I’ll offer my two cents having seen this discussion play out a few times with political movements - so disclaimer that there are differences and what works for some may not work for us. Anyway…
I personally think that things like “Please R/T” or “Click like” will be seen as engagement strategies and avoided by users. However, each time I’ve seen this debate play out in an A/B test, the strategies do work. Usually for things that were opinions - “Like if you support XYZ issue” or “R/T if you agree that ABC should happen”. When the same graphic or article was posted on two FB Pages of similar size and scope, we would continuously see that messages which ask for engagement got more engagement. I’m not sure if this is something where those working in communications are so familiar with the strategies we question if they will work, or we just see them so much we get tired of them ourselves. Sort of like LGBT activists tendency to dislike the rainbow a few years into the work. ;) Or it’s a situation where we say we won’t do something - like buy newspapers that talk about scandals - but our behavior when we are not analyzing things betrays us (sales of newspapers featuring scandals go through the roof). Either way, my hunch is that the requests, when attached to the right kind of message, do engage more folks (despite my personal feelings toward that). I agree a discussion and possibly testing of this concept is a good idea. As always, it is possible Wikimedians are the exception to the rule. ;) -greg > On Oct 15, 2015, at 10:07 AM, Jeff Elder <[email protected]> wrote: > > It's a good discussion. Our reach dwindles to as low as 30,000 (of our 5 > million fans) if we just push out our links. Then everything suffers: blog > traffic, page growth, engagement, etc. Conversely, highly engaged posts raise > everything. And we have to remember our Facebook fans, especially recent > ones, are mostly readers not editors, and are looking to connect with us. > > On Thursday, October 15, 2015, Andrew Sherman <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > I totally understand what you mean and would really enjoy discussing those > uses of "click like" or "comment below" :). > > I think they can work I just am unfamiliar with what situations we use them > for, when it's not redundant etc. > > Otherwise LGTM. > > On Thursday, October 15, 2015, Jeff Elder <[email protected] <>> wrote: > Those are good points. I suppose people can click like to just indicate yes. > My experience is that online and social media veterans bristle a bit at > "click like," but a lot of people also do it. Our audience is very diverse, > and seems to embrace basic common denominators. So I'd rather not rule it out > uniformly. But I see the point today. So: > > Have you ever looked up a celebrity on Wikipedia? Who? > > All in favor? Opposed? > > On Thursday, October 15, 2015, Andrew Sherman <[email protected] <>> > wrote: > I also kinda agree. I watch a lot of youtube and it might be personal but the > whole action of asking for engagement kinda turns me off ("subscribe if you > want more content, click like to let me know what you think", etc). > > I think the proposed question "have you ever looked up a celebrity on > Wikipedia?" is sufficient enough to get engagement; maybe even ask why or > what did you find out to the question. > > > > On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 9:35 AM, Joe Sutherland <[email protected] > <>> wrote: > I'm not sure I like "Click like if..." personally, seems kind of cheap. And > surely everyone's looked up a celebrity one time or another? > > On 15 October 2015 at 14:28, Jeff Elder <[email protected] <>> wrote: > Click like if you have ever looked up a celebrity on Wikipedia. If you > remember one, we'd love to hear who in a comment. > > Thoughts? Engagement is a goal right now, and getting our large audience of > mostly readers more involved. > > > > -- > Jeff Elder > Digital communications manager > Wikimedia Foundation > 704-650-4130 <tel:704-650-4130> > @jeffelder <https://twitter.com/JeffElder> > @wikipedia <https://twitter.com/wikipedia> > The Wikimedia blog <https://blog.wikimedia.org/> > > _______________________________________________ > Social-media mailing list > [email protected] <> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media > <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media> > > > > > -- > Joe Sutherland > Communications Intern [remote] > m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 <tel:%2B44%20%280%29%207722%20916%20433> | t: @jrbsu > <http://twitter.com/jrbsu> | w: JSutherland > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:JSutherland_(WMF)> > > _______________________________________________ > Social-media mailing list > [email protected] <> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media > <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media> > > > > > -- > Andrew Sherman > Digital Communications | Wikimedia Foundation > > E: [email protected] <> > WMF: ASherman (WMF) <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:ASherman_(WMF)> > > -- > Jeff Elder > Digital communications manager > Wikimedia Foundation > 704-650-4130 <tel:704-650-4130> > @jeffelder <https://twitter.com/JeffElder> > @wikipedia <https://twitter.com/wikipedia> > The Wikimedia blog <https://blog.wikimedia.org/> > > > -- > Andrew Sherman > Digital Communications | Wikimedia Foundation > > E: [email protected] <> > WMF: ASherman (WMF) <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:ASherman_(WMF)> > > > -- > Jeff Elder > Digital communications manager > Wikimedia Foundation > 704-650-4130 <tel:704-650-4130> > @jeffelder <https://twitter.com/JeffElder> > @wikipedia <https://twitter.com/wikipedia> > The Wikimedia blog <https://blog.wikimedia.org/> > _______________________________________________ > Social-media mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media > <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media>
_______________________________________________ Social-media mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
