This Is Not A Sponsored Conversation

Seeking Trust and Transparency In A Comps For Tweets Stripscape

Posted by Chuckmonster

This is Not A Sponsored Conversation

For the information addict, Twitter is like shooting the purest form of heroin. For those who like actual content, thought and debate Twitter can be the most annoying thing in the universe. I love the friendships formed by following strangers with similar interests, other times I wish I could get back all the time I've wasted drowning in a sea of re-tweets for the occasional piece of info gold. Sometimes, I contemplate pulling the plug on this Twitter thing altogether. For me, the key to successful twittering is limiting the number of people you follow to solid thinkers in the subject areas that tickle your boopsie. Overtweeters and regurgitweeters are promptly given the boot.

A month ago, I started working on a feature length article about how casinos use Twitter as a marketing tool. Research for the story has required reading a blizzard of 140 character posts from a wide ranging cast of characters in the Las Vegas Twittersphere. Ewww.

The crux : y'know that voice that follows you around the hotel & casino? The one that describes luxurious shopping when you are riding up an escalator? Or the one that mentions juicy steaks when riding in elevators? Or maybe the one that tells you about all the exciting shows while riding on people movers? Those guys and gals are casino marketing... now - thanks to Twitter - they can listen in to the snarky conversations you are having with friends and will occasionally @ you back if you press the right elevator buttons.

Don't be fooled, their job isn't to help you have a good time, but instead to convince you to have a good time - i.e. spend money - at their property. If MGM Mirage's @vegasconcierge was a true Vegas Concierge and actually followed people who they follow, they would've seen my tweet about finding pubes in my room at the Mirage and had it taken care of with a flurry of direct messages and calls to hotel management. Despite their friendly demeanor and occasionally personal attention, you must remember that these folks are not your friends, they are advertisers invited into your social stream. Friends don't recommend Criss Angel's BeLIEve.

Social media - Twitter, Facebook and to a lesser degree, Digg - are the hubs of what professionals call "word of mouth marketing." Here, traditional advertising models don't work, so marketers have developed ways to get users to discuss and/or mention their products repeatedly in their tweets/status updates and postings, always in a positive light. One method marketers use to start conversations is by offering free products, goods and services to "social media influencers" in exchange for their facilitating word of mouth marketing on the companies' behalf. The company could be anything : Beer Garden, Dairy Queen, an artist/musician, TV show or - in our case - a casino resort.




     Add To Itinerary



Advertisement



Comments & Discussion:

There's no way slimy guys will ever start disclosing if they're not required to. The reason the big corps give them free kitchen leftovers is because their 'reviews' are passed off as genuine and unsolicited. If they started disclosing people wouldn't trust them, or just tune them out, and the casinos wouldn't see any value in them anymore because there's no more deception. It's not in their interest to disclose.

They're just being deceptive assholes, plain and simple. Worst than douchebags.

I grow weary of the twitter thing as well. I really only seem to use it a lot when I am in Vegas. Like everything else on the internets twitter is flooded with porn and spam (mmmmm spam). I am currently taking inventory of who I follow and will get it down to a select few so it is easier to manage. Oh and if any casinos want to throw me free stuff in return for my positive tweets I am open to offers :)

I don't think I get it. What difference does it make, really, whether a Twitter marketing account gave you a comp to a restaurant or the casino did? Does it really influence that much? Most of the restaurant workers you are interacting with, probably, are not aware your meal is free. Likewise, the casino does not want everyone else in the room to be aware that some people are eating for free.

I mentioned John Curtas' blog once or twice in the past few weeks, and here's a good example of what I mean. Sometimes he pays for his meal, sometimes it's comped, and he writes down whether or not that was the case, but does that really influence the quality of the meal? Anyone can know what he looks like, his photo is right there on the page, and in some reviews (when he's paid, even) he has mentioned having to discern when he's being buttered up for being a reviewer.

I could not recognize "24k" or "VegasBill" if I walked past them. If they walked up to me I probably would not know to give them better service unless a supervisor handed me their photos beforehand and said "make sure these guys are taken care of."

A reviewer eating a comped meal may not be able to discern quality for price (though that's not always the case, looking at my receipt I figured the actual $12 price of my "free" chicken sandwich at Stratta was better taste for money than my usual plonking of 20 smackers at the entryway to the Bellagio Buffet, taxes and tips not included.)

Basically bad food does not magically taste good when it's free, unless the person tasting is a true sucker. In the end, you are dealing with an entity that is arbitrarily giving out all kinds of valued items away for free for various reasons, from guest loyalty to sucking up the twitterati. You have to understand that everyone from the Conde-Nast reviewer to lowly ol' VT is getting at least a little bit more than Bob From North Dakota, and figure out who you trust however you see fit.

Mini-

It does matter, yes.

The casino is comping customers because otherwise they'd go across the street. How many of them hop on Twitter or Facebook and extoll the virtues of said cuisine? A few but not many.

As for the Twitterers, you're assuming that the restaurant staff doesn't know they're coming. In the case of a well orchestrated marketing campaign, you'd be wrong and they would absolutely get a call from the marketing department saying XYZ person is coming in, make sure they have a good time.

Beyond that, some people in this game get addicted to 'free stuff'. They can't say know - they want more. The key to getting more of it is to make the givers happy - that often means good reviews. I'm not tagging anyone specific with this, I'm speaking in the abstract but I know for a fact this happens all the time, every day. It shouldn't be a surprise.

For me, the key to this is disclosure. Readers can do with it what they may but if I am going to review something and I get it for free, I need to be honest with my readers and tell them that. It's about establishing trust and a track record, which is why (many) people will trust the New York Times when they quote 'anonymous sources' but would be skeptical of the 'Pequoima Free Press' and probably should be.

And here I've been giving myself away for free. I feel like such a slut.

Outstanding stuff Chuck, and right on the money. I've definitely noticed it on Twitter and to a certain degree blogs and sites (more outside of Vegas then in). Journalism maybe bashed regularly for it's personal views and shoddy stories, but there is something to be said for journalistic standards and integrity, that's getting loss in Web 2.0

Don't tweet, don't facebook, don't myspace. I only VT. Usually when I look for reviews about anything, I look for the bad ones and try to discern whether the reviewer was being overly critical or if I would have cared about the same situation. For example, I tend to find that many reviewers complain about expensive restaurants simply because they are expensive.

"For me, the key to this is disclosure. Readers can do with it what they may but if I am going to review something and I get it for free, I need to be honest with my readers and tell them that. It's about establishing trust and a track record, which is why (many) people will trust the New York Times when they quote 'anonymous sources' but would be skeptical of the 'Pequoima Free Press' and probably should be."

While I don't Tweet, I appreciate your line of thinking. There is no reason why a casino (or any business for that matter) should think of reviewers and media as a marketing tool. I do facebook to a small degree, and find it not a genuine "social networking" aid. Too many ads, weird apps, and overall clutter. Luckily I "keep it real" and haven't joined any groups or added on too many apps.

While Twitter may avoid the clutter, I assumed there would still be crap I would have to deal with, and I guess I wasn't far off! Thanks! great article!

Hunter is obviously correct: Believe me... they know when a media comp is coming. No waits, few lines, best seats.

Here's my thoughts:

1. Most of the time, a Vegas experience is going to be pretty good. I've only had to kill two show reviews in the last three years simply because the show sucked. (No, I'm not going to say which ones they were). But... we approach reviews differently: We aren't trying to be a theatre critic. Almost every Vegas show has some appeal to a certain audience. I'm interested in making sure that people end up at a show they will enjoy. So, we craft our reviews to drive those people to a show, and others away from it.

We do take the media comps (saves me from paying for the tickets as I already have to pay the writer) but we rarely gush about a show or trash it. Just the facts, ma'am.

2. People following Twitter streams can figure out pretty quickly what is up. The handful of people who follow 24k and VegasBill who actually read their stuff (best educated estimate based on their TwipPic views is that only a few hundred of their followers actually are reading their tweets) are those who are wrapped up in the lifestyle and are living vicariously. These people want a kick-ass story they can ride along with, not some review of how the salad somewhere had a bug in it.

I see nothing wrong with those guys delivering that story. I think they are going to be up the creek without the paddle (and cut off) when the resorts realize how small their reach is. But that is their problem, not mine.

3. Where do you draw the line with a sponsored tweet? When we note a new concert and tweet the link to our tickets page, am I going to have to note it as sponsored? Or if I (or someone in the mainstream media) writes a matter-of-fact article about something where we went to the VIP opening, is that sponsored?

Twitter is turning out to be a great social tool, but not the most relevant business tool. (Recent study I read noted that over 50% of businesses said that Tweeting did not bring positive ROI). And with bloggers, if the blogger sends readers up a bad path, they will lose those readers. So, this whole thing will be pretty self-cleansing.