In the last week or two, I've noticed the "Sponsored" icon next to a certain Trending Topic, which I thought was an interesting development in crowd-sourcing. Kudos to Twitter for being transparent about it. Make that kudos with a side of booyah, and do pardon me for a second while I glare in the direction of InfoSeek's grave (now known as Go.com).
As when Google introduced paid listings, I wouldn't have dreamed of squawking. Why? Because it was all on the up-and-up: Paid results here; "organic" listings below--no ambiguity. (Although, truth be told, I did pay attention to relevance until the trust level bounced back up. Which didn't take too long: The joy of having esoteric hobbies is that "relevance" is--typically--far less subjective than with mainstream ones.)
But comparing Twitter to Google is not quite apples-to-apples. Invoking the wisdom of The Omniscient Google (and their mind-dizzying algorithms) is different from simply putting finger to pulse-point, which is the (ostensible) point of Twitter's Trending Topics. Purchased popularity is a bit different from sponsored links (themselves generated by a somewhat impersonal algorithm). You know: Lucius Malfoy buying Draco a spot on the Slytherin Qidddich team--that sort of thing.
Maybe it's just me being contrarian--fancy that!--again, but my gut feeling is that that buying buzz is the surest way to kill it.
