Facebook, the World Series and combined relevance

Since meeting Dan Zarrella at a social media workshop last June, where he presented his “Science of Social Media” talk, I’ve been experimenting with some of his principles for spreading ideas via social media. One of his principles — that of combined relevance — has been of particular interest to me, and during the World Series, I had a chance to put it into practice on behalf of our university.

I bet you thought I’d shut up about baseball by now, more than a week after my favorite team, the St. Louis Cardinals, won the World Series. But even if you aren’t a baseball fan, I think you’ll find that this topic has a bit of combined relevance for you as a higher ed marketer. So, please bear with me.

Zarrella explains combined relevance as the merging of “two seemingly distinct interests,” and it works in social media because it connects organizations with the interests of their audiences in unexpected ways. Combined relevance finds a connection with audiences that often have little to do with an organization’s brand or sales pitch.

“By combining two apparently unrelated niches,” Zarrella writes, “you can create a piece of content likely to go viral with people who just happen to be into both things.”

In Zarrella’s oft-cited case, the two unrelated niches were “gadgets and Victorian era intoxicants.” (You really need to read his post to fully appreciate where he’s coming from.) For me most recently, the two niches weren’t quite so exotic. I combined professional baseball with a graduate of our university.

After St. Louis’ comeback in Game 6 of this year’s World Series, in which hometown boy David Freese shone by tying the game in the ninth inning, then hitting the game-winning home run in extra innings, our department learned, via our alumni office, that Freese’s father was a graduate of our university. So we decided to test the theory of combined relevance on our Facebook site with the following post connecting our institution with a baseball hero.

Here’s a fun fact for all you St. Louis Cardinals fans out there. David Freese, the St. Louis hometown boy who hit the game-winning home run in last night’s Game 6 of the World Series, is the son of Rolla grad Guy Freese, CE’75. How cool is that?

This single post resulted in a significant spike in activity on our site. As of yesterday (Tuesday) afternoon, the post has garnered:

  • 3,610 impressions
  • 138 likes
  • 10 comments (including one from us)

Here’s what the post looked like:

Using combined relevance -- in this case, the World Series and a Missouri S&T graduate's family connection -- on our Facebook site
Using combined relevance -- in this case, the World Series and a Missouri S&T graduate's family connection -- on our Facebook site

That may not sound like much to some of you, but those numbers represent one of the most viewed postings on our Facebook site. And, according to Facebook’s algorithms, also one of the most viral. It’s virality score of above 11 percent was more than four times higher than the runner-up for the month of October.

Of course, we can’t always make combined-relevance connections to occasions as prominent as the World Series. But we can still find ways to connect our institutions to relevant topics being discussed in the social media sphere. The key is to be attuned to what our audiences are talking about. On one warm October day, quite a few of our Facebook fans were interested in baseball, and they apparently liked that we were interested in it, too.

No more RSS sharing: not a plus for Google

Google-shared-itemsOnce upon a time, not so long ago, there was this nifty widget on the left sidebar of this blog. This widget let me share interesting stuff from my Google Reader RSS feed with readers of this blog, five items at a time. (That’s what it looked like, over there on the left.)

This widget held value for me because it gave me an easy way to present shareworthy news items with readers, without going to the trouble of blogging about those specific topics. If I found something I thought might be interesting to readers, I could simply click “share” on my Google Reader interface and, like magic, it would appear in the widget. This was a great way to share additional content here on this blog that I found interesting but not necessarily blogworthy.

Just as I shared that content here on the blog, it also was shared in the Google Reader environment itself with dozens of other higher ed folks and other connections in marketing, PR, music and related interests. I could share stuff from my RSS feed with my Google Reader connections, as well as read what they were sharing. It was an enriching experience.

Then on Halloween, Google pulled the plug on the Google Reader sharing function as we had become accustomed to, and re-routed it to the world of Google Plus.

So now, if I want to share items from my RSS feed, I can only do so via Google Plus. Not on this blog or in the native Google Reader environment.

I think this sucks. And I’m not the only one who thinks that. Many Google Reader devotees have voiced their unhappiness with this switch. They’re saying stuff like:

Keep the social functions! Yes yes yes. Don’t ruin all the functionality of Reader by removing the social stuff, that’s how I get all my news – it’s lovely to have my friends pick and choose what I read, but not have it lumped in with all the Facebook/Google+ style crapola.

And:

The beauty of Google Reader for me is the fact that my friends and I can have discussions about the interesting things we’re reading, in the same place that I’m reading all my RSS feeds. Go ahead and update the user interface if you have to, but don’t take away functionality!

And:

Please keep Google Reader social. I love that my friends and I can have discussions about CONTENT on google reader, unlike other social networks concerned with update status and other nonsense.

And so on. But perhaps the strongest critique comes from former Google Reader Product Manager Brian Shih, who nailed it with his Halloween post (hat tip to TechCrunch). Acknowledging the value of visual consistency as a design aesthetic, Shih rightly points out that “whoever made the update did so without ever actually using the product to, you know, read something.”

The fact of the matter, as Shih points out, is that the purpose of Google Reader is not at all the same as that of Google Plus.

Reader is a product built to consume information, quickly. We designed it to be very good at that one thing. G+ is an experience built around browsing (similar to Facebook) and socializing. Taking the UI paradigm for G+ and mashing it onto Reader without any apparent regard for the underlying function is awful and it shows.

A pretty scathing critique, but also pretty accurate. This change has left a bad taste in the mouth of this longtime Google Reader user. I haven’t exactly cottoned up to G+. (Like Alaina Weins, I’ve more or less given up on G+ altogether.) So shoehorning the sociability of Google Reader, a product that I love(d), into the G+ atmosphere isn’t going to convert me into a G+ fan any time soon.

Plus, I miss my Google Reader sharing widget. And isn’t sharing what social media is all about?