Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by LaminatorX on Sunday December 07 2014, @03:43AM   Printer-friendly
from the 140-chair-actors dept.

On 30 August 2012, Hollywood star Clint Eastwood took the stage to lambast President Obama. What ensued was an odd, 11-minute monologue where Eastwood conversed with an empty chair upon which an imaginary Barack Obama sat. The evening of Eastwood’s speech the official campaign Twitter account @MittRomney did not mention the actor, while the Obama campaign deftly tweeted out from @BarackObama a picture of the president sitting in his chair with the words “This Seat’s Taken”. The picture was retweeted 59,663 times, favorited 23,887 times, and, as importantly, was featured in news articles across the country. According to Daniel Kress both campaigns sought to influence journalists in direct and indirect ways, and planned their strategic communication efforts around political events such as debates well in advance. Despite these similarities, staffers say that Obama’s campaign had much greater ability to respond in real time to unfolding commentary around political events (PDF) given an organizational structure that provided digital staffers with a high degree of autonomy.

Romney's social media team did well when it practiced its strategy carefully before big events like the debates. But Obama's social media team was often quicker to respond to things and more creative. According to Kress, at extraordinary moments campaigns can exercise what Isaac Reed calls “performative power,” influence over other actors’ definitions of the situation and their consequent actions through well-timed, resonant, and rhetorically effective communicative action and interaction. During the Romney campaign as many as 22 staffers screened posts for Romeny's social media accounts before they could go out. As Romney’s digital director Zac Moffatt told Kreiss, the campaign had “the best tweets ever written by 17 people. ... It was the best they all could agree on every single time.”

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by isostatic on Monday December 08 2014, @11:27AM

    by isostatic (365) on Monday December 08 2014, @11:27AM (#123690) Journal

    Setting aside the typo, it's true. This sort of political crap winds people (including me) up, attracting many rants, and thus high page views, and then gives the impression that's what people want. The Daily Mail sells a lot of newspapers using the same method. "Reality" TV is more popular than good drama. "News" programs like OReilly or Stewart attract more viewers than real news.

    However SN does not need to rely on high hit rates, it should be aiming for the quality end of the market rather than the popular tat that other sites do. If there aren't any submissions, don't post anything. I'd like to see a few rejected posts on SN, I don't recall seeing anything in the queue not appearing.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2