P.S. I know Todd and Shea may not have written anything with malicious intent, but all we have to go on is how they came across, and they came across as rather mean.

P.P.S. I also know Todd and Shea aren’t belly-aching over having lost any followers.

Other than that, I will let people connect or disconnect my dots for me. Don’t really feel like getting into it. And my sense is that most people won’t mind my silence.

All–
And, BTW, I will be on twitter, just as soon as I graduate from Todd’s School of Modern Social Media. SO WATCH OUT FOR A VIRTUAL MAMMARY/TESTICLE PUNCH

Fake Josh, OUT!
[drops mic]

Josh, you’re a wind-up merchant. If you cared for the English vernacular, you’d at least understand what it was you were posting such poisoned comments on. Since you don’t, your point of view is worthless, and as others have pointed out, your comments smack more of personal vendetta than anything worthwhile. If you genuinely don’t have a Twitter account, then your view means as much as a thatched hen. Tremendous work on looking like a prize cockend — that’s not good English, by the way — all cocks have an end. But… well, you know.

Here’s the thing — so many people jump on any sort of bandwagon to sell their snake oil; Shea believed that’s what Todd was suggesting, and because nobody bothered to clarify the point, so on it went. Neither side did very well in putting the matter to bed, and there was some awfully petty behaviour, however it’s all resolved now.

Dustin — you’re right, and that’s sort of the point. If folk appear to capitalise on social media and present themselves as some sort of guru, they deserve nothing short of a kick in the testicles / vagina (see, right on there with the equal rights, sisters). Todd isn’t doing anything of the sort, but I don’t think he actually pointed that out, leaving the whole ambiguous sorry mess to play out to the point we’ve now reached.

It’s all done now, so let’s have less of the idiots like Josh and move on.

A few words to everyone else: Shea never personally attacked anyone yet people have been making personal attacks on her all day. It’s unfortunate. At the end of the day though, your opinions of her do not matter. They are irrelevant to the facts. Shea is a intelligent, successful, creative woman who has way more followers than those who teach these classes anyway.

For the future might I suggest a cup for protection. Or maybe a sense of humor.

Todd:
After reading all of the back-and-forth today, and much thought on the issue (if it’s really an issue), I’ve changed/refined my opinion on “social media experts”. I have to admit that I have used the phrase “social media douchebag” many, many times before. I think that the reason for this is simple: I’m jealous.
Personally, I believe that I am just as absorbed into social media as any of the “experts” out there. I try out new software, services, and web sites before they become public. I stay up to date on the latest trends. I know the internet inside and out, and I feel that makes me an “expert”. Yet, I can’t call myself one, simply because I don’t work for in marketing.

I also know that many jobs and responsibilities of social media experts these days are very new jobs, and many companies don’t know how to handle them. Many businesses are turning to marketing companies to manage their social media, and I don’t think that this is what they should be doing. I have my own thoughts and plans on how businesses should instead handle their social media, but I honestly don’t want to discuss that. Mostly because at times I’m not a very good debater, and you have much more experience and qualifications on these issues than I do. I would probably lose any argument there, and I’m fine with that. I still feel that my opinions are right.

Long story short: it’s frustrating to see social media “experts” getting all the credit for “pioneering” the way that businesses and individuals use services like Twitter, Facebook, and blogs. And frankly, I find it annoying at times to see “experts” teaching people (and charging to do so) how they should be using the services. Especially Twitter.

The world of social media has never been easier to get into (see: grandmas on Facebook, parents on Twitter, etc). I don’t think that anyone needs help getting up and running on Twitter or Facebook.

Brainstorming for marketing ideas and publicity stunts to perform on Twitter is one thing. Teaching a class on how, exactly, to respond to the question “What are you doing?” is entirely another.

Hopefully I presented my point of view in a way that makes sense and is even valid.

Peace.

I would also like to point out the fact that Shea mentions she is (among other things) a “dating columnist for Naked City Magazine” on her rebuttal to someone’s rebuttal above. I have stopped reading this magazine long ago, and have stated several times publicly that I personally feel the contributors of this rag should be lined up and punched in the balls. Repeatedly. (If you don’t live in Wichita, you can get a feel for the content and style of this magazine here: http://www.ncbeat.com/ )

I really don’t want to comment about the matter at hand (Suffice it to say I don’t have a Twitter account, but I would if I owned a business or wanted to market a product. And I think a lot of people don’t do this that should, so Todd seems justified in spreading the word.)

What I do want to comment on is the reluctance of Shea to engage in any kind of meaningful dialogue with Todd regarding Twitter pedagogy. It seems to me that the reason both for Todd’s frustration and Shea’s reticence is the fact that, in this instance, these two people are using the same medium for quite different purposes (or are “on two different pages,” as Shea notes later on). Just look at their respective “tweets”:
Shea’s language is permeated with cliche: “respect[fully] disagree,” “see eye to eye,” “panties in a wad,” “the end,” and even “douchebag.” This seems appropriate when you consider the fact that she never actually says anything. So what is her purpose? I don’t actually know. Even in her post to this blog she is equivocal: “I’m sorry that you took this so personally and while I appreciate your attempts to “call me out,” it certainly hasn’t changed my opinion (which, to me, is part of what makes social media so interesting — following people who have different viewpoints).”

Her opinion is unchanged, certainly. But do we ever know what it is? Or (as Todd was trying to understand) do we know why she holds this opinion?

Todd’s language reflects the fact that he is attempting to dialogue, rather than Tweet from a proverbial soapbox. The key point in the conversation is Todd’s question, “What’s the difference? I’d tell my clients the same thing I’d tell my students…”

Suffice it to say, if I were looking to establish a dialogue with a customer, I would want to learn Twitter (or whatever else) from Todd. If I was interested in selling myself (“Shea may not be selling anything specific in her tweets, but she’s always selling herself”) or “gain[ing] a handful of interesting new followers,” then I would be glib and cute and edgy.

“[P]eople are haunted by the idea from the intellectual heights that life is, in reality, absurd. Thus the only acceptable relief is to be cute or clever.…The only sincerity bearable is clever insincerity.“
– Dallas Willard

To me, this whole debate is really about marketing approaches and what is at back of them.