Three articles to read this week, each touching on an element of focus for this course: companies, government, and non-profits.
Ian Stockley in his article Choosing the right social platform for high quality engagement focused on brands and, as I interpreted it, the need to confidently and intentionally embrace the right social media platforms. Highlights include: acknowledging the embrace of exclusively visual social media platforms (i.e. Instagram) and how it emphasizes the loss of control that brands experience when their social communications are received and shared/replied by consumers; identifying a tone of voice “triangle,” that brands should embrace one or two of the three — funny, helpful, informative; and to not forget that social engagement is communication at its core, that the means should never trump the message.
On Mashable, Zachary Sniderman identified How Governments Are Using Social Media for Better & for Worse, in particular noting how the Ontario government used a wiki to crowdsource a policy paper on the government’s approach to “social innovation.” A bit of a misstep here, this example seems indicative of a foreign news service in search of an international good news story. Had this been an American example, I’m sure there would’ve been a follow-up of some sort attempting to evaluate the success of the wiki (or policy papers in general). To be fair, it does acknowledge the early success of Michael Ignatieff’s social media positioning in the run-up to the 2011 election and how it did not translate into votes.
And in Non-Profits: Drive Behavior with Social Media Roger Dooley at Forbes.com reinforces the idea that “humans are wired for altruism,” that non-profits should consider ways to acknowledge their benefactors while at the same time promoting their service to others, via auto-generated special badges that supporters could access and share with their friends.
The point of this trio of articles is that the style of engagement varies for companies, governments and non-profits. They each have metrics of success that may not translate from one to another.