<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>gdp's Comments</title>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<link>https://www.intensedebate.com/users/969206</link>
		<description>Comments by stevenshattuck</description>
<item>
<title>Media Outreach : Corporate Church Twitter Accounts vs. Brand Evangelists</title>
<link>http://mediaoutreach.com/2010/04/corporate-church-twitter-accounts-vs-brand-evangelists/#IDComment68872607</link>
<description>Okay, Kristen, you might regret taking away my 140 character limit. :)    In Indianapolis, there are a few stand-out corporate accounts: @collegeparkindy , @citycommunity , @IndyMetroChurch, @castletonchrist (which I manage) - these accounts, for the most part, only broadcast new blog posts, sermons, or new website or Facebook content - there are very few @ messages.  These churches already have built in networks of readers, visitors and especially Facebook fans, so why broadcast those messages outside of those mediums?    Also in Indianapolis are a few outstanding pastors/ministers: @mattlipan, @aaronstory, @brianltabor who are constantly engaging people and building brand equity for their respective churches.    Now, could those people also manage a corporate church account, and send lots of @ messages to people?  Sure, but wouldn&amp;#039;t the interaction be more meaningful if you had a face and a name attached?      During the conversation with @faithHighway that sparked this post, I had no idea until today that I was actually talking to @KristenParkhrst (or was I?).     If I engage in a conversation with a twitter account, I think the exchange could be more meaningful if I knew who was on the other side. </description>
<pubDate>Mon, 19 Apr 2010 18:10:37 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://mediaoutreach.com/2010/04/corporate-church-twitter-accounts-vs-brand-evangelists/#IDComment68872607</guid>
</item>	</channel>
</rss>