For the sake of posterity and having all of the tweets in one place that isn’t Storify, here is a recap of our April 2013 editorial about how we use Twitter.
"All you can tweet" – an Editorial in 42 tweets that explains how @NatureChemistry uses Twitter – http://t.co/uzPoBFzNl9
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
Nature Chemistry signed up for a Twitter account in March 2009. More than 5,000 tweets later, what have we learned and how do we use it?
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
When cramming an informative and self-contained message into only 140 characters (including spaces!), clarity is a virtue.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
With subjects that sometimes rely on specialist language, such as chemistry, composing tweets can be quite challenging.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
We use Twitter to point out any interesting chemistry-related content, including papers, news stories and blog posts.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
We retweet chemistry-related job opportunities and internships that we think might be of interest to our followers.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
Our tweets range from serious topics (chemical safety) to the light-hearted (such as chemistry-themed music parodies http://t.co/f1l2BEku9Y)
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
We share our Articles and other content from Nature Chemistry on Twitter, but that's only a small fraction of what we tweet about.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
Journal Twitter streams — especially automated ones — full of just their own content can resemble RSS feeds and are a missed opportunity.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
There are quite a few chemistry journals with an active presence on Twitter and we maintain a list of them (http://t.co/WTxFKo4tGd).
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
A handful of chemistry editors and journalists are on Twitter and following them gives you a behind-the-scenes look at the publishing world.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
Twitter provides a direct — and effectively instant — two-way connection between the journal's editors and its followers.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
All of the Nature Chemistry editors (past and present) have contributed to the journal's Twitter feed, albeit some more than others.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
Ideas for research highlights come from many different sources, including tweets by chemists about papers that catch their eye.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
Twitter can be a great way to crowd-source answers to a question — there are lots of experts (and others) just waiting to chime in.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
Have a problem with a reaction or want to know what an odd piece of glassware is? Ask Twitter, someone might know.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
As of mid-February 2013 we had more than 70,000 followers, aided by a short spell on Twitter's who-to-follow list for 'science'.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
Using @TwitonomyApp (http://t.co/wfqbqYKBvk) we have analysed just under 3,200 tweets that we sent between April 2011 and February 2013.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
Of 3,197 tweets scrutinized by Twitonomy, 1,492 (47%) of them have, so far, been retweeted a total of 5,865 times.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
Our tweet referencing a tongue-in-cheek blog post by @DrRubidium about misuse of the term 'organic' is our most retweeted.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
From April 2011 to February 2013, we posted an average of 4.79 tweets per day, with an average of 0.39 links in each one.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
A Wordle (http://t.co/fC6PTsuVr2) made from more than 3,000 of our tweets shows that the word 'chemistry' dominates pic.twitter.com/VgJEAUgQmL
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
Unsurprisingly, the vast majority of our tweets are about chemistry — whether in the context of concepts, publishing or people.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
The accounts of other chemistry publications frequently get mentioned in our tweets, most notably those of @ChemistryWorld and @cenmag.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
The Twitter handles of chemistry bloggers feature prominently in our tweets, including @ChemBark, @Chemjobber, @SeeArrOh and @sciencegeist.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
Getting to know people (and their opinions) through Twitter has led to the commissioning of content for the journal.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
A Commentary article (http://t.co/5WkPPC8icb) co-authored by @sciencegeist came about following numerous interactions with him on Twitter.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
After spotting a tweet by @kevinbookermilb lauding a paper in @angew_chem we asked him to write about it for us (http://t.co/qoUFHdSAhB).
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
Twitter exchanges about our 'In Your Element' series of essays resulted in @DavidMLindsay, @SimonHiggins_60 and @kjhaxton each writing one.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
Bloggers we have got to know on Twitter (@JessTheChemist, @SyntheticRemark, @azmanam and @karlDcollins) have penned our Blogroll column.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
We commissioned @davidkroll to review @bstockwell's book, 'The quest for the cure', after he tweeted about it (http://t.co/GPeNXwOFQV).
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
In 2011 we asked who the greatest chemist of all time was — the responses inspired an Editorial (http://t.co/eDLzlSQpyr).
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
Twitter is particularly useful for highlighting new chemistry blogs and was how we learned of those written by @BRSM_blog and @vinylogous.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
Filtering tweets is relatively easy; you can control the signal-to-noise ratio by choosing who to follow and by creating themed lists.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
Hashtags — included in tweets in the form of '#hashtag' — are handy for tracking or finding tweets on a particular topic.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
A very active chemistry-related hashtag — popularized by @Doctor_Galactic — is #realtimechem, where chemists tweet about their daily lives.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
A range of hashtags — #chemophobia, #altchemfree, #spacedinos, #dangerous5 — have proved popular with chemists.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
Nature Chemistry editors tweet (when rules allow) from conferences, offering interesting snippets from the talks and events we attend.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
The length of tweets means that it is a quick form of communication; you're not agonizing over a lengthy e-mail or blog post.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
Despite its limitations, Twitter is useful for quickly disseminating information to an audience who has chosen to listen.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
If you're really busy and worried about Twitter being a distraction, you can just turn it off. It's not always easy to do that with e-mail.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013
Twitter length restrictions mean you can't wax lyrical about life, the universe and everything, but you can write an Editorial in 42 tweets.
— Nature Chemistry (@NatureChemistry) March 20, 2013