UK Government Official Releases Thorough Twitter Guide

It's not just countless blogs that are writing Twitter guides anymore. Last week the company itself revealed Twitter 101, a guide to the microblogging service for businesses. But even that pales in comparison to the 20-page guide a UK government official has released, covering most aspects of the medium. While even the author, Neil Williams, admits that it may seem “a bit over the top for a tool like Twitter,” he believes that there are plenty to talk about.

Williams, head of the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS), released the guide as an official “template” on Cabinet Office's Digital Engagement Blog but believes that the document should be distributed and modified to suit the different needs of other organizations.

Keeping up with the account, including publishing new tweets, replying to other users and generally overlooking the operations on Twitter should not take more than an hour per day according to the guide. It also goes on to say that Twitter should be seen as an addition to the normal operations and should prove a valuable tool because of its immediacy.

The guide gives exact numbers, not just general advice, saying that representatives should create between two and 10 tweets a day, except in special circumstances like events or crisis. The tweets should also focus on fact and events rather than just promotional stuff and personal engagement from the ministers themselves is encouraged, as is the use of an informal style to better suite the environment.

Some of the risks involved with such an undertaking are also listed such as breaking news embargoes or posting sensitive information about the ministers' whereabouts or personal lives. A “light-touch” control over the accounts is therefore recommended with the tweets being verified before getting published. The guide also recommends a certain "tone of voice" be used so that, even though the tweets may be coming from different individuals, they should be presented as coming from a “hypothetical voice.”