Could a bot Twitter?
Image via Wikipedia
Can software be social?
What if a big company decided to make a Twitter feed of every single brand that existed under its umbrella. Lets say it was P&G, for argument’s sake (they aren’t a client in any way).
Now lets say they grabbed a feed for every brand, and even the sub brands. So Tide got a Twitter feed and so did Tide with bleach. They would have a lot of Twitter feeds. But then, they would also have a lot of news about P&G, about updates, about blog posts. What if they could invent a reader (a sort of google spider-like thing ) that scrolled brand/news RSS feeds looking for things that were 140 characters or less to Tweet about?
In theory, it could work. Code could be written that would find 140 strings of thoughts that had certain key words that could be updated weekly, that could result in Twitter feeds.
But would it work in practice? Would it be recognizable as a bot? I don’t know the answer. I think on Twitter, especially, it would be harder to recognize a bot. The language of Twitter is the language of text messaging — with some twists. The limitations of text messaging were laziness. BRB is used for be right back because it’s easier to type. On Twitter, the limitation is that finite number of characters. So instead of the laziness, we have a focus. And machines can focus really well. They can find strings of 140 characters that can work as Tweets.
And the language does get a little machine-like. “My blog post.” “Hired new person at [company].” “Tide used to get stain out.”
Without the need to use ‘is’, or ‘that’, or other words that add conversation to the tone, Tweets sound a little machine-like already. Maybe enough that a bot could pretend to be a person for brands?
FYI: I’m writing this blog post using Zemanta. The image is suggested and the links below are as well.
- Plurk is not twitter [via Zemanta]
- Reading Twitter links more than feed reader links [via Zemanta]
- Why Write When You Can Twitter? [via Zemanta]