<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Updating both Facebook and Twitter with the same status?  You&#8217;re probably doing it wrong!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://johndschultz.com/updating-both-facebook-and-twitter-with-the-same-status-youre-probably-doing-it-wrong/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://johndschultz.com/updating-both-facebook-and-twitter-with-the-same-status-youre-probably-doing-it-wrong/</link>
	<description>auctioneer, runner, sports fan</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 27 Mar 2011 19:16:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://johndschultz.com/updating-both-facebook-and-twitter-with-the-same-status-youre-probably-doing-it-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-2170</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Feb 2010 20:02:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://johndschultz.com/?p=853#comment-2170</guid>
		<description>The more I think about it, the more I&#039;m being convinced about posting different information to both sites... Although, I think some messages can be cross posted w/o changes.

I&#039;m starting to give more insight, and commentary to our Facebook followers, as compared to our Twitter followers.  The most information is given to our web users, then our email users, followed by Facebook and then Twitter.

The frequency of updates flows the other direction.  First Twitter, then Facebook, then emails, and then our website.  In many ways, it&#039;s all inter-connected and used together makes for a fantastic information distribution system!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The more I think about it, the more I&#8217;m being convinced about posting different information to both sites&#8230; Although, I think some messages can be cross posted w/o changes.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m starting to give more insight, and commentary to our Facebook followers, as compared to our Twitter followers.  The most information is given to our web users, then our email users, followed by Facebook and then Twitter.</p>
<p>The frequency of updates flows the other direction.  First Twitter, then Facebook, then emails, and then our website.  In many ways, it&#8217;s all inter-connected and used together makes for a fantastic information distribution system!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan George</title>
		<link>http://johndschultz.com/updating-both-facebook-and-twitter-with-the-same-status-youre-probably-doing-it-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-2153</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan George</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2010 19:10:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://johndschultz.com/?p=853#comment-2153</guid>
		<description>My Twitter and Facebook audiences and personae are too dissimilar to use verbatim status updates.

Since almost everybody is one either Twitter or Facebook, I don&#039;t understand why you&#039;d spawn your feed to lots of other sites without niche business needs requiring it.

Traffas is right, though: if you&#039;re going to use one platform to talk to others, Twitter is probably the best primary launching pad.  My company Facebook page and personal LinkedIn page automatically sync-tweet.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My Twitter and Facebook audiences and personae are too dissimilar to use verbatim status updates.</p>
<p>Since almost everybody is one either Twitter or Facebook, I don&#8217;t understand why you&#8217;d spawn your feed to lots of other sites without niche business needs requiring it.</p>
<p>Traffas is right, though: if you&#8217;re going to use one platform to talk to others, Twitter is probably the best primary launching pad.  My company Facebook page and personal LinkedIn page automatically sync-tweet.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://johndschultz.com/updating-both-facebook-and-twitter-with-the-same-status-youre-probably-doing-it-wrong/comment-page-1/#comment-1943</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 16:47:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://johndschultz.com/?p=853#comment-1943</guid>
		<description>@aaron, excellent points! Although for me, TweetDeck has become the launching pad to the other social media sites.

@carl, interesting points.  I mostly agree with you, except that I strongly believe Twitter is just as good, and, I think, better for conversations and building relationships.  I often am involved in conversations about various items on Twitter with a wide variety of individuals who I&#039;ve built relationships with online, and turned into real world relationships.

I believe it&#039;s more of how you use each service.  If you&#039;re just broadcasting targeted messages on Twitter, you&#039;re spot on, and you&#039;ll not have conversations or build relationships.  However, if you&#039;re being social, you&#039;ll have conversations and build relationships.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@aaron, excellent points! Although for me, TweetDeck has become the launching pad to the other social media sites.</p>
<p>@carl, interesting points.  I mostly agree with you, except that I strongly believe Twitter is just as good, and, I think, better for conversations and building relationships.  I often am involved in conversations about various items on Twitter with a wide variety of individuals who I&#8217;ve built relationships with online, and turned into real world relationships.</p>
<p>I believe it&#8217;s more of how you use each service.  If you&#8217;re just broadcasting targeted messages on Twitter, you&#8217;re spot on, and you&#8217;ll not have conversations or build relationships.  However, if you&#8217;re being social, you&#8217;ll have conversations and build relationships.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

