Starting to agree with you on this.

I have unconfirmed reports that this is Jupiter Drawing Room and Gloo.

It’s Gloo, yes

very persuasive argument matt. unfortunately most people I’ve seen partaking have simply been RT’ing, but now that you mention it I’ll check out the hashtags and have a look at the conversations.

hey Kate,

Lazy users will get rewarded for just RTing, the same way people get rewarded for helping a campaign to go ‘viral’ by sending it to a friend. The opportunity does exist to engage with this campaign and not annoy your followers with RT’s, it just takes a little more work. (using the hastag, following the clues etc..)

It’s annoying when a campaign (that I have no involvement in btw) gets slated so harshly, by ,very obviously, competitors in the same space without real justification.

Maybe I’m completely wrong, but I’m pretty sure that the campaign is scalable enough in the type of interactions it facilitates to allow for a ‘pure’ Twitter entry, as well as the spammy type. It’s up to the user and ultimately, it’s the user that is accountable to their followers.

An Ode to Lolz.

Forgive my spelling, but I’m on my way out and already on my way

So what you’re saying is that we should still blame Marilyn Manson for kids behaving violently?
That makes sense I suppose if we’re going to blame brands for having competitions. The people you follow have annoyed you. And it’s Woolies fault..Sorry, but I just don’t think that’s fair.

The brand isn’t the one RT’ing. If you follow people who are habitually RT’ing in an attempt to win something than that would appear to be the problem. As for the realistic chances of people not unfollowing Woolies after the promotion if they don’t have a decent content strategy, that depends on their plans for later.

..voucher? really, is that where we are?

Life’s not fair Matt. I sincerely hope they send you a voucher. A+ for effort!

I got an email saying that another (and quite true) comment had been added to this page. That comment has obviously been removed. The reason is quite fair, the poster didn’t leave any sort of correct mail or honestly identify themselves. (I’m assuming, as I can’t think of another reason why somebody shouldn’t be able to express themselves as they see fit.)

For the record (if that previous poster is reading), I agree with you, but wish you would have the courage of your convictions to attach your name to your opinion.

It’s a sad day that when an individual expresses an opinion, that could in fact improve upon a brand’s offering, someone like Matthew Visser decides to leverage a poisonous anonymous comment to personally attack that individual.

I hate to break it to you, Matthew, but I’m entitled to my opinion.
You are entitled to disagree with it, but if you’re going to be a bully and attack me personally, then I’m going to object to it, and talk about it.

I hope you find a counsellor who can get you the help you need.

C’mon guys, think what you are saying here:

“Twitter spam. Really? Are you even paying attention? I’ll say it again, you choose who you follow. If you’re following a newsbot, you’re going to get news spam. If you follow a good friend who can’t stop RTing, you’re going to to get retweet spam, but complaining about it is like standing the middle of a freeway asking, “Why do these cars keep hitting me?”

http://www.randsinrepose.com/archives/2009/02/09/a_twitter_decision.html

Alan,, agree re: you choose who you follow,,
And yes, I can block bots and spammers and porn stars, but when people I follow because they had something to say at some point, decide to RT & Win (especially when the more RT & Win = more chances to win) then it becomes spam for me.

Luckily only 1 person seems to be doing that in my list of followers and can be forgiven.

Alex, I think we need to get marketing campaigns specially tailored to us.
We obviously don’t fit in the same category as the few thousands that have entered!

All this justification is rubbish. Saying that it is the lazy option to win this competition is missing the point Matt, it’s still an option. The structure to the competition means that it will always “force” itself into people’s lives. Digital does not work like that. That’s the old-school interruptive advertising model. Read up Ivan Askwith’s article on virii vs gifts.

This is the equivalent of the opt-in vs opt-out digital marketing fiasco of the 90′s, where a definite line was drawn to differentiate spam from invited messages. You cannot force people to look at your content, they need to be suitably engaged to WANT to spread it for the content’s message and not because of the structure of a competion.

I think everyone here seems to have too much time on their hands. It’s simple you choose who you follow so if you don’t want the brand’s messaging in your stream then unfollow them. Its just like email if you think a brand is spamming your inbox you unsubscribe from their mailing list. I think its a case of PMS rather than a constructive debate.

I too have been irritated by this campaign and I can’t resisting giving this discussion my 0.02c. I followed @Woolworth_SA as I’m a loyal customer. As Raoul already pointed out they Auto DMed me back – tacky at best. What made it worse was actual text of the dm “Hi! Thanks 4 following! Keep an eye on us – we have awesum things planned for 2010 Find us on Facebook 2: http://www.facebook.com/woolworthsSA”. I’m 36 for god sakes, I don’t expect “awesum”, “2”, “4” and “;-)” from a mature brand. As Marc Perel from “From the Couch” put it also in response to this DM – “twitter isn’t MXit”.

The other thing that bothered me is that they didn’t follow me back? It’s not that I’m after followers (so much as after a dialog with a brand that I actually like – I’m sure 90% of 10&5’s loyal visitors have read the Cluetrain Manifesto – Social Media is all about a dialog with your client. How am I meant to enter into a dialog if they don’t follow me back?

Sure Woolworths_SA made some other schoolboy errors (not registering the domain, not putting the twitter address on the poster, a flash only site, no mobi site, getting the ranking of the love birds wrong?) but yes they handled those mistakes relatively well. What really got me was that you won points for retweeting [enought discussion about that though]. Noticing that all the people doing the retweeting had 0 followers I couldn’t help but tweet “So @Woolworth_sa if a hundred newbie tweeps with 0 followers retweet in a forest will anyone hear them? #spam #fail #brandminus” [ a bit harsh and clichéd maybe – but I couldn’t resist]. Funny enough that got them following me.

Last point and for me the most disturbing point – I wrote an email to Woolies last year (on the advice on a well respected PR Company) alas, I didn’t get a response but I did somehow end up on their mailing list? Surely this the worst crime of all – non-opted in spam. Tragic.

Woolies, I’ll continue to follow you, I’ll tweet when your biltong goes over R500/kg (you’re nearly there) and I’ll tweet when your queue goes out the door (lakeside Woolies – what is up with that place?). As Raoul said I really do hope this campaign successes I still want to “engage” with you.

Apparently it isn’t okay to just offer problem, so Woolies if you read this (and I’m sure you are) how about an “actual” campaign modelled on something like http://tweetingtoohard.com/ but where people “love tap” the most lovable tweet, just an idea. Far more engaging if you ask me.

hahahhaaaa!!!

This is absolutely rediculous.

Matt Visser is no bully, I give him shit all the time. Just the other day I bullied him to the point he no longer takes my calls.

Your statements are unfounded. Focus on the campaign and not on the Visser.

Hmm, beside the entire RT discussion, has nobody noticed the terrible execution? Does it really not count anymore how it looks? Does Woolworths really think their clients are flying little love birds that want to live in a pastel pink world with extended hearts flying love birds all around? I think the execution is a complete insult from WW to its customers!

I agree with Lyle. You people take advertising far too seriously. You also take Twitter far too seriously.
Neither is real life. So chill.

What do you mean Cuan, not ‘real life’?

Didn’t you know real life is all about commenting on other agency’s clients and brands like (a) you knew more about said brand than the rightful agency who has been working with them for years and of course you could’ve done it so much better if only they were your client and (b) mouthing off on Twitter about ‘how it works’ because you’ve been there a couple of months longer than some other poor asshole who is trying to win a voucher so he can buy some Chuckles for his girlfriend as the recession is now only really starting to bite and a RT-here and RT-there is pretty much the only thing between him and bankruptcy on Valentine’s Day…

This is real. This is life. Right now, right here!

The biggest irritation around this campaign for me (personally) is the fact that Woolies wants me to register for the competition. Why, oh why?! The campaign is based around Twitter and Facebook, so it makes sense that I should simply be able to log in with my Twitter/FB account and Bob’s your uncle. Since I’m the only one who is objecting to registering, it’s probably insignificant. So be it. I just think it could have been much more effective if they made it easier like that.