Can the Onion concept convey Social Media Lurkers Into the sunshine?

March 6, 2015

Can deeper personal disclosure seduce silent social media lurkers into joining our dialog?

Mark Schaefer and i have been on a apparently never-ending quest to take into account darkish social media, grey social media, and the individuals who may just love your company but keep within the shadows.

however what if we’re focusing on the medium and not the message? If we are able to’t measure social media lurkers, maybe the content can draw them in.

As Brian Solis famously mentioned:

Social media is ready sociology no longer technology.

BINGO.

The Onion idea

if you’re over the humorous idea identify, let’s discuss how it can be used to fish for lurkers.

I wrote my first post on the Onion thought, and my undergraduate thesis work on the way it applies to the use of psychographics in social media advertising.

the idea has 4 elementary assumptions about the best way we form relationships:

They transfer from non-intimate to intimate (unknowns to lurkers and probably to neighborhood individuals)
development is normally systematic and predictable (content material is most often the catalyst for ignition)
construction comprises de-penetration (slow deterioration of relationship) and dissolution (now not each lurker will turn out to be a group member, not each neighborhood member will transform a customer)
Self-disclosure (revealing information about your self to others) is at the core of relationship building (emotional marketing is needed to make a connection)

in accordance with these assumptions, are we doing sufficient with our content material to divulge information about ourselves … whether or not an creator or a model?

The psychology at the back of it says that by way of disclosing details about your self to your neighborhood, you’ll spark off reciprocity with a few of your members, as a result creating a relationship and trust.

different essential on-line elements apply, like authority, affect, and confidently two-method dialog.

Is it that you can imagine that deeper disclosures can seduce the silent segments into becoming a member of our identified audience?

The Onion theory: Bringing Lurkers To the sunshine?

If we consider the levels through which we’re engaging our audiences with content, i think we want to center of attention extra on the disclosures that content material gives.

To me this is a component of the key (psychology/sociology) for changing lurkers into people who interact in two-means social.

It’s my case for using more emotional marketing and no longer getting mired in tracking metrics or an IP address (but yeah, i want that too!).

serious about the manufacturers you make a choice to have interaction with, take a look at the degrees of the Onion conception and decide where they fall …

level One

Cliché. customary. Meh. What many companies and brands deem “acceptable” content. on the other hand, with the outbreak of mundane content (content material shock) this degree will infrequently beckon silent audiences from the shadows.

level Two

I’d like to call this “purgatory” as a result of i feel like that is the place so many people get caught. We’ve acquired these informal relationships; the readers who may be studying per week, but never displaying themselves. whereas we (the emblem) are relatively displaying who we are, we aren’t truly going “there” with genuine transparency. We additionally aren’t doing enough to spark lurkers to weigh in.

stage Three

These are the really genuine manufacturers. Chick-fil-A right away involves mind. They aren’t scared to show how they feel about faith, even at the price of criticism (imagine it or not, gross sales skyrocketed after the identical-intercourse marriage controversy). very few brands can get here based on the anxiousness of being disliked for his or her disclosures, being “too emotional” or going too a ways.

degree four

there’s an even trade of psychographics — emotions, opinions, beliefs, attitudes — from each audience and model. Two-method conversation has emerged. i assume we’d believe this advertising “heaven” due to the fact two-method conversation and sharing denotes a measurable impact. I saw the unique Olympics have interaction on this degree on their fb page again in 2010/2011 when they requested their fanatics how they felt about the “r” phrase. The response used to be riveting.

take into accounts it. As any person concerned with the different Olympics, that kind of question would move me to reply. and other people did.

They shared each feeling conceivable on the topic, after which different Olympics web page shared their thoughts again.

[image source: WikiCommons]

So? What degree do the brands you select to interact with function on?

I’m positive there are only a few who engage you with private or core content material (and if there are, please let me learn about them in the feedback part!).

inform the truth. the place does your advertising and marketing sit down?

Sociology Or know-how?

I understand there’s chance of taking things too a ways. We’re all so scared of getting overwhelmed down by using making one off-colour commentary.

but take a look at tv. We’ve moved faraway from cliché programming to networks riddled with truth television.

I find it fascinating that reality television was originally created a way for networks to fight the rising costs of producing a show.

whereas PBS and Discovery have large budgets dedicated to continuing to engineer educational shows, other, smaller networks needed to seize viewers with one thing they might connect with on a deeper stage.

It’s just like combatting content shock.

while the large companies have deep pockets and can produce heavy-hitting educational content that’s rising to the highest of search engines, possibly the small or heart-market manufacturers need to create “reality” content material, which is cheaper and more straightforward to supply, and allows lurkers to attach on a deeper stage.

it can be that by moving past levels One & Two, we will coax our silent audiences into dialog and participation.

after which, POOF!, they’re measurable. Definable. Identifiable.

Is that the reply?

I don’t understand. I’m asking you.

will have to we be occupied with the metrics that convey us who’s silent, or working to present the quiet voices a platform for being heard? Let me comprehend within the comments section beneath!

Digital & Social Articles on business 2 neighborhood