Bloomberg recently posted an article discussing the down side to marketing via Twitter. In the article a Twitter user of 2-months expresses her frustration with companies contacting her based on what she tweets. As with any social media tool that grows in popularity, marketers and brands set up shop hoping to reach their consumers in their natural environment. After a while the community becomes so flooded with poorly targeted and irrelevant marketing messages that users either flee the community all together, or the site begins putting stern regulations into place. In the case of Twitter, I think it’s important to highlight the difference between marketing and spam, which is something the mentioned article doesn’t do a great job of distinguishing. There is no doubt that Twitter spam (“twam”) has been an issue in recent months. Flooding consumers with messages unrelated to their needs or interests, mass auto following, hacking into accounts, etc. is a practice no reputable marketing agency should ever support. On the other hand, joining conversations where your service or brand is welcome or relevant is something I think we all agree can be an effective tactic.

The Twitter user highlighted in the Bloomberg article is upset that Home Depot contacted her after she told her followers that she was going to buy some paint at either Home Depot, Lowe’s, or Ace Hardware. The brand responded with a quick note wishing her luck and asking her if she needed any help. Maybe I’m having a hard time separating “Christy the consumer” from “Christy the marketer” – but what’s the big deal? I think the consumer should feel empowered by this. They are now being heard and have influence on how these brands operate. It was her perfect opportunity to respond and say ‘what can you do for me?’ As long as a line isn’t crossed into spamming territory (i.e. Home Depot “tweeting” or direct messaging her daily about hardware specials, sending her info on grand openings at store’s out of state, sending her countless customer surveys), I think customers should be excited by this new found authority and embrace it with open arms – or retreat to a deep dark cave with no Wi-Fi.

Bottom line – marketing can quickly turn into spam based on a single, poorly placed message, while spam on the other hand can never turn into marketing.

In his presentation, Plouffe shared some simple, yet brilliant, lessons that all marketers should consider:

• Reach people in every way possible. These days, people receive information in many different ways and they don’t always overlap. Therefore, the campaign “tried to meet people where they live and not make any one communication [medium] superior to another.”

• Have a consistent message. It’s important to keep a balance between inspiring creativity (user-generated content) and making sure your message is maintained.

• Use people as your messengers and validators. The Obama team armed and empowered individuals to spread his message. As Jalali Hartman, Yovia.com CEO, wrote in his paper ‘Obamanomics,’ “The campaign was not successful simply because it got a lot of people out to vote. It was successful because it got a lot of people out getting others to vote.”

• Have a lot of information. There is no such thing as too much data. The Obama campaign provided people with information constantly and consistently in multiple formats through various channels. Most of all, they were transparent and honest, building a trust and giving people the power to make their own informed decisions.

• Have as much data on your customers. Pay attention to the audience you’re trying to reach and diversify the media and the message based on where they are and what’s important to them. After all, not everyone visits the same websites or watches the same programs. And they’re not all interested in the same issues.

• Communicate with them… a lot. Treat it as a relationship with open two-way communication. Talk WITH your audience, not AT them. Plouffe says his team received amazing feedback that allowed them to better understand barriers and how people receive information and helped them make improvements during the campaign.

There was a moment during the meeting when Obama addressed the AIG bonus debacle and said the words, “Listen, I’ll take responsibility; I’m the president” to which the room erupted into… applause?

That’s right. Applause. Why? It’s not that people are excited about the fact that a bunch of fat cats are getting huge bonuses – that is for certain. No one is sitting there going, “Great job, Obama. You did amazing work on this one. We love how much of our money your administration squanders on rich people that screwed us in the first place.” No. People are PISSED. And they should be. So what to do?

Deny deny deny? Have your press secretary give non-answers at an impersonal podium? No. The only possible salve for this kind of unrestrained outrage is to go directly to the people, speak directly to the people, and take responsibility. This country is so weary of years of excuses, double speak and hypocrisy. We want honesty, authenticity and above all for someone to step up and say, “Hey, this isn’t right. I might have screwed up here. I take responsibility, and I’m taking steps to make it better.” And that is exactly what Obama did.

If you can do that and you can mean it and you can work toward solutions, you can win back the hearts and minds of a whole lot of people. Perfection is not expected. Accountability and frank communication, however, seem non-negotiable. He could have stayed quiet. He could have stayed in DC and dealt with pushing his policies forward, working within the bubble where the work gets done and decisions get made.

But he didn’t. He chose to go to the people. Because it is important to speak to your people.

This doesn’t just go for our president. This extends to every business, every brand, every website, every entity that is providing a service or value to consumers. More than fifty-five percent of consumers have stated that they want brands to interact with them. Your consumers would like a quick chat, won’t you sit down?

I stumbled upon this blog post about many companies being deathly afraid of negative blog coverage. As I spend the majority of time speaking to clients, I can vouch that this fear is very real. Negativity freaks people out. Look, no one likes to be publicly lambasted, particularly not profit-seeking entities that have a lot to lose.

I get it. No one wants their ugly warts out there for everyone to see. But unless you are an absolutely flawless business that never ever makes any mistakes, someone is going to call you out. Actually, even if you are flawless, someone will call you out anyway – they will make it up if they have to.

The truth of the matter is, trying to squash negative feedback, or pretending it doesn’t exist or (god forbid) litigating (!!) is not only not the answer, it is the waste of a fantastic opportunity to engage with your consumers. Social Media is giving us a gift – the gift of answering consumers directly and publicly. Without having to call town meetings.

Those that speak negatively about you are simply inviting you to get in the sandbox and play.

So play. Learn the rules of the game please… but play.

This is the opportunity to gain a new customer, win an old one back, or at the very least show the rest of the people watching that your brand hears, takes responsibility and cares. It can’t be overstated how important that is to the health of the brand-consumer relationship and how far that goes in generating positive word-of-mouth.

Jump in. It’s not that scary. It’s not like it’s $165 million of taxpayers’ hard earned dollars going to the undeserving. If he can do it, so can you.