https://twitter.com/crazyfoo/status/811331557608652800
AKA outside of Dorsey, who is a split / shared CEO, who is in charge of Twitter?
https://twitter.com/crazyfoo/status/811331557608652800
AKA outside of Dorsey, who is a split / shared CEO, who is in charge of Twitter?
The head of product is Keith Coleman, who was preceded by Edward Ho (interim, now also (interim?) head of engineering) and preceded by Jeff Siebert (both of whom are still at the company).
On the other hand, losing this many execs in this short of time almost never bodes well, which means their stock price is going to tumble even further without something drastic happening soon.
Because advertising on Facebook and Google pays off.
Twitter, afaik, has struggled to be a relevant ad platform.
Now, if you want to talk about the $2.5B expense line....
Off the top of my head:
Twitter App- Web, IOS, Android, Other
Twitter API
Twitter Firehose
Twitter Advertising
Twitter Analytics
Edit: Twitter's bylaws suggest that a VP is a company officer.
2 data points from other industries, based on LinkedIn:
1) Ogilvy & Mather: 7,289 employees, 188 with Vice President in the title.
2) Johnson & Johnson: 63,072 employees, 1,154 with Vice President in the title.
3) Microsoft: 129,445 employees, 2,514 with Vice President in the title.
I think Vice President doesn't mean as much as it used to. :-)
seems to be matching the pacing of a graphic novel.
I can't be the only person who sees this potential. Come on, Twitter, build this out... I'll even let you hire me to work on it. :)
1) Making it easier to compose Tweetstorms (third-party services like WriteRack exist, but it would be nice to have official support).
2) Enhancing the display of Tweetstorms to make them easier to follow. Right now, the UI for viewing Tweet replies is the same regardless of who's replying to who. Twitter could make it so that a person's replies to themselves (the building blocks of a Tweetstorm) have a unique look-and-feel compared to replies from followers. This would emphasize the Tweetstorm as a distinct type of posting, rather than something jury-rigged out of self-replies.
3) Not Tweetstorm specific, but make it easier to have and follow branched conversations. Sites like Reddit have this down already, while Facebook and Twitter seem reluctant to let anything go beyond one level down. Let people branch! It would actually make things easier to follow, and it would also allow for something (sort of) novel: branched Tweetstorms! Linear text is so 20th century! :)
The timeline thing is a real(ish) problem that can be solved with UI, in a similar way how they show conversations inline (automatically collapse them)
Here's this tweetstorm visualized with the tool: https://s3.amazonaws.com/aws-website-staticfiles-25g9k/tvp.h...
Or maybe the tweet storm is always the left most branch and I just didn't realise that? :)
In any case super cool stuff!
Otherwise, this pic will give you a good idea of the changes Twitter is making to the tweet structure...
http://www.insider.gr/sites/default/files/57e01f4edd08956b5e...
This is a bit ridiculous. Not trying to demean your product, but it shouldn't be necessary to have it.
So, imagine your timeline is a regular, vertical stream. But any tweet could have paging on the horizontal axis, and you'd hit next or swipe to continue reading. Anyone browsing could read the opening tweet and ignore the rest if they wanted. Subsequent tweets within the first could have a video, image gallery, etc. Analytics would show the writer how many people delved how far into the content.
So, for a sports story, some people might scroll past, or read the first couple of sentences, but a strong fan would read every detail down through the analysis and stats.
Not sure why they haven't tried this. They could supplant some news that currently exists as links outside of the app.
Considering really the only people on Twitter is just Media people...
(Exception I suppose is the live tweetstorm, where someone is just getting on their soapbox)
I feel great!!
But note that OoTheNigerian's comment eventually became upvoted (hugely upvoted in fact). That community correction often happens when comments are unfairly downvoted—but it takes a little while.
I didn't see the comments that you erased, but based on many things you've posted in the past, I'm sure they were in good faith and driven by concern for the quality of HN, which is something we appreciate even in the rare case of a misfire.
Actually, since you're queuing up all the tweets to post them in one go, it should be feasible to add the out-of count to every tweet in the storm! That would be neat. But the last tweet should have it by convention.
Since characters are scarce in a tweet, we tried to reduce the number of non-critical text.
I think we can make the numbering type (x/y) an option.
"Twitter is stronger because w#oneteamneteam" != "Twitter is stronger because we are #oneteam"
Or is that my browser?
I like the term storm-view. I'm stealing it. :D
I can't understand how he was vp product on a social network.
I think that term describes most of those companies well, as it incorporates their business model. They just vary in what kind of content or service they offer with their ads.
I dont think it's unfair to call a business what it is -- just like we do with farms or investment firms, though they greatly differ in how they go about that business model.
Why are we making everything a question?
I'd still suggest that, even though twitter obviously needs advertisers, someone with a deep understanding of users and how they use twitter would lead to more user growth / more engaged users. Which is probably the thing twitter needs most.
Maybe they shouldn't try to grow absolute user numbers and instead focus on being a publishing platform for influencers (keep in mind that lots of people who aren't Twitter users see popular tweets on other platforms). Then they could focus on providing great advertising and targeting for companies that want to reach influencers.
At the end of the day Twitter's customers are advertisers. It seems like they are trying to sell these customers a way to reach a mass market audience. Maybe they should play to their unique advantage and focus on selling influencers' and/or business decision-makers' attention.
It's a good way to control the quality of output, but it isn't a good way to make mega millions, as these big companies and influencers only have so much advertising budget to go round.
Consider also for someone like Trump or a Kardashian, the ability to reach 17.6M followers (and however many more through retweets + national news) for free with no filtering is a huge draw. It's hard to get them to pay for what they have already. Start to introduce features (as Facebook did) that make it more difficult for people to see tweets, and both the end consumers and the influencers themselves will revolt.
Focus less on absolute user numbers and the quality of the product declines (you have less data to train your targeting algorithms on), and the site as a whole becomes less of a draw for influencers too.
Not saying T shouldn't offer 'Premium' content to media companies, but going all in on large advertisers seems like a route to the poorhouse.