I honestly don't see why companies with products as hot as Apple's and Cisco's Flip would participate in such a scheme. Although I'd say FatCow is probably getting a pretty good return on their investment

Thanks,
Aaron

Very sad.

Your points are valid, but maybe a little too reactionary for me. After a time, I suspect you'll get accustomed to seeing advertising in tweet streams much in the same manner I'm looking at a good deal of advertising on your blog.

I think we all remember the days of bloggers screaming about advertising on blog being "inauthentic".

Cheers.

However, unless the links were expanded before you took the pictures above, it looks like most of the links were NOT obscured.

When there is an ad on TV you change channel.
When there is an ad in a magazine you turn the page.
When there is an ad on twitter delete the tweet and/or the followers from you follower list.

Take pretty much the same time than TV and magazine (At least if you use tweetdeck.)

I mean come on, this there is no way in hell anyone except the founder of the ad company is working from their home, and making any money on this crap. Do we really want to crush their dream job of turning people into permanent searchable billboard? Hello!!! Tweets have permalinks and it's a real pain to go back in time and delete a really old one.

Honestly if some schmuck I follow or follows me does this, I'll @call them an idiot and then block them. Now maybe if somehow they had a permanent pay-per impression royalty payment system, I'd change my tune. Probably not. Advertising is strange.

Advertising is ubiquitous, period. How fast can the eye move on? Better on Twitter than when they line the walls of a restroom stall or the conveyor belt with your groceries on it.

Plus, it is so easy to spot a ad before you click on anything. Way more people are shamelessly plugging their stuff constantly, but don't seem to suffer from it as far as follower numbers go.

I spend inordinate hours building my following and relationships because I care so, so much about my peeps.

And sure I do my own marketing right along with the chit-chat. But to get paid to endorse a third party big name by shoving it in front of my carefully built network... something just doesn't sit well with me.

marketing should be about providing a *service* and interface. Not devious manipulation. OUT with them!

What sucks about this, though, is that anyone talking about something they like on Twitter loses validity. Oh, wait, did that happen a long time ago, like when the first user signed on and realized the whole point of twitter is promoting yourself or your product?

Regardless, I've yet to stoop to Magpie level. I'd piss off my followers and myself. Love how the ad often makes it sound like the user has already tried / owns the product. Lies, lies, lies. We live in such a sad day in age.

you idiot advertizers better start considering how many people you drive away. i think you'll be surprised.

people will start to just unfollow and filter out this type of thing....so there will be no benefit to advertisers anyway...

I would rather see context based ads running alongside, rather than sneaky redirects...that take my attention away from interesting stuff...

And yes, completely inevitable. We all knew it wouldn't take long for spam to find it's way into the tweetosphere. There are always people willing to sell their souls for a few dollars more, particularly in a down economy. The further an ecosystem expands into the "mainstream" the more inevitable it is that someone will set up a service like this.

I would have less of a problem with it if it was clear that it was an ad. For the clueless, I will point out that putting #magpie in the tweet does *not* make it clear that it's an ad, particularly if the tweet is written in the sort of way as in the examples Marshall gives.

The only good thing about it is that Magpie tweets will be a useful excuse to stop following people you might otherwise feel guilty about dropping.

Oh and yes, I wouldn't be surprised to find that all those name brands you were worried about are innocent and it's affiliates in each case.

At least let them come up with their own unique lines.

People will not walk away because Twitter is too good. It's networking at it's finest.

Magpie could have quite easily gotten away with this if they had let the tweeter write the message in their own words, and done away with the #magpie.

There are more then 20 ads on this page alone, and you are still reading it.

if i were the company, i'll pay the one who posts the best twit, not these redundant sentences they issue.

These are all affiliates running these though, so I think this post should be changed to clear that up.

RT
www.web-privacy.us.tc

Maybe twitter could introduce a 'report spam' button, alongside the 'unfollow'.

Come on. This reminds me of the early day of email and the internet (early 90's) when, horrors, people started to advertise their products and services.

The outrage was amazing. The internet would die. It would no longer be pure. I'll leave the internet.

Guess what, the largest firm on the internet, Google, is an ADVERTISING COMPANY.

Twitter is part of the internet. Advertising is part of human life.

You have ads on your:

- Internet pages
- Blogs
- Email (hotmail, yahoo mail, etc)
- Instant Messaging clients

Get used to it.

Shaun Dakin
@EndTheRoboCalls
@IsCool

Adjix

Adjix makes it clear that there is an ad in a tweet and the person Tweeting can control what is advertised.

Here is an example:

Is Obama falling short? http://adjix.com/tv44 Ad: Free $25 Starbucks Card! http://is.gd/nK6d

Guy Kawasaki uses it.

Follow me on twitter - @MohanArun

What "relationships"? Are you seriously building your serious relationships using public twitter service? use private email for that. That shouldbe obvious, because @reply goes to public timeline, something that is a-fault.

Also, may be Magpie can start a @Magpie where if you register yourself with OPTOUT saying
"@Magpie OPTOUT"
then you wont be getting any paid ads frm Magpie from anyone in your follow circle.

This is a flat-out lie. Readwriteweb knows very well that Apple would never advertise in the underhanded way being suggested here. But since readwriteweb is a Microsoft controlled, anti-Apple propaganda site, then lying BS is what you get.

hippiegirljess #Magpie "apple has reburbished iTV's on sale"

What is an iTV??? there is no such product, and you at readwriteweb know it, and it's an immediate clue that something is rotten. The Apple product is AppleTV.

More lying Microsoft propaganda from Readwriteweb.

Money can make it feel dirty, but to really ascertain this, observe specifics.

Twitter is another form of media, and any media will need to rely on advertising to sustain itself, unless the government funds it. You would have found twitter's own ad boxes at the right in twitter web interface.

In this case, the complaint is that the tweets are 'deceptive' as they seem to come from friends and contacts, so it is YOUR friend who decided to make some bucks by signing up for magpie, so whats wrong with that? Doesnt your friend have the right to do so? All this would solve itself, when magpie becomes opt-in advertising, so you wont receive magpie ads if you send a @matpie optout, just like Google personalized network ad optout cookie.

Also, people have a business to promote, and it is hypocrisy when whoever says I want to advertise my business but I wont allow other people to advertise to me. This is just like SMS advertising and email newsletters (CANSPAM act)- you 'opt in' and see ads, if you dont like, you can opt out any time.

Of come on. Facebook includes 'sponsored links' and 'advertising' on YOUR home page. Google places 'contextual' and 'behaviour based' advertising on YOUR Search results. Bloggers, Social Bookmarks, LifeFeeds, etc. carry advertising. So it's OK for Facebook, Google, RedWriteWeb, etc. to make $$$ from YOU but not OK to make money yourself?

What exactly is the problem?
- Your Friends have not tagged these as Ads (OK maybe they should be)
- Your Friends are making more money than you (because they're more popular)
- You still believe the web is FREE (So who pays for the servers and bandwidth you’re using?)
- This service is not being run by Twitter (would this make it more acceptable?)

As more companies join Twitter 'advertising links' will become more frequent. I see no problem with an individual being able to provide these same links and earn something in return. Afterall YOU ‘opt into’ the service and can 'opt out' at any time.

If you don't like what I have to say, STOP FOLLOWING me.

Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/kentbeatty

Follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/kentbeatty

Magpie is worrying and greasy to say the least, but tread carefully with the accusations, please.

What's interesting to me is the language. It's amazing how quickly some advertisers have learned social media phrasing to make these ads fit right into the stream of things. While some agencies still don't get it, Magpie is an example of learning your market before you get into it.

Would I use it or recommend it? Nope. I agree with Mari, I've built a business based on trust and I'm not going to blow their trust with hidden ads. If I support a product or company I will do it openly.

Advertising on Twitter is here to stay,just as it is on blogs and websites.

Removing FatCow from my bookmark list of hosting companies to evaluate.

By doing lal the above, People begin to trust you and value your content, and then when appropriate and relevant, thy may go to your site, and buy something...

I personally would never get involved with Magpie, or any other form of advertising to my followers....

Best

Mark
@markshaw

"It's just like the ppl who complained about advertising on blogs.." and "You have ads on your blog here, hypocrite!"

There is a difference between an ad on a blog/twitter/online and what Magpie is doing. It's wording the tweet like it's the person's opinion on something.

That would be like readwriteweb.com posting a blog post as a review of a product/service, and it's actually written by the company that's selling it, and no disclaimer has been made.

I don't blame companies for trying to get into this "Tweeter/Tweezer... Twacker.... whatever kids are doin these days" I blame the people who sign-up to use it in their tweet stream. Magpie clearly states what will happen when you sign-up. You're selling ur tweets, which is your choice, but they are dishonest, depending on wording.

It takes 1,000 tweets to build your brand on Twitter, and one to ruin it.

If I have a twitter following of vegans and I tweet a Burger King ad, that's spam. If I tweet about a new veggie burger then I'm adding value to the community. And in the bad economic times why shouldn't I get a commission for recommending a product that helps the community? Right now the tech's not there, but when Magpie and their competitors can automate a platform that can do this why would you call it spam?

Have your friends ever recommended a product to you, or sold Avon, Tupperware? When you ask a taxi driver for a nice restaurant do you know he gets a commission for bringing people in? So if a twitter follower offers a product or service that is in line with the community why shouldn't they be paid as well? I think putting food on my family's table by helping my friends is wonderful.

And please remember to shake hands with a flesh and blood human being. It's not possible to be friends with 25,000 people on Twitter.

I request the admin to remove the comments above along with this one. I am communicating with the author via e-mail so i have nothing more to share. Thanks.

I follow companies on Twitter and appreciate the ones that genuinely interact with their followers. The ones paying others to do it simply don't get it - or my attention.

Terrance Charles
http://twitter.com/TerranceCharles

Terrance Charles
http://twitter.com/TerranceCharles

I'm not a fan of the Magpie service and don't use it, but I'd say if the ads are disclosed it would be "more ethical" than a blogger or legacy journalist writing about a company without disclosure of affiliation. That's the real challenge now as many of us "cover" news about companies we many have relationships with.

"Some people love money and use people; some people love people and use money."

I think it's obvious where MagPie people fall on this scale. I also think it's "sh*ting where you eat"

We've had OMFG TWITTER TWITTER TWITTER rammed down our throats *endlessly*, and now the big media is on it, big corps, the small media, the republicans and democrats--even people on it because they are somehow just 'supposed to' be on it--and also OMFG TWITTER TWITTER TWITTER.

Exactly what did people expect, especially when making money is kinda important these days? Don't be so naive and offended, it makes you sound like a grandma. Twitter is not your lawn.

So there are ads on the internet. OMG, what next? Will ministers be asking for donations in Church to save your soul?

The Saints who run twitter are not doing it for community service!

No media is safe from the ad zombies. None, nada, zip. They'd put flashing logos with testimonials on your feces if they could just figure out how.

Don't get me wrong: I think advertising is great. But literally lying ("OMG, I bought and love this product!") is pretty despicable from every angle.

It floors me how people cannot tell the difference between this sort of deception (which tarnishes brands, misleads or annoys readers, and reflects poorly upon the person inserting the ad) and putting ads on a blog. These activities are not even close to the same thing.

Plus, in this economy with most advertisers pulling out of print ads, and moving towards online ads, due to cost, more wonderful new FREE website will pop up all over...FREE for us that is, but will cost advertising money.

Collegiate Chris
Owner
Collegiate Living/>

I am a bit of a Twitter newbie but I do understand that people are sending me to sites to make money. That is the nature of the beast. I don't feel outrage I just move on quickly and are less likely to trust that person again. But that is advertising anyway.

Well, I still have a problem with any company which would willingly allow it's affiliates to do stupid crap in this manner, and not speak out against it. I'm pretty sure these companies made something off this, at least 1 person must have clicked on one of the links, made a purchase, and brought profit to the company and affiliate. I don't want to hear a company say, "It's not my fault."

* I pick and choose every single message to be posted. I only choose those that I actually would say myself.
* I pick the maximum frequency. Right now I have it set to every 10 or more tweets. That doesn't mean it will actually post that often, either, that is the MOST it will post. I'm finding it is much less frequently.

So Magpie is sending a couple of tweets in my name, that I have individually chosen, approved and personally believe myself. How is that different then me tweeting directly? Except it is easier.

I'm spending time putting quality info up on Twitter, and you begrudge me making some coffee money, apparently. As you promote your view on your blog, which has ads running on it ;-) How is that different?

So what is your problem, exactly?

Fred

Let's hope this soon dies out from lack of response.

i thought i was 100% against joining that damned cult before. POS.

Not a single one mentioned this was an ad.

If it were just one or two folks attempting to deceive people then I'd think, hey, maybe the problem isn't Magpie, maybe it's the abuse of their service. Blame the person, not the tool, right?

But when I see (from at least my quick glance) *100%* of the use of this service being deceptive, it suggests to me that the problem is deeper than a few bad apples.

Remember how outraged people were with banner ads, pop-under ads, pop-over ads, flash ads, mouse-over "information" pop-ups? You sound just like those outraged masses. And just like those outraged masses had the choice to visit a website or not, you have the choice to follow tweeters who inline a Magpie ad, or ignore Magpie tweets.

I could really care less either way, and whether someone inlines an ad or not, they get followed for their content not their ads, same as my choice in blogs and websites and everything else.

Take a deep breath, and repeat after me "There's always the delete button. There's always the delete button..."

1. Check profile - hmmm, no avatar, bio, url.
2. % of following vs followed (usually hugely) unbalanced.
3. Tweets - spam spam spam spam spam, one or two inane "pesonal" tweets.
4. Block, report to @spam.

Done!

NB: haven't come across #48 style tweet yet, but that would be OK with me. At least it's transparent.

I currently follow one prolfile which often provides great tweets, but throws in a more than occasional tweet with link direct to their Amazon affiliate. One more and they are gone.

Hate all forms of ads. One you have on top of the page from some sick company called hubspot.com nearly got me. Thought that was part of your website!

I could be dumb! but back in THOSE days banner ads used to have disclosures..

Never going to buy anything from hubspot...

disclosure...?? changes as technology cycle changes.. get it??

vapid, vile, stupid hubspot.....

I'm amazed it took this long.

1. What about when RWW sends a tweet notifying people a new post is up?

2. What about when @mashable sends a tweet thanking it's sponsors?

3. How many people throw link bait to their latest blog post?

4. Are the days forgotten when people were up in arms that people began advertising on their blogs?

5. Who's paying RWW's bills?

Why is no one freaking out about that? I think Magpie is a great service...2 years from now. The Twitterverse isn't ready for it yet and I think it's funny a 3rd party site has figured out a monetization model that Twitter themselves hasn't capitalized on yet. If Magpie's service made RWW the #1 tech blog out there and advertisers were lined up on RWW's doorstep would you be complaining then?

@jasontryfon

my name is Jan, I am the CEO of Magpie & Friends, the company that runs Magpie.

With your permission, I would like to clarify a few things:

1. We offer all our Twitter users the possibility to pre-approve or block our customer's messages on a per-case basis. Thus, even though the messages aren't written by our users themselves, they do represent their personal attitude towards the particular brand or business. Otherwise, they would not have approved them. Our users have a clear choice in whether they agree or disagree with a posted message, and whether or not they want it to be posted.

2. We supply Magpie as a service to Twitterers in order to help them monetize their microblog. This is in fact very similar to traditional media and blogs which often need the sponsors to pay for their writer's excellent work. We also encourage our Twitter users to embed a disclaimer in their Magpie-tweets which denotes them as sponsor messages/advertisement messages. Some users, however, choose to disable this disclaimer. We understand this as a full personal endorsement for the brand or business in question, meaning that the message aligns with the user's personal opinion and taste.

Having said this, I do understand the concerns which you are raising. I also acknowledge that people might not be used to sponsor messages and advertisement on Twitter yet. However, we are exposed to ads in our daily lives on a large scale. It is also commonplace for celebrity actors, sportsmen, etc. to endorse brands or businesses publicly and for money.

Only a decade ago, the privilege of writing, publishing and getting heard belonged to the "big guys" in media, such as publishing houses, newspaper companies, TV stations, etc. Now, Twitter and the Internet in general have empowered the ordinary man to express and publish his own articles, comments, and break news just like them. Magpie gives ordinary people the ability to also earn from sponsor messages -- similar to how the "big guys" have been doing for years. We at Magpie think this is only fair.

Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or comments. Kind regards,

Jan Schulz-Hofen
CEO Magpie & Friends Ltd.

On the flip side, I understand the economy is the way it is and even I've been close to considering painting my car with names of nightclubs or selling my plasma... but I wouldn't risk my audience on Twitter for extra mula. :)

Haha...

Tom Hoehn from Kodak here. I lead Kodak's social media efforts and can tell you that we do not condone or practice the kinds of non-transparent messaging outlined in your article in any form of social media including Twitter.

Your article got my spidey sense tingling and I spent the better part of the weekend tracking down the source to make sure we were on the up and up. Our situation is similar to that outlined by numerous commentors (affiliate) and we have taken steps to ensure people are not misrepresenting our brand.

We have worked very hard to add value to the social media landscape. Jenny Cisney (@KodakCB), a 10 year veteran of Kodak, who tweets on our behalf is regarded as an industry leader. Our CMO, Jeff Hayzlett (@JeffreyHayzlett), also has a large following and is quite active in this space - and, no, we do not use ghost-tweeters.

We love the interactions with our customers, fans, and even our detractors. After all markets are about conversations and we choose to engage. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me.

Take care,
tom @tomhoehn on Twitter, for real ;-)

boxdotnet@solessence Just wanted to reach out and let you know that we do not "buy fake testimonials", nor do we endorse the ads mentioned.about 10 hours ago from TweetDeck in reply to solessence

boxdotnet@solessence These ads are from an affiliate network from Commission Junction. We are working on the matter. Feel free to send us questions.about 10 hours ago from TweetDeck in reply to solessence

boxdotnet@solessence No problem - we keep an eye on tweets about Box, and these magpie tweets have been constant. We hope this changes soon.about 7 hours ago from TweetDeck in reply to solessence

First off: This is my ad as it appeared on @Footballtweet

ad: Visited Wales this Easter? Post your review at WalesCymru.com http://is.gd/sg3b

As you can see I run a regional review website and wanted to target people who had visited the Wales this Easter.

After 3 days this ad has been served 628 times and has recieved 16 clicks, costing me €1.71 (I've set a daily budget of €3 which is not being reached).

The account was easy to set-up and appears to deliver what it promises. My main problem with the service are:
- I couldn't preview the ad
- Payment is in Euros
- Ad targeting is very primative (it uses single keywords to select the Tweeters who carry the ad, which are largely ineffective for targeting the audience I'm after)
- I cannot filter the Tweeters who recieve the ads by Location (so my Ad are seen by people anywhere - most of the clicks came from the US)
- I cannot target Tweeters by geo-tags (this would be ideal)
- Only accounts who have opted in deliver the ads, so I'm relying on them having the followers that I want to target (I have no ideal who their followers are and cannot target specific followers)
- I cannot select the accounts I want to run my ads so have no control of where the ads appear.

There are various problems with this service; but it's also one of the few ways available to me to promote my site to Twitter users, so I'll try it this week and see.

Would you please have a copy editor read these blog posts before flinging them into the blogosphere? Casual usage conventions are to be expected, but this post is frustrating with punctuation errors and an apparent inability to proof sentence composition.

I'm sure this isn't a case; Mr. Kirkpatrick, I don't follow your posts regularly enough to suggest this is anything but a momentary lack of judgment. Holding the title of "Lead Writer" suggests you know very keenly how to write.

Cheers

We heartily inviting to my blog http://funevil.blogspot.com/ Ready to accept Pain of FUN

Can a spammer change their spots? If Magpie does, they have a shot and I'll sign up. If not, good riddance.

Look at the best search engines from one place!

http://searchbooter.com/

Thanks,

Mike

Is it called networking or smoozing. Everyone gets to act superior and 'above it all'.