Twitter Lurkers

Yeah, it's a thing.

No, They're not the Peeping Toms of the Twitterverse. They're not their to get noticed. They're not there to garner followers. They're...just curious.

Pew has posted some research on this. It should be no surprise that a small minority does a large majority of the posting on the platform. For example,  just 6% of all U.S. adults with public accounts on the site, but they account for 73% of tweets from American adults that mention national politics.

In Pew's analysis, the terms “lurkers” and “infrequent tweeters” are used interchangeably to refer to U.S. adults who have posted an average of fewer than five tweets per month since they first opened their account, whether those tweets were original messages, retweets, quote tweets or replies. To refer to U.S. adult Twitter users who are not “lurkers,” we use the terms “active tweeters” or “frequent tweeters” interchangeably.

Here are five facts about Lurkers according to Pew:

1. Half of US adults, who use Twitter, post about five times a month.
2. 41%  of the Lurkers say they visit only a few times a month or less often.
3. Twitter Lurkers are more likely than other users to get a variety of views.
4. Lurkers don't do a lot of following and they do not have many followers.
5. Replies to other users are the most common type of tweet by infrequent tweeters. They account for roughly half (51%) of lurkers’ tweets, compared with 30% of those from more frequent tweeters.

The challenge for Twitter will be converting Lurkers into more frequent users. The other challenge may be getting Lurkers to post. They're not going to drive eyeballs to the platform.

Freedom of Speech

 It doesn't mean you can say anything you want.

I can remember mom saying, "keep a civil tongue in your head," and " Is it too much to ask you think before you speak?"

It's in the bible too. This is from Proverbs 16:23 The hearts of the wise make their mouths prudent,and their lips promote instruction.  27 A scoundrel plots evil,and on their lips it is like a scorching fire.

Steve Brannon may have stepped over the line.

From multiple sources...Twitter permanently suspended an account belonging to former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon after he suggested Thursday morning that Dr. Anthony Fauci and FBI Director Christopher Wray should be beheaded. His comments were made in a video posted to his Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter accounts. 

 Is it a freedom of speech issue? Not if it puts individuals in imminent danger.

So...here are the exceptions. Categories of speech that are given lesser or no protection by the First Amendment (and therefore may be restricted) include obscenity, fraud, child pornography, speech integral to illegal conduct, speech that incites imminent lawless action, speech that violates intellectual property law, true threats, and commercial speech such as advertising.

Along with communicative restrictions, less protection is afforded for uninhibited speech when the government acts as subsidizer or speaker, is an employer, controls education, or regulates the mail, airwaves, legal bar, military, prisons, and immigration.  Wikipedia

Are we allowed to say anything we want on line without regard to the consequences. Are the platforms we use liable for the content we provide? According to talksonlaw.com, But guess what? Facebook, Twitter, the other social media platforms are not the government. They are private sector entities, and therefore, they have no First Amendment obligation to protect your freedom of speech. To the contrary, they have their own First Amendment rights—their media right. 

Should freedom of speech be limited on social media? 

(a) It is the policy of the United States that large online platforms, such as Twitter and Facebook, as the critical means of promoting the free flow of speech and ideas today, should not restrict protected speech.May 28, 2020 -whitehouse.gov

What speech is not protected? Categories of speech that are given lesser or no protection by the First Amendment (and therefore may be restricted) include obscenity, fraud, child pornography, speech integral to illegal conduct, speech that incites imminent lawless action, speech that violates intellectual property law, true threats, and commercial ...advertising. 

It seems Bannon crossed that line. Subsequently, his lawyer quit.

Cautionary Tales

Think Before You Send

President Donald Trump should serve as a cautionary tale about what we say and what we share online. His tweets have been introduced as his state mind evidence as his travel ban travels through the court. His posts are his own worst enemy.

He's not the only one self sabotaged by his social media posts. Ten potential Harvard students had their admissions denied because of their offensive posts.

But there's more...

About the same time I was considered the damage that could be done by ill-advised posts can an op-ed from Mark Oppenheimer in the LA Times about how Twitter is bad for him...because...well...it's a huge time suck. Just think about the time wasted over Trump's typo. As Oppenheimer puts it, "Life is short, summer’s here, and my dog deserves a long, leisurely walk. Halfway through, we’ll sit down for a spell. I’ll bring a book.

When to Post (Using Social Media)

It matters...

Why?

Maximizing reach is essential in a fractured marketplace. That fracturing is already having an effect of listening. The effects are far reaching according to NPR's Research. Statistics cited in a Washington Post article by Paul Farhi points to a decline in listener-ship among the audience that's under 55.

Perhaps more troubling are the broader demographic trends. NPR’s signal has gradually been fading among the young. Listening among “Morning Edition’s” audience, for example, has declined 20 percent among people under 55 in the past five years. Listening for “All Things Considered” has dropped about 25 percent among those in the 45-to-54 segment.

The implication is that the tent poles (Morning Edition and All Things Considered) continue to appeal the audience garnered in the 80's. That appeal is not so strong among audience segments 54 and younger. 

What About Appeal?

Maybe Morning Edition and All Things considered, created by boomers to appeal to boomers is getting old like its audience. Another consideration is that the rush to create local programming to build content stations could call their own may be pulling down the tent poles. Is that content building audience or driving audience away? Local programming for the sake of being local is not valued by the public radio audience. If that were the case, all those podcasts being offered would be wildly successful. They're not. Local content has to match the expectations and values of public radio's audience no matter the platform.  Radio works best when there is a consistency of appeal.

And what about midday programming in general? The appeal of national offerings has not been consistent with the appeal of the tent poles. It doesn't take much to convince a potential loyal listener to tune away. The problem is magnified by the thousands of offerings on newer platforms.

Don't Throw In The Towel

People are still using radio.  According the Nielsen, 93% of Americans are tuning-in. News/Talk continues to be the top format. The top formats among listeners 25 to 54 are Top 40, Country, and Adult Contemporary. The key public radio is to find out where it's younger demographics are migrating. As Nielsen acknowledges, the audience is shifting to digital platforms.

In the meantime...

Tighten up your programming. Listen to the way you sound. Take a critical look at promotions.

Let them know you're still here. You're still listening and you're still engaging. Promote on the platforms they're using. Allow users to access what you're offering on their terms. 

It matters when and how you post. I've been looking around for ideas on when I could make the most of my postings on Social Media. There are lots of ideas waiting for you. Some in public radio have hired experts to help with postings. Others don't have the resources to hire somebody dedicated to managing social media. The information on effective posting is out there and easy to use. 

Fast Company has some interesting infographics they published in 2014. Among the advice given...

• POST ON FACEBOOK DURING THE AFTERNOON SLUMP
• SCHEDULE TWEETS FOR LUNCHTIME
• NO ONE IS CHECKING LINKEDIN ON A FRIDAY

Does 2014 seem dated? There are others offering information about best practices for posting. Hubspot offers posting advice on their site. For instance: 

• The best time to post on Linkedin is Tuesday through Thursday during working hours. 
• The best time to post on Instagram is anytime Monday through Thursday except between 3:00pm and 4:00pm.

I still think what we offer matters. The ground is shifting below our feet, but the sky is not falling. I remember the stickers that used to be on the windows in the control oft the first public radio station I worked for. It said...

Think Audience!

Journalist Suspended for Comments

Politico suspends Joe Williams for racially tinged remarks about Romney | Poynter.

When journalists are encouraged to share personal opinions on MSNBC and Fox News (Or Twitter or anywhere else) are they stepping over the line? I thought so when I worked in public radio. Others think so too. Politico suspended Joe Williams for his remarks on MSNBC about Mitt Romney being very much relaxed around white people. Williams has been warned before about his tweets about Romney.

MSNBC has standards when it comes to their own employees. You might remember that MSNBC and Keith Olberman parted ways over his political contributions. He was suspended. Olberman then quit.

NPR was criticized by Fox News and others for the firing of Juan Williams after his biased comments about Muslims on Fox News. It was not just this event that led to his firing.

AP has standards when it comes to their journalists using twitter.

Should journalists be held to a higher standard? Should they keep their opinions out of public view? Or, with the popularity of Fox News and MSNBC, is anything goes the new standard?

Celebrities as News Source

Study: Celebrities played role in spreading news of bin Laden death | Poynter.
Steve Myers reports for Poynter that Celebrities played a major role in spreading the news about Osama bin Laden's death on Twitter. Myers sites research from the Georgia Institute of Technology. They found that initially traditional news sources led the way. As time went on...a select group of celebrities became the source of tweets about bin Laden's death.

News organizations fared well early.

What does this have to say about where people are getting their news? The top two celebrities being followed on Twitter are Lady Gaga and Justin Bieber. I can imagine the water cooler conversation (or social media buzz)  "Hey did you hear? Lady Gaga just tweeted that bin Laden is dead!"

Updating Media Skills

Something really interesting happened last week with the Planned Parenthood - Komen controversy. The response on Facebook, Google+ and Twitter using shared information (curating) changed the result.

I'm taking some courses on marketing and new media. I've only just begun. I know enough to, perhaps, do more damage than good. The courses have got me thinking about the ways public media can use social media.

In Public Radio (public media) we've been looking for ways to attract a younger and larger audience. We've been looking for the right combination of programming (format) to attract that audience. The answer might not be on the air. Or, maybe it already is. The quality content of public radio (public media) put on the right platforms can grow the audience. NPR is already doing this. I'm speaking of content created locally. This is content already being created. Thoughtful selection and sharing the content through social networks will expose the content further. This is only a theory. But, it's easy to do and inexpensive. Because of that it has a lot of potential.

The starting point is to put the content being creating on the platforms used by the public radio audience and measure the results. See if you can take advantage of the curatorial power of social media to expand the audience.

AP Warns Reporters About Tweeting Opinions

The Associated Press is warning its reporters about offering opinions about news stories through social media. According to a report in Yahoo News, AP issued an internal memo that could reignite the debate over the blurry line between professional and personal use of social media. The AP is concerned that the opinions expressed may damage the AP's reputation as an unbiased news source. According to Yahoo News, reporters covering the gay marriage vote in New York and the Casey Anthony trial expressed personal opinions on Twitter.
The blurring of the lines between objective reporting, the role of the news analyst, and personal opinion heated up last fall when NPR fired Juan Williams.
It is also important to note that the AP has written guidelines about social media and personal opinion that their reporters are required to follow.