Pretty comprehensive post on Mashable about the Top 40 brands tweeting and the people behind them.
There are apparently only 2 brands that are unaccounted for i.e. no individual person is fessing up to being the brains and good looks behind them: Burger King and Popeye's - although it appears this is by choice (as opposed to a rogue effort)
Also interesting is that only 2 of the brands have actual "people" (humans if you will) as faces of/for the brand: Dell and Ford. To be clear, I'm reffering to their names as part/whole of their Twitter ID's. Frank Eliason for example, is very much attached to Comcast in the form of Comcastcares.
With regards to the former, I'm not sure I'd completely agree with putting up Richard Binhammer as the poster child (although he has done a great job doing so) - as you'll see, there are plenty of Dell related Twitter accounts, although admittedly Richard's is the only authentic/human voice versus aggregated feeds and/or headlines.
With regards to the latter, the name/face both belong to Scott Monty, former crayonista. There appear to be no other Ford-related tweetfeeds. This begs the question, especially in this day and age of personal branding and branding transformation: which approach is better? Scott is clearly 1 out of 40, which makes him an outlier or exception to the norm. Should the rest follow suit or should Scott detach himself from the brand and replace his name with something corporate/generic like Ford, FordTweets or FordMotor(s)? I own the latter two (kidding), whereas I'm sure Jason Ford would not say no to a healthy check or new car from Ford in exchange for his Twitter ID.
Let's take this discussion up on Twitter, shall we? I'm @jaffejuice of course (or should I say @crayoncares or @josephAtCrayon?)
Recent Comments