Category: communication

Social media’s future: less Tweeting, more Facebooking?

Social media expert Brian Solis turned soothsayer for the crowd at Ragan‘s Social Media for Communicators Conference in Atlanta and told them that the future of social media lies not with Twitter, but with Facebook.

Why? Well, Facebook has a much larger audience, for starters, so the potential for greater reach is there. But Solis also says Twitter is too ephemeral. He says the average lifespan of a popular retweet is only about an hour. “Twitter has no memory,” Solis says. “It’s always moving on to the next thing.”

[P]articipation on social media runs deeper than just responding to other people.

“Our job is to contribute something to the greater conversation,” Solis says. “Have killer content. Make people feel compelled to share.”

I agree with Solis on the killer content thing. But my experience, based on working with both personal and organizational accounts on Twitter and Facebook, is that Facebook provides the greater reach but Twitter creates a greater connection among users. The people we interact with on the @MissouriSandT Twitter account seem more connected somehow than those we interact with on the Missouri S&T Facebook site.

Of course, most of you who know me from my blog and Twitter ramblings know I’m a big fan of Twitter, and that my interest in Facebook continues to wane with every new meme and every request to join a group that wagers a dog, a rock or some other object can get more fans than Sarah Palin or Obama’s health care plan. So maybe I’m a tad biased.

Also, it wasn’t so long ago that MySpace was the king of social networks, and Facebook was a mere sprite. But the table quickly turned. Could the same fate that came upon MySpace also befall Facebook?

The crux of the matter probably has more to do with what aspects of Facebook, Twitter or any other social media platform appeal to people — not which is the better platform for everyone. This post from Twitip got it mostly right, I think:

“Facebook appeals to social animals and can be very addicting to people who have an insatiable appetite to stay connected with friends and make new acquaintances,” while “Twitter is like a communications stream you dive into for an invigorating swim.”

What do you think? Is Facebook the wave of the future? Discuss.

On being relevant

A recent post by Andy Shaindlin on his Alumni Futures blog got me thinking about relevance. Andy’s post — about issues facing alumni relations in the year ahead — really struck a chord, especially the part about the relevance of alumni relations organizations in this era of budget reductions.

Andy wrote:

I’m concerned about “mattering.”

Senior administrators are questioning the relevance of alumni relations in the face of external and internal changes (i.e., competition for scarce resources). Will alumni organizations matter?

It’s an important question, and not just for alumni organizations. From my perspective as a communications director, the issue of relevance matters on several levels:

  • Mission. How relevant is our department’s mission to the institution’s? How about to our stakeholders? (Does our department even have a mission? And if so, do we al know what it is?) Then there’s the institution’s mission. How relevant is that to stakeholders and audiences? An organization’s communications and marketing staff ought to be conveying the institution’s mission to various stakeholders, right? So the relevance of institutional mission should set the tone for the institution’s messages, and thereby set the agenda for the communications/marketing office. Which leads to the next issue…
  • Messaging. How relevant are our organization’s messages to constituents? Are they connecting? Are the messages we (communications people) transmit in step with the organization’s mission? How well are we serving as the spokespeople for our organizations?
  • Delivery. What about the ways in which we transmit the messages? How relevant are our delivery systems? To reach our stakeholders, do we rely mostly — or even solely — on traditional vehicles, such as press releases, alumni magazines, newsletters and direct mail? Are those the best approaches? Should we consider mixing it up a bit — or even eliminating some old vehicles that our stakeholders no longer pay attention to?
  • Organization. Then there’s the ultimate relevance question we must ask ourselves: If your (my) organization were to suddenly cease to exist, would the institution still function as well as it does now? Would it matter? Answer that question honestly, and you should get a good idea of whether — and how much — your department or organization matters.

Lots of questions, I know. I hope you’re asking yourself some of them.

How do you plan to remain (or become) relevant in the changing world of 2010?