No, introducing ads will not be Twitter’s downfall

There has been much discussion over the past week, as Twitter look set to introduce a self-service ad platform, which will see a new set of Twitter ads enter into the Twitter stream. While many are viewing this as a purely strategic move by Twitter to increase their valuation, or indeed prove their current market valuation, many are taking the view that Twitter is ultimately making the wrong decision here. An excellent article on Twitter’s ad plans on Gigaom cites a post on Forrester by George Colony, where he laments the introduction of more ads. Evidently he, and many others, see this as Twitter’s ‘bad idea’, viewing the introduction of more ads as an unwanted intrusion into the conversation on Twitter and completely the wrong way for them to monetise. I don’t see this as Twitter’s big ‘bad idea’ – rather they are introducing a model that advertisers clearly want and which will likely be executed in such a way as to be respectful of the way Twitter works.

Ads are okay if we want things for free

The fact is that if we want a service for free, we know that advertising will have to come into play at some point. Up until now we have enjoyed a Twitter experience that has been virtually ad-free, and it’s been great. But if we want to keep enjoying Twitter at all, then there will have to be a compromise made between Twitter and its users. The uncomfortable truth is that if Twitter were to develop an ad product that would be so unobtrusive to the ‘conversation’ on Twitter that we don’t even notice it, advertisers wouldn’t be too happy and poor ad return would make the model unsustainable. Therefore Twitter needs to introduce an ad format, fast, that catches people’s attention. And if this means we see an advertised tweet in our stream, maybe we will have to accept that if we want the service to continue.

The biggest risk Twitter is taking here obviously, is that it could annoy its users at a time where there is fresh competition on the market in the shape of Google +. But to look at it purely in that way ignores the (in)valuable ecosystems people have built up on Twitter, the reliance many of us have on the site in our day to day lives and the pure value it continues to drive. Ads will not undo all this hard work. Rather, we will find a way to adapt, maybe filter out the ads from the main stream of the conversation and if it’s done well, maybe even click on a few because what we’re seeing is relevant content.

If Facebook can do it…

What seems odd about the backlash to Twitter’s decision to introduce ads in this way, is that it was sort of inevitable this was coming. In-stream ads are the most obvious way for Twitter to monetise the content that people are generating. Facebook has been doing this for years, finding increasingly new ways to make money off the back of content that’s generated through their site, even making these appear more like organic activity through the likes of sponsored stories. Facebook do this, and people keep on coming. The first reaction to a change like this will be negative and it may seem uncomfortable at first, but the level of hype around Twitter’s decision seems somewhat incongruous with the simplicity of the fact. Like any other social network, they’re providing a platform for people to create content. And just like Facebook, they need to find a way to make money off of that (harsh as it may sound) in order to survive.

The dinner party problem

One very valid point raised by George Colony in his article, is in the analogy between comparing Twitter’s proposed ads to a dinner party where an uninvited guest barges in to try selling to you. The beauty of Twitter is the biggest problem here – it’s pretty much always been about one main section of the site where updates filter into. The sidebar has become more cluttered in recent months, but this one wall is their single most valuable asset on the site. If they want to offer a viable option to advertisers, ads in this stream is pretty much the only place that’s going to drive revenue, barring a radical overhaul of the site. It means that you can’t get away from this uncomfortable dinner party problem. Do we really want an ad right there in the middle of our own conversation?

The first thing Twitter has to get right here is the way that ads look. One thing Facebook consistently gets right is that their ads look like ads and are nearly always in the same place in the site. If Twitter start ‘tricking’ users by placing ads in the tweetstream that look organic, people are going to feel cheated  and even more intruded upon.

The second thing they have to get right of course, is the way in which the ads are served. Compare your dinner party intruder to a door to door salesman and it’s not too comforting to think that’s what your stream could soon resemble. But think of him as someone that is able to sit at the table and strike up a funny conversation as he tells you about what he’s selling, and you could start to see the appeal more. If Twitter maintain control over the process of approval for ads and limit how often they are shown, they can make these in-stream ads fit more with the conversation on Twitter. This will be ultimately more beneficial to both the user and the advertiser and shows the unique approach Twitter has to take here. If they’re making ads a direct part of the conversation, they need to educate brands into how they should start that conversation.

Ultimately, these new ads will not be Twitter’s downfall, provided of course they served in the right way. It has been their most obvious way to run ads and it seems they’ve put it off for as long as is possible. Quite what the reaction will be, is determined largely by what might seem like the minutiae – such as how the ads look or how the disclaimers they might carry. Twitter will survive this, and probably be a lot richer because of it.