I'd love to see some clarification from Dick on this statement and/or
a possible change in the TOS. The press has wildly heralded it as the
end of all advertising on Twitter not coming from Promoted Tweets.
Even if this is not true the public perception certain impacts all of
our businessesand if we are to develop with any level of trust
what's stated clearly and publicly is still going to be more important
than internal confirmations.
Look forward to hearing a clearer stance on this.
On May 24, 10:28 pm, Ryan Sarver rsar...@twitter.com wrote:
I want to make sure this part is clear -- this policy change isn't meant to
say that we are going to start policing if the content of something a user
tweets is an ad or not. The policy change affects 3rd party services that
were putting ads in the middle of a timeline.
So if Liz is paid by Reebok to tweet about how much she loves their new
shoes, we are not going to be policing that any more than we were on Friday.
This policy also *does not prohibit* services like Ad.ly that help
facilitate those relationships or even help her post the ads to her timeline
on her behalf.
It *does prohibit* an application from calling out to a service to find an
ad to serve to Liz that will get inserted into the timeline she is viewing.
The language is somewhat nuanced but it sounds like we might need to make
the policy more explicit as a number of people are misinterpreting it.
Let me know if you have more questions.
Ryan
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 12:26 PM, Dewald Pretorius dpr...@gmail.com wrote:
Liz,
You are 100% correct in summarizing the problem. Not only were those
businesses built with the full knowledge of Twitter, Twitter even had
specific rules governing sponsored tweets (had to be clearly marked as
sponsored, etc.).
I'm really baffled by this decision of Twitter, because I don't
understand how they expect to have integrity and trust with developers
while doing this type of stuff.
Right now we are all being pointed to Annotations as the holy grail of
new development. But how do we know that they won't yet again change a
rule in the future that will kill businesses that were built on top of
Annotations?
On May 24, 3:56 pm, Liz nwjersey...@gmail.com wrote:
Peter, I think the problem is that business have been created,
received funding and developed over the past year, with the full
knowledge of Twitter, and this just undercuts destroys them.
I think people can understand the rationale (and the desire for
Twitter to eliminate competition) but this is a policy decision that
should have been made over a year ago. Twitter should have included
this in an earlier terms of service instead of giving an implicit
okay to services like Sponsored Tweets which has turned into a
successful company.
It also seems disingenuous that the blog post says that a guiding
principle of Twitter is that We don't seek to control what users
tweet. And users own their own tweets. and allow adult-oriented
content and photos but for some reason, users can't Tweet ads. That
sounds like control of content to me.
Liz
