Nice, Arik!

We've talked before about how companies can help themselves by tying their products/services to an experience - using emotion to help the selling process. This is where I think Twitter can really help a company succeed.

Any company out there can engage followers on Twitter and enhance their consumers' experience with the brand. But this could be especially helpful for companies whose products/services are less "sexy" or don't lend themselves as well to an "experience." Having someone come across Twitter in a human way, while still sending out relevant information on the company and the industry it plays in, can be a huge asset to a company.

Of course, the key is not bombarding the follower with a sales pitch and "following the rules," as you've noted several times. The more human and real the interaction, the more authentic the experience the follower will have and the better the brand will resonate.

@JasonSprenger

Another quality post, Arik.

Two that I enjoy 1)the Molson crew 2)RichardatDell.

The Molson crew - @MolsonFerg & @toniahammer do a great job engaging and aren't pushing their product. I think Molson is doing some great things in general and these two are the catalysts. They do a great job getting the "what" & "why" out there and in the end, because they do such a great job, you personally figure out the "who".

@RichardatDell - Again, another one that doesn't push the brand down your throat. Actively engages in communication with others. You know he has good intentions when he's helping the #endautodm crusade.

Like you and others have been preaching, those that come and engage with their communities are going to get a great return. Social media is going to be the difference between companies that come out of the recession with momentum and those that barely squeak by.

@kmskala

Very timely post, Arik, especially in light of this morning's Skittles stunt on Twitter.

I think an interesting take on this is celebrity brands on Twitter.

Lance Armstrong and Shaq are brands in and of themselves, but they definitely become more human through their use of Twitter.

Lance seems to be more of the PGATour approch - giving his message about LiveStrong and its efforts and sharing news about his training rides and upcoming races, with personal updates thrown in now and then. But there's not a ton of engagement with followers (except for the other cyclists on Twitter that he knows in real life).

I'd say Shaq is more like Kodak. He's engaging with lots of people and really building his own community of loyal fans on Twitter. He shares info about basketball and his games but also a lot of personal info, too. I don't feel like I'm following the Shaq "brand" on Twitter - I feel like I'm following the real person.

Then there are countless celebs who have an account but likely have someone else update for them, don't interact/reply at all, and use it to push out their own info/agenda. I'm thinking Britney Spears here. At least her account is somewhat transparent in the fact that Britney isn't necessarily making the updates herself.

Great post and I think you're definitely right in that brands are all still trying to figure this out - there's not a right answer yet!

@amymengel