“People are over-thinking the whole thing.” – Stacey May Fowles on Twitter at last night’s CSME mixer.

They really are. If last night’s discussion taught me anything it’s that magazines (and people in general) are still struggling with how to use Twitter. Too much emphasis is placed on ways to monetize it, whether it be through gaining followers, pushing subscriptions, and most often, getting more traffic to websites. Twitter can help, but it certainly won’t save you – because money isn’t the point. So if you’re just looking to get higher traffic numbers, you probably shouldn’t tweet. If you don’t have the time to build a community, you probably shouldn’t tweet. Social networking is what it is: a series of networks in which people share, engage, and challenge. It’s about conversation and interaction. This is why social networks are for people, not impersonal corporations.

This is a good thing, because it’s people that make a magazine. We tend to talk about “brands” like we’re separate from them, but we aren’t. Like it or not, personal and professional boundaries are blurred and anyone working for a title can be considered its representative. If you’re the tweeter for any given title, you’re even more accountable and transparent (an aside: read my dear friend Jon’s post on weaponized transparency, it’s quite interesting). But this another good thing, because Twitter’s front-line, immediate communication results in better customer service.

Of course, building a community takes time, something almost no one in this industry has. I’ve found that tweeting for both Cottage Life and explore is difficult and leaves me stretched thin (and sometimes, the accounts are sorely neglected). But it’s worth it when I respond to a reader, joke around with them, or solve an issue that they’re having.

A few of my thoughts:

• Linking exclusively to your own website = bad. Including outside articles your readers might be interested in = good.
• Twitter is not the same as an RSS feed. As Melanie McBride posted back in February, using automatic feeds is a good way to have a presence when you don’t have much time to interact, but it is not ideal. Feeding a bunch of blogs into your account might get followers and traffic, but ignoring @ replies and direct messages is not wise, regardless of what your mandate is. People will expect responses.
• The best Twitter strategy you can have is to be yourself. Forget about struggling between your personal and professional voices and tweet as you would actually speak to coworkers and readers. Use common sense (for example, it’s probably best that you don’t complain about your job or announce a wicked hangover on your title’s account). Think about it. What do magazines do? Serve their readers. Do the same in your social networks, should you choose to have them.
• Personalizing your magazine isn’t as scary as it seems. Using first names and answering readers’ inquiries builds interest and loyalty for your title. It shows that you care and that there are real people behind your publication and website.
• Mix it up. Blend subscription offers, contests, blog feeds, article links, and conversation. Best Health and The Walrus are two magazines that I think do this very well.
• If you’re concerned about the tone or frequency of your tweets, get multiple people to use it. Consider applying for a CoTweet account.

What others think/people who wrote most of this before me:

Phillip Smith on the value of followers & The Walrus’ Twitter
Kat Tancock on how magazines should use Twitter
Howard Rheingold on Twitter literacy