<?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: Twitter is not a search engine</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.searchenginesnark.com/online-marketing/twitter-is-not-a-search-engine/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.searchenginesnark.com/online-marketing/twitter-is-not-a-search-engine/</link>
	<description>Optimized for &#039;snide&#039;, buying &#039;sarcastic&#039; on exact match.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 May 2009 22:03:03 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Search Engine Snark</title>
		<link>http://www.searchenginesnark.com/online-marketing/twitter-is-not-a-search-engine/comment-page-1/#comment-53</link>
		<dc:creator>Search Engine Snark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2009 02:56:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.searchenginesnark.com/?p=434#comment-53</guid>
		<description>If by conversation engine we&#039;re talking a platform which can be used to converse, totally. It&#039;s mass broadcast IM - faster (in a good way) and leaner (in a bad way) blog platform and a medium whose message is speed.

If by conversation engine we&#039;re talking an engine for searching conversations, I offer up the same points to say otherwise - IMO, Twitter has far too much noise and far too little actionable and helpful content to be of any use from a search standpoint.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If by conversation engine we&#8217;re talking a platform which can be used to converse, totally. It&#8217;s mass broadcast IM &#8211; faster (in a good way) and leaner (in a bad way) blog platform and a medium whose message is speed.</p>
<p>If by conversation engine we&#8217;re talking an engine for searching conversations, I offer up the same points to say otherwise &#8211; IMO, Twitter has far too much noise and far too little actionable and helpful content to be of any use from a search standpoint.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: patrick</title>
		<link>http://www.searchenginesnark.com/online-marketing/twitter-is-not-a-search-engine/comment-page-1/#comment-52</link>
		<dc:creator>patrick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2009 02:23:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.searchenginesnark.com/?p=434#comment-52</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s not a search engine. But it is a conversation engine.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s not a search engine. But it is a conversation engine.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Search Engine Snark</title>
		<link>http://www.searchenginesnark.com/online-marketing/twitter-is-not-a-search-engine/comment-page-1/#comment-30</link>
		<dc:creator>Search Engine Snark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2009 17:12:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.searchenginesnark.com/?p=434#comment-30</guid>
		<description>Totally! Twitter is many things from both a time-wasting-fun and social marketing standpoint, but everyone popping up all of a sudden and saying that because it now has an internal search feature and people are expressing opinions on it, that it&#039;s suddenly a search engine was just hype run amok. Personally I think that the twitter team realized that there&#039;s no way in hell that they could monetize it fast enough to make back their VC investments and that the only way to hit their numbers would be to sell...and what faster way to drive up your value and desirability than to suddenly declare yourself a threat to Google? Sprinkle a few thoughts amongst your most rabid fans with a wide reach, and voila!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Totally! Twitter is many things from both a time-wasting-fun and social marketing standpoint, but everyone popping up all of a sudden and saying that because it now has an internal search feature and people are expressing opinions on it, that it&#8217;s suddenly a search engine was just hype run amok. Personally I think that the twitter team realized that there&#8217;s no way in hell that they could monetize it fast enough to make back their VC investments and that the only way to hit their numbers would be to sell&#8230;and what faster way to drive up your value and desirability than to suddenly declare yourself a threat to Google? Sprinkle a few thoughts amongst your most rabid fans with a wide reach, and voila!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Search Engine Snark</title>
		<link>http://www.searchenginesnark.com/online-marketing/twitter-is-not-a-search-engine/comment-page-1/#comment-29</link>
		<dc:creator>Search Engine Snark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2009 17:09:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.searchenginesnark.com/?p=434#comment-29</guid>
		<description>Exactly - what was odd was that so many people reached out on it on the same day, each one making my blood boil just a little hotter. It&#039;s a social platform with potential to be a lot of things, but not a search engine. Rrrr.....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Exactly &#8211; what was odd was that so many people reached out on it on the same day, each one making my blood boil just a little hotter. It&#8217;s a social platform with potential to be a lot of things, but not a search engine. Rrrr&#8230;..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rich</title>
		<link>http://www.searchenginesnark.com/online-marketing/twitter-is-not-a-search-engine/comment-page-1/#comment-28</link>
		<dc:creator>Rich</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2009 17:03:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.searchenginesnark.com/?p=434#comment-28</guid>
		<description>Interesting contradiction. I think that issue is just a good strategy for linkbaiting.

Anyway, Twitter search is really far from being a search engine. Well, if you&#039;re searching for spam and blatant self-promotion I believe you&#039;re in the right place.

I just wish Twitter can improve more.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting contradiction. I think that issue is just a good strategy for linkbaiting.</p>
<p>Anyway, Twitter search is really far from being a search engine. Well, if you&#8217;re searching for spam and blatant self-promotion I believe you&#8217;re in the right place.</p>
<p>I just wish Twitter can improve more.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew Diehl</title>
		<link>http://www.searchenginesnark.com/online-marketing/twitter-is-not-a-search-engine/comment-page-1/#comment-27</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Diehl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2009 17:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.searchenginesnark.com/?p=434#comment-27</guid>
		<description>Thank You! I wholly agree with this post. Twitter is a social media platform that has a search feature on it&#039;s website so it is not a search engine - done and done.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank You! I wholly agree with this post. Twitter is a social media platform that has a search feature on it&#8217;s website so it is not a search engine &#8211; done and done.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
