Last night, I attended a minor league (AA) baseball game in North Carolina (where I live) and was struck by how active the team was on various social media platforms. Before the game even started, they were showing pictures of the “Facebook Fan Of The Game” from their fan page, which I later learned had well over 3,000 members – not too shabby! I was also struck by the number of times the PA announcer asked fans to “join the team’s Facebook Fan Page and follow us on Twitter” for news, discounts and special promotions.
This is a team that is doing everything correctly, right down to their social media calls-to-action. Yet, I was struck by this phrase – “join the team’s Facebook Fan Page and follow us on Twitter” and how neatly it encapsulates the huge usage disparity between Facebook and Twitter that we observed in Edison’s recent research on Twitter Users in America. Some of the people who’ve studied this report expressed surprise that there was such a tremendous difference between the percentage of Americans using Facebook, 41% at the time of our report, and those using Twitter, which stood at 7%. Yet awareness for both social media services was equally high – roughly 87-88% awareness for both amongst all Americans (online and off.) That there is a disparity is not a shocker, given Facebook’s considerable head start. Why, however, given nearly equal and ubiquitous awareness, does actual usage of Twitter trail so significantly behind usage of Facebook?
I think one answer lies neatly within the example provided by this minor league team’s promotion. The phrase “follow us on Facebook and Twitter” is repeated so often that it begins to resemble what my friend Dennis Clark calls “chickenorfish” syndrome: when the flight attendants rush down the aisle with their carts, robotically asking everyone “wouldyoulikechickenorfish,” commoditizing both and making neither particularly appealing.
In the case of “followusonfacebookortwitter,” almost everyone who maintains a social profile online is on Facebook, so if that is sufficient to get news, discounts and special fan promotions from the team, why would the average American bother with Twitter? Yet Twitter is a different dog, and its asymmetric nature cries out for differential treatment by businesses from their Facebook fan pages.
The team, I want to emphasize here, is really doing nothing wrong, and just about everything right. It isn’t their responsibility to teach people how to use Twitter, or encourage its adoption – it’s their responsibility to engage fans, and be everywhere they are. Ultimately, the responsibility rests with Twitter itself – the company – to reach out to the many media outlets tacking Twitter onto their “chickenorfish” promotions, crafting exclusive offers, and making the benefits and differential uses of Twitter for businesses not only crystal clear, but of value. Location-based networks like Foursquare and Tri-Out, along with online coupon providers like Groupon, are already doing this now at the local level.
I’ve noted this before, but it is incumbent upon Twitter to clearly articulate the unique value, usage and benefits of their service, before teams like the one I saw last night begin to craft their own differential strategies using Facebook for engagement, location-based services for sales promotions, and Twitter is left as the odd man out.
By the way, I hope you are enjoying my humble efforts here at BrandSavant – look for even more to come in the near future, including some great guest posts and an updated “news” section to keep you apprised of the latest social media research. Don’t miss out – subscribe today to have BrandSavant neatly deposited in your RSS feedreader or email box. And thank you.
This post originally appeared at the Edison Research blog.
{ 8 comments… read them below or add one }
Thanks for another thought-provoking post, Tom. In this case, the thought it inspires is this: do you think Twitter has failed to communicate its unique value to mainstream SM users, or is the problem really that Twitter doesn’t add a lot of unique value for them? Finding friends is more difficult than on Facebook, communication options between friends are more limited, and the one thing Twitter lets me do – status updates – Facebook already does. I’m fairly active on Twitter, but that’s primarily a function of my professional peer network (social media geeks). Frankly, I’m still not convinced of Twitter’s mainstream potential, and usage data from a variety of sources supports my skepticism. So, what exactly is the mysterious value proposition that Twitter has failed to communicate?
I was hoping you could tell me. Great question, David. I’m making an assumption here, obviously
If there isn’t one, then there isn’t one – Twitter will probably continue on regardless, in some form. I do think Twitter has a mainstream play, but again it isn’t the responsibility of businesses to sort that out for them.
I wish I could, Tom, but I honestly just don’t see it. Don’t get me wrong – I think there’s tremendous business value in Twitter – it’s a great listening tool, a professional development resource, and for niche peer networks like ours (the aforementioned SM geeks), it even has casual social utility. I just haven’t heard a compelling argument for mainstream adoption, and I suspect there might not be one. Seriously, can anyone explain this mysterious value relative to Facebook, or is this an Emperor’s New Coat situation?
Got me thinking and I believe you’re spot on. Twitter is much more of a buy-in, let me find interesting folks to follow, let me see if there’s something special going on out there. And Facebook typically has more of I really know most of these folks feel, having “friends and family” in most respects being friends and family. And even with FB Pages, those are more whims usually than actual seek these topics out kinds of connections.
What may happen is that Facebook becomes the home of the “fan”, while Twitter has the broader reach (due to its asymmetrical nature) and thus begins to embrace being a “broadcast” network, rather than an interaction platform. In the case of the team I wrote about, I’d love to read tweets from the players, but wouldn’t necessarily have an expectation to interact with them. But who knows?
Then is it a timeliness thing, then? Perhaps FB is that space for “this is my life” and then I can be a fan of XYZ, but on Twitter “this is right now” and I appreciate the interaction for tonight’s special at the ballpark. Maybe that’s another defining line?
Maybe – and “relegating” Twitter to more ephemeral things isn’t necessarily a bad thing for Twitter’s future. Everyone likes Ice Cream.
man, I love this blog! Another great post.