Brands on Social Media
As I dig deeper into Twitter lurking and general social media prowess, including the conversation about Free Riders, content creation, and social media exchanges, I find myself thinking about the prevalence of brands/companies on social media and how it affects the genuineness of interactions and content consumption.
One of my previous blog posts was about the automated future of content creation and how artificial intelligence and computer software will play the majority role in the future of press releases, scheduled social media posts, and the future of digital marketing. The main focus of the article was about digital marketing and brands on social media. I continued to think about things from that lens as I played around with Twitter this week.
As a former sports writer, what really caught my eye (and has done so for the last year plus) is the interaction between the official account of teams and fans/journalists. Official accounts for teams often have hundreds of thousands of followers, made up of fans, professionals in the industry, and, of course, haters. A recent trend I've noticed is for the accounts to interact in humorous and sarcastic ways with those stakeholders (and even with their rival teams' accounts).
When a team account tweets something particularly funny or a 'burn' to another team or rival fan, that team's fans go wild. Gif reactions are especially popular. From these tweets, the teams get an incredible amount of interaction. Users seem to really enjoy these fun moments when it feels like you're connecting with your favorite team.
But I wonder about the genuineness of the interaction. Is an interaction still meaningful if someone is subtly advertising to you throughout it? One of the most popular team accounts in terms of humor and engagement is the Chicago Cubs. They often tweet jokes and throw shade at rivals. But at their core, the tweets are still marketing. They are carefully crafted to create engagement and interaction. They read their audience and act accordingly. Sometimes, to me, it all feels a little bit like pandering.
I also wonder how this aspect of funny, pop-culture inspired interaction will play out within the automated future of content creation. Surely a computer can schedule a tweet or write a press release based on supplied information, but will it be able to understand the nuance of a carefully selected eye roll emoji or a reaction meme featuring the 'back at it again with the white Vans' boys? For that matter, will folks get sick of this sort of pop-culture pandering? Promoting a brand through an understanding of internet culture? Or maybe it will continue to grow in success and popularity because users crave interaction that appears more human?
As you can see, my questions abound, but it's something I'll be keenly following.
One of my previous blog posts was about the automated future of content creation and how artificial intelligence and computer software will play the majority role in the future of press releases, scheduled social media posts, and the future of digital marketing. The main focus of the article was about digital marketing and brands on social media. I continued to think about things from that lens as I played around with Twitter this week.
As a former sports writer, what really caught my eye (and has done so for the last year plus) is the interaction between the official account of teams and fans/journalists. Official accounts for teams often have hundreds of thousands of followers, made up of fans, professionals in the industry, and, of course, haters. A recent trend I've noticed is for the accounts to interact in humorous and sarcastic ways with those stakeholders (and even with their rival teams' accounts).
When a team account tweets something particularly funny or a 'burn' to another team or rival fan, that team's fans go wild. Gif reactions are especially popular. From these tweets, the teams get an incredible amount of interaction. Users seem to really enjoy these fun moments when it feels like you're connecting with your favorite team.
But I wonder about the genuineness of the interaction. Is an interaction still meaningful if someone is subtly advertising to you throughout it? One of the most popular team accounts in terms of humor and engagement is the Chicago Cubs. They often tweet jokes and throw shade at rivals. But at their core, the tweets are still marketing. They are carefully crafted to create engagement and interaction. They read their audience and act accordingly. Sometimes, to me, it all feels a little bit like pandering.
I also wonder how this aspect of funny, pop-culture inspired interaction will play out within the automated future of content creation. Surely a computer can schedule a tweet or write a press release based on supplied information, but will it be able to understand the nuance of a carefully selected eye roll emoji or a reaction meme featuring the 'back at it again with the white Vans' boys? For that matter, will folks get sick of this sort of pop-culture pandering? Promoting a brand through an understanding of internet culture? Or maybe it will continue to grow in success and popularity because users crave interaction that appears more human?
As you can see, my questions abound, but it's something I'll be keenly following.
Comments
Post a Comment