I’ve been thinking a lot lately about twitter because, well… that’s what twitter users inevitably end up doing. Twitter is almost infuriatingly great. Infuriating because it doesn’t make sense to anybody when they first discover it. Great because, once you take the leap and start using twitter, it fits into your life so damn well.

Trying to explain what twitter is to a non-techie person is damn near impossible. You end up sounding stupid: “It’s like a weird hybrid Blog/IM/Facebook/Chat program with an arbitrary character limit for every post. You should try it!” They probably won’t. But the thing about twitter is that, once you do start using it, it’s remarkably easy to become utterly obsessed with it.

It happens organically. You sign up for an account. Start following some people. Maybe it’s only something you check a couple of times a day. But, soon enough, it takes hold. And you can’t get away.

I think Tim Bray pretty well nailed twitter earlier this year, when he wrote this:

I think that with Twitter, something important is happening. But I’m having trouble figuring out what.

So here’s twitter: a web application that doesn’t sound very appealing, but whose users are often obsessive about it. An internet milestone that no one can really define.

Does it have a legitimate business use?

This is the question that I’ve been turning around in my head. There are a few places where twitter has already had a sizable impact at the business world. In tech and design circles, it’s become an inseparable part of the conference/trade show experience. Having a dedicated backchannel is incredibly useful, and makes networking a snap.

Further, I’ve seen some stories of people using twitter as a successful marketing tool. (Here’s a good rundown of one example.) It’s a way to directly interact with potential consumers, and join the conversation. If twitter does nothing else, that’s valuable in itself.

Still, though, I can’t help but feel like twitter is still mostly untapped potential for business users. In terms of marketing, communication, promotion and brand, twitter offers something that no other social networking app has been able to before.

Twitter versus Facebook

Brief digression time: A lot of markets are focused on Facebook right now. And Facebook is a huge resource, especially considering its market penetration. But I’d argue that twitter is far more potential-laden. The differences between twitter and facebook are pronounced, especially when it comes to features. (Facebook has a lot of features; twitter has none). But the important differences may seem minor: Facebook is a closed system, twitter is open. Facebook is still very passive (You don’t need to contribute a lot to enjoy it), twitter is active, and requires you to be outspoken. Facebook users are generally either netural or wary of the service, twitter users are passionate.

Small differences, but incredibly important.

What to do with twitter in your business today

If I could tell you exactly how to use twitter as a business tool right now, I’d be in an incredible position. I could make tons of money if I had those answers. But I don’t, unfortunately. The exciting thing about twitter is that it’s all still kind of uncharted territory for business.

I can tell you what NOT to do, though, if you want to experiment with twitter. First, DON’T create an account that is just a feed for your blog. (The only case where it’s okay to do this is if you’re very clear that this is all your twitter feed is. You probably need to have an enormously popular blog to do this.) DON’T go out and follow 1,000 top users you don’t have an interest in, then get mad when they don’t follow you in return. DON’T send messages from the guise of some disembodied ‘company’ — be a real person. And, finally, DON’T expect success overnight.

The last one is key. The thing about twitter is that it’s virtually no risk. It costs nothing to join. It’s very easy to use with no learning curve. And, unlike a blog, you really can’t spend a whole day working on a post. Just dive in. And have fun.

Photo by Carrot Creative. Licensed Under Creative Commons.

I totally get that Flash Video and sites like YouTube make it both easy and bandwidth-affordable for all kinds of sites to offer video content. In most cases, this isn’t a bad thing: the internet was meant to be a multimedia experience with text, images, sound and video. Plus, I waste a lot of time each and every day watching stupid videos off digg and I wouldn’t have it any other way.

But as good as video content can be, sometimes it’s just tacky. Case it point: theweathernetwork.com.

I’ve been checking the Toronto weather all night because they’re predicting more snow tonight. So that red banner across the top was of interest. But while I was expecting to get linked to a news story or data table, instead I was brought to a video.

This is a patently ridiculous use of video online. If I wanted to watch a weather person tell me about the weather at length, I’d turn on the actual Weather Channel. When I visit their web site, I want the information presented to me all at once, so I can read it quickly. When it comes down to pure information delivery, text is faster than video nearly 100% of the time.

Video for the sake of video is a bad idea, and one that indicates that there are still powerful people out there who don’t really understand this whole internet thing yet. Here’s a protip: it’s not just a TV with a keyboard attached to it.

Ed Gottsman at ZDnet writes:

The workplace won’t change because of Gen-Y’s values. It’ll change because of their tools. In particular, social networking tools. Now, if you’re like me you are sick unto death of hearing about MySpace, FaceBook and LinkedIn. But part of the reason they keep coming up is that they’re important.

There’s a bit too much exasperated-old-foginess coming out of this article, but Gottsman makes a good point here:

So one of the most important assets Gen-Y will bring to the workplace is its Facebook account: an enormous “rolodex” of acquaintances–probably larger, more varied and better maintained than those of top management. Enterprises will be well-advised to encourage cultivation of this contact list–in other words, to let their employees “play” on FaceBook–since this activity will serve as a source of new customers and recruits.

While I have mixed feelings on Facebook and its long term prospects (more on that later), there’s definitely something to the idea that Gen Y employees will bring social networking clout to businesses. Already businesses have seen the kind of success a timely link from digg, slashdot and BoingBoing can bring them. My own digg experience has shown that a front page appearance on a weekday during business hours can net a web site some 30,000 pageviews. Considering posting to digg costs $0, it’s hard to think of more effective advertising.

I do think this is an area where Gen Y will have to be smart, though. No matter how much the corporate landscape shifts, no one’s ever going to get hired because they have over 1,000 MySpace or Facebook friends. Especially if your social networking activities are limited to superpokes and Scrabulous. On the other hand, if someone happens to have regular IM or twitter contact with Jason Kottke, waxy or the gang at 37 signals, that’s an immediately valuable thing for business. That’s an employee who has the connections to get you major exposure across the web.

This shouldn’t just be limited to so-called ‘web’ companies, either. This is something that all businesses would do well to keep in mind, especially as more people — and not just the sketchy ‘SEO’ market lurking about these days — come into business with extensive social networking experience and knowledge.

Photo by Aristocrat. Licensed under Creative Commons.

The headline at forbes.com is Mister Softee Buys Cool, referring to yesterday’s announcement that Microsoft is in the process of a hostile takeover of Yahoo! and all their properties.

So, why is this merger/buyout in the works? Simple: It is all about the Facebook Nation. This is apparently the main focus of the Microsoft plan, as they have been slowly moving toward a greater relationship with Facebook for some time. Have you taken notice of the sea change to the look and feel of Microsoft? As a company, it has finally realized that “square corners” is not selling. Microsoft wants desperately to be hip. It owns the desktop, but it doesn’t own the action/nightlife.

Think of a teenager living in his parent’s home. He uses it as a place to flop, eat and wash. He tolerates his parents yet keeps them at a social distance. Once he has his wings, he is out of there. Apple (nasdaq: AAPL – news – people ) has done a good job at capturing the early adoption of many of the Gen-Xers and now Gen-Y is up for grabs. This is the social generation with idealism.

It’s a good point and it throws the spotlight on something really interesting about this deal: Yahoo! wasn’t at the very top of Microsoft’s to-buy list when it comes to ‘hip’ web properties. What they really wanted, and have been angling for for months, is Facebook. But Mark Zuckerberg – worth billions and one year younger than me (dammit!) – wasn’t playing ball: Microsoft ended up only getting a small piece.

There’s no doubting that Microsoft desperately wants to foster a more youth-friendly image, but I’m not sure Yahoo! will do anything to help that. For the most part, Yahoo! is too big to really seem cool. Some of their properties have the right kind of cred: Flickr is definitely cool. Del.icio.us is pretty cool. Even the Fantasy Sports sites have potential. But Yahoo! Finance and News? The search engine itself? The mail program? These things are nowhere near as ‘cool’ as Google’s products. Plus, there’s not really any “Yahoo! Communities” on the level of Facebook, Myspace or even Digg.

Is it a bad deal? Probably not. If anything, it takes out a major third party in the Battle for the Web, leaving this as essentially a two-horse race. (With maybe Newscorp hanging out somewhere, far behind.) But any talk of the Yahoo! buy giving Microsoft more Gen Y appeal seems a little presumptuous.

Photo by Gnal. Licensed under Creative Commons