Project Weekly Reflection 2: Twitter

Week one was completely focused on Facebook usage. It was telling and interesting. With this week’s focus on Twitter I expected differences, but also correlations. It’s a completely different atmosphere and setup. It wasn’t an easy week as I tried to find aspects of Twitter that were important to my research. At the end of the week I accomplished by goal: five posts all over 750 words, three of which were over 1,000. The five posts focused on 1) introduction and followers, 2) tweet counts, 3) tweet content, 4) tweet frequency, and 5) retweeting. Everyday was a battle as I dug deeper and deeper trying to find meaning to every statistic and pattern. Overall, though, the week went smoother with one already under my belt. I also put a little time into my main page, as I always try to do weekly, with added features to the right of the page and images galore.

Monday’s post brought a short introduction that proved likes on Facebook and Twitter followers do no correlate. The research pointed towards the realization that Facebook reaches a wider audience, while Twitter mostly reaches youth. I also solidified the fact that band inactivity leads to less followers. When bands take breaks, for whatever reason, they fail to reach new audiences. Modest Mouse was a good example. Also of note, bands with older fan-bases will have a smaller number of followers. These three noteworthy discovers made for a successful first day. Monday was also the start of the statistic overhaul about ensue this week. To really comprehend Twitter I needed to make calculations, and there were a lot of them.

Wednesday’s post was not as conclusive as I would have liked it to be as patterns were difficult to find, unlike Facebook. I did discover that every band uses Twitter in a different manor. Of Monsters and Men used it as a way to follow people, organizations, bands, and celebrities that they want to hear from. Grizzly Bear used it to tweet and retweet as often as possible. They were quite active. They seemed to care more about quantity than quality, which we saw a lot of on Facebook. They have been around since Twitter’s inception so they have the experience that others don’t. The Shins seemed not to use it all at, and they are an older band. The Lumineers and Two Door Cinema Club use it similarly. They focus on daily original posts, sometimes twice daily. They also follow under 200 people, which keeps their intake at a minimum. More importantly, I learned that being “radio popular” does not equals higher volumes of followers, nor does it make them more active on Twitter. I suppose I also learned that some bands are also reluctant to using Twitter at all (The Shins). I took more of a broad approach to the research on this post, which I avoided the rest of the week.

I found out a few things on Friday’s post. Mainly, do not get retweet happy. It can get annoying. Also, there is a good way to tweet a lot and a bad way. You can tweet all you want as long as you are producing original and new material, and giving fans some reason to follow via videos, tour dates, etc. Another thing I came upon was that Twitter is huge hot-spot for tour date announcements. The feeds were jammed full of them. The research was a little inconsistent, but Twitter is a little inconsistent. Patterns were proving to be harder to find on Twitter. I did implement Youtube videos that were mentioned in the blog for reference, which was a good touch.

Saturday’s post brought some much need balance and number association to the Twitter conversation, as I focused on tweet frequency. A lot of numbers were crunched. I now know the approximate tweet per month count. I know there are extreme highs and very extreme lows. I also have a good feel on a number bands should be reaching for monthly. Also, being on tour, promoting an upcoming album, and coming off an album does not necessarily mean more tweets. The research was very detailed and time-consuming. Actually tweets were made visual for examples. This had good effect. While this post may have a little confusing to some, it was well worth it and gave me a better grasp on how bands are using the space.

Today’s post was all about retweeting, which brought some interesting discussion. Once again, I went in-depth with numbers and percentages to better represent the band’s Twitter usage. Two bands have retweeted over 100 times this year alone, while the rest of the group combined for 77. These oddities were fascinating. I feel strongly that the numbers represent the amount of retweeting that goes on. I found a safe number and a good amount of retweets per month. The research done today, along with Saturday’s, was the best I have done all week. Thorough, developed, and well-thought.

I don’t quite know how it’s going to go on a research level, but posts should only get better from here as I move into MySpace. I know very little about it, so I’m excited.


One response to “Project Weekly Reflection 2: Twitter

  1. Pingback: Building over time | The Daybook·

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s