@ FOCM: @MarthaStewart And @carr2n: Why We TweetAnd Is It Worth Paying For?

This story was written by David Kaplan.
[In progress]Having just surpassed 600,000 followers on Twitter, Martha Stewartor @MarthaStewartspoke with raspy-voiced NYT media columnist David Carr (aka @carr2n) at Future of Celebrity Media, where they began by comparing how many followers on Twitter.

Stewart: It took me two years to get to 600,000 subscribers with Martha Stewart Living. It took a fraction of that time to get there on Twitter.
Carr: Well, there is a price point there.
Stewart: Right, but by that point I should be up to 2 million followers on Twitter.

Twitter time: Stewart then showed off a pie chart she and her staff cooked up that showed off some Twitter stats. For example, 22 percent of Twitter users follow celebrities. Carr admits he spends way too much time on Twitter and is not exactly sure if there's an ultimate point to it. But then again, he's not running a major company. He asked Stewart if this was the best use of her time. "It connects you to your audience and shows you're one of them. I've always tried to demonstrate that, so Twitter makes sense for me."

Twitter cons: Trying to get her 600,000 to go to a blog is "hard," Stewart said. "Only the real devotees are going to read the blog. I find it distracting, and I don't care about the 140 character. But people who Tweet all day long just repeat and repeat. I get the same responses all day long from some people. I don't think they're inspired. I worry that people are only reading in spurts. If people are doing it because their bored at work7 percent, according to the chartI worry about that leading to being bored in life. People will get bored if you just use it to sell. If you're informing, if you're giving something away, you will get people in droves. Ellen DeGeneres gave away tickets. Oprah gave away KFC and they had to shut it down. I don't have anything to give away."

Pay to Tweet?: Greycroft Partners' Alan Patricof asked Stewart about a business model for Twitter. "I would say $20 a year would be fine for Twitter as well as for Facebook"Carr interjected that he would drop both"and I think media sites should be explore that. It's right to charge for content." Speaking of making money and Twitter, an audience member just interrupted, pointing to a tweet just moments ago from Clay Shirky (@cshirky): "Today's sign of the End Times? 'Get 4,000 Twitter followers for $13 Simply sign up and we do the rest!' today in my Gmail ads."

Update: Stewart just posted her Twitter poll here. The chart, which asks her followers why they use Twitter, is below.

By David Kaplan