Episode #012: Radical Media, Using Influencers In Marketing, and Social Media Trust
Duration: 10 min, 42 sec.
• “Talking Radical Media With Noam Chomsky” by Victor Pickard, The Nation
• “How to Incorporate Influencers into Your Social Media Marketing Plan” by Mike Nicholson, 46ALPHA
• “Why Users Stick With Social Media Despite A Serious Lack Of Trust” by Brian Deagon, Investors.com
Links from this episode:
This week’s three topics:
Noam Chomsky, the author of Manufacturing Consent, talks about today’s radical media.
How to Incorporate Influencers into Your Social Media Marketing Plan
And why do most of us stick with Social Media sites when we don’t trust them?
The date is Sunday, August 15th, 2021, the time is 2100 hours, and you’re listening to Episode #12 of Communicate For Effect.
A good Sunday evening to you all.
I’m Mike Nicholson.
It’s been an interesting week.
Continued COVID craziness, politics, rhetoric, misinformation everywhere about COVID and Delta.
Major League Baseball had a “Field of Dreams” game between the New York Yankees and Chicago Red Sox.
It was a game played on the same field that the movie “Field of Dreams” was shot.
I didn’t see it live, I only saw it afterward, and it looked amazing.
And then it looks like Afghanistan is going to fall back into the hands of the Taliban, rather quickly.
As of right now. the Taliban have already captured the Presidential Palace in Kabul, evacuations of U.S. Embassy personnel continue, and the U.S. flag has been lowered ending 20 years of war there.
For those of us that deployed and spent a lot of time there – I was there three different times – it’s hard to watch and I think all of us have mixed feelings about this.
I’ve got some thoughts, but not for today.
Today, let’s jump into the first segment.
Noam Chomsky, who is an author, political and cognitive scientist, has been called “the father of modern linguistics” and he wrote Manufacturing Consent, spoke with Victor Pickard who is a professor of media policy and political economy at the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg School for Communication.
His article is on The Nation website.
The topic of the interview was his thoughts on radical media today and the subtitle of the article is, “The 92-year-old leftist sees meaningful progress in news coverage.”
Which was surprising.
They talk a little about his previous books, interests and then got into the information space of today.
“You can get information from other sources—the Internet allows you to read the foreign press if you’re interested. But I think the Internet’s main effect is to narrow the range of information that most people access by driving them into social media bubbles. The propaganda model is basically the same.”
He talked about the Florida governor pushing legislation to study students’ opinions in Florida colleges to make sure there’s “diversity,” or enough right-wing ideology.
He calls this a “straight-up Stalinist-style thought control.”
He also talks a little about the “critical race theory” debate and then at the end, they discuss what is of interest to me – how do you fix this?
Referencing the interviewer’s book that he read, Chomsky says:
“you discussed how the founders of the US Republic believed that the government ought to publicly subsidize the dissemination of diverse news media. In this light, the First Amendment should be understood as providing what’s called a “positive freedom”—not just “negative freedom.” It should create opportunities for free and independent media. Subsidizing news media was a primary function of the post office.”
And when talking about the option of increased public funding as opposed to commercial, for-profit news agencies, he said:
“As for public media, they can, to some degree be more free than commercial media. The measure of their freedom largely depends on the level of democracy in the broader society. If it’s controlled by the state under Stalinist Russia, obviously it’s not going to be free, but if it’s the UK’s BBC, then yes, it can be reasonably free—not totally free by any means, but reasonably so.”
I’ll put a link to this article in the show notes.
I wrote an article on July 27 titled, “How to incorporate influencers into your social media marketing plan.”
Other than requesting a few influencers to assist with projects and amplification, I’ve never really jumped into this so wanted to research it a bit.
I cover the basics of what an influencer is, what you need to look for, what they do
• Sharing posts about the brand
• Conducting a product review
• Speaking on behalf of your company
• Using products to promote the brand
The benefits, and then how to get started.
When looking for an appropriate influencer for your organization, you need to do some research and don’t get your mind focused on only one.
That one influencer you are thinking of may not want to partner with.
So do your research, get an idea of who they are, what they post, and how they help other brands.
Once you determine a person is an appropriate personality, make your initial contact, provide an overview of what you are looking for and see what their requirements are upfront.
It could be most likely money, or freebies, or something else.
You need to determine if you want a one-time post or a continual agreement, but whatever it is, make sure the terms are specific and both parties clearly understand what is required of them.
Ideally, you are looking for an influencer that genuinely loves your organization and/or your product and it is someone you can build a professional relationship with.
I don’t have an example of a legal agreement, but that might be something useful for me to add.
I’ll make a note of that.
Finally, Brian Deagon asks the question of why users stick with social media despite a serious lack of trust.
A recent survey by Investor’s Business Daily and its polling partner TechnoMetrica Market Intelligence found Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, and TikTok were the bottom four slots of trustworthy sites, but of course, these are some of the most popular social media sites.
So what gives?
At the top was Amazon, then Netflix, PayPal, Google, Amazon, Microsoft, YouTube, Spotify, Pinterest, and eBay rounding out the top 10.
He cites the data privacy concerns, but then discusses the privacy paradox.
The privacy paradox describes online behavior that reveals discrepancies between users’ attitude and their actual behavior.
Users claim to be very concerned about their privacy, but yet they do very little to protect their personal data.
Richard Bird from Ping Identity interviewed for the articled, says:
“Everybody wants privacy, yet consumers give it away even though they know that information about them is routinely accumulated and monetized. They might feel like they are getting more value in return but do not understand the scale of risk.”
The issue of trust also depends on age, political affiliation, income, and other demographic categories.
As an example, Democrats gave Facebook a score of 60.3, and Republicans gave it a score of 36.
For Twitter, Republicans gave Twitter a 33, but Democrats gave it a score of 60.
So no surprise there, that perceptions of trust are greatly dependant upon typical demographics like political party affiliation, age, etc.
So that’s a wrap for #12.
If you have any questions or comments for me, just go to 46alpha.com and shoot me a note.
You can subscribe to the Last 24 daily news summaries, or follow my FlipBoard magazine if you want to read more articles that I find interesting on digital comms, marketing, and technology.
I’m Mike Nicholson, thanks again and see you next week.