start selling the opportunity to see them be genuine on stage for money instead of for free on twitter? As if twitter isn’t full of enough spammers, this could have turned celeb twitter feeds into a dressed-up phony baloney spamfest. I don’t begrudge anyone the ability to make money on social marketing. They just have to deliver something, anything, for the opportunity. They have to offset the cost of pitching a product or service to me, by being at minimum entertaining. That’s the deal. It’s like a funny commercial. Commercials suck. Except, that one, with the thing, and you laughed, and you don’t mind that one so much any more.

So good for you, twitter, for not letting them pull the wool over your eyes. I am loving seeing so many people wise up, either consciously or subconsciously, realizing that something is rotten in the twitter feed of Denmark. jk Denmark, you’re ok, it’s whoever is typing the @charliesheen feed who is smelly and thinks we don’t notice.

Advertisements

Comments»

1. Carlos - May 6, 2011

It would be nice if you would retract your many statements that Mr. Sheen shot Kelly Preston with malice, now that she’s publicly stated otherwise:

http://perezhilton.com/2011-05-06-kelly-preston-backs-up-charlie-sheens-shooting-story#respond

A blog post admitting that you were misinformed will be sufficient.

Syd - May 6, 2011

In which article did she say this? Perez didn’t cite, unless he had this conversation with her personally? Happy to oblige if there are additional sources so we can confirm.

2. Carlos - May 6, 2011

Does video of her saying so suffice?

http://www.tmz.com/2011/05/06/kelly-preston-charlie-sheen-shooting-gun-mr-chow-john-travolta/

The first link should have been enough for you to retract your libelous statements. Please print a retraction immediately.

3. Carlos - May 7, 2011

Here’s the link where Kelly Preston clearly states that Charlie Sheen told the truth about the incident with the gun.

http://www.tmz.com/2011/05/06/kelly-preston-charlie-sheen-shooting-gun-mr-chow-john-travolta/

You can delete this comment again if you wish, but proof of it’s existence, and that you’ve been informed that you have been reporting false information, will remain. Be advised.

Syd - May 7, 2011

Apologies – we did not delete the comment, just hadn’t approved them all at once. You’ll see them all here now. We will update any blog posts with reference to the shooting with the info, and post a blog shortly acknowledging that.

While I’m glad this incident didn’t happen the way it was initially reported, this doesn’t mean the other violent incidents he’s had with women didn’t happen.

Thanks for the links.

4. thesporkgirl - May 7, 2011

this is not news, he already made this claim years ago, and i included it in the original blog.

and that is not how guns work.

and leaving a loaded gun in your pants isn’t really better anyway.

no retraction will be made.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: