Lab 2:
Find Facebook pages and Twitter streams for one credible nonfiction site and one credible nonfiction writer of your choice. How do the publications/writers interact with readers? Does it work? Why or why not? How much is too much? What is effective and what is noise? Write a short post.
Credible NonFiction Site: National Geographic
Facebook: National Geographic's Facebook page works quite well. There is a photo album of
some of the famed photography, and then on the Wall are posts referring to articles
with a eye-catching thumbnail picture. It works like a magazine, actually. You can
choose articles to read just by scrolling rather than skimming. It also neatly posts its mission statement on the Info section, which I think becomes lost in the serial
publication. As a serial, one infers what National Geographic is about, but on Facebook
there is another opportunity for NatGeo to identify itself.
http://www.facebook.com/natgeo
Twitter: I think National Geographic uses Twitter quite cleverly for the vision of its enterprise.
There is a steady stream of photograph links which sends the reader to the National
Geographic website rather than just an isolated image. This not only highlights the
prestigious photography of National Geographic, but it also encourages the reader to
check out the website and learn something besides gaze at the pretty picture.
National Geographic's Twitter feed also sends multiple messages regarding a single
study or featured article.
http://twitter.com/#!/NatGeo
Credible NonFiction Author: Thomas Friedman, NYTimes correspondent, three-time Pulitzer Prize winner, specializes in foreign affairs, especially the Middle East.
My father read from him extensively and loaned me "From Beirut to Jerusalem" of which I am halfway through, and I have been halfway through for months.. >_<; It is very interesting, and very dense.
Facebook: The Info section is little more than a brief introduction to what he does and what
he has written. There are a few nice photographs of him at speaking events.
The Wall is used to post his published articles and speaking events, which would be
very convenient for his fans. There are also audio and video files linked there.
It seems this page is maintained quite nicely, although I'm not sure if Friedman
maintains it himself or not.
http://www.facebook.com/thomaslfriedman
Twitter: Thomas Friedman's Twitter feed is a simple stream of his contributions to
The New York Times. I suppose this is a useful tool for his regular subscribers and fans.
I suppose that here Twitter is used simply as a list for collecting and keeping up with the author. There's no time or reason for personal glitter here.
http://twitter.com/#!/NYTimesFriedman
I conclude that Twitter and Facebook are more useful for larger media franchises because they attract readers with smaller, bite-sized hooks. For authors, it seems that someone would have to already be a fan to have interest, at least in the case of Thomas Friedman, I think. Although these tools do a good job giving an order to the author's works and events, it's interesting how impersonal these social media sites might be for the professional.
Find Facebook pages and Twitter streams for one credible nonfiction site and one credible nonfiction writer of your choice. How do the publications/writers interact with readers? Does it work? Why or why not? How much is too much? What is effective and what is noise? Write a short post.
Credible NonFiction Site: National Geographic
Facebook: National Geographic's Facebook page works quite well. There is a photo album of
some of the famed photography, and then on the Wall are posts referring to articles
with a eye-catching thumbnail picture. It works like a magazine, actually. You can
choose articles to read just by scrolling rather than skimming. It also neatly posts its mission statement on the Info section, which I think becomes lost in the serial
publication. As a serial, one infers what National Geographic is about, but on Facebook
there is another opportunity for NatGeo to identify itself.
http://www.facebook.com/natgeo
Twitter: I think National Geographic uses Twitter quite cleverly for the vision of its enterprise.
There is a steady stream of photograph links which sends the reader to the National
Geographic website rather than just an isolated image. This not only highlights the
prestigious photography of National Geographic, but it also encourages the reader to
check out the website and learn something besides gaze at the pretty picture.
National Geographic's Twitter feed also sends multiple messages regarding a single
study or featured article.
http://twitter.com/#!/NatGeo
Credible NonFiction Author: Thomas Friedman, NYTimes correspondent, three-time Pulitzer Prize winner, specializes in foreign affairs, especially the Middle East.
My father read from him extensively and loaned me "From Beirut to Jerusalem" of which I am halfway through, and I have been halfway through for months.. >_<; It is very interesting, and very dense.
Facebook: The Info section is little more than a brief introduction to what he does and what
he has written. There are a few nice photographs of him at speaking events.
The Wall is used to post his published articles and speaking events, which would be
very convenient for his fans. There are also audio and video files linked there.
It seems this page is maintained quite nicely, although I'm not sure if Friedman
maintains it himself or not.
http://www.facebook.com/thomaslfriedman
Twitter: Thomas Friedman's Twitter feed is a simple stream of his contributions to
The New York Times. I suppose this is a useful tool for his regular subscribers and fans.
I suppose that here Twitter is used simply as a list for collecting and keeping up with the author. There's no time or reason for personal glitter here.
http://twitter.com/#!/NYTimesFriedman
I conclude that Twitter and Facebook are more useful for larger media franchises because they attract readers with smaller, bite-sized hooks. For authors, it seems that someone would have to already be a fan to have interest, at least in the case of Thomas Friedman, I think. Although these tools do a good job giving an order to the author's works and events, it's interesting how impersonal these social media sites might be for the professional.
No comments:
Post a Comment