Free2Thee.com

Archive for the ‘Social Media’ Category

The Hunger Games Facebook It’s hard to overstate the massive success of  the film adaptation of ‘The Hunger Games’. So far the first film in the series has grossed over $250 in eleven days,  higher than any ‘Twilight’ adaptation and every ‘Harry Potter’ adaptation, save for the final installment in the series. This isn’t just a hit family film like ‘The Lorax’, this is one of the biggest blockbusters of all time. Films opening up on Memorial Day weekend or Independence Day are expected to open this way, but how does this happen in late-winter/early Spring? Children are in school, adults are working and Hollywood is usually at it’s sleepiest this time of year.  Some would attribute this to marketing techniques, particularly ones used through social media outlets. Many business degrees today emphasize the use of social media marketing, but often times don’t understand that social media is a dynamic tool. Wielding various outlets requires creativity and timeliness. For example, despite the wealth of billboards in cities around the world and the usual onslaught of television ads, ‘ The Hunger Games’ presence was felt on-line in ways far more advanced than simple banner ads on popular websites. The marketing team for ‘The Hunger Games’ created 13 Facebook pages representing the different districts that play a role in the story. Facebook user could align themselves with the district of their choice and become ‘citizens’ of a specific district. A Twitter account was created for The Capitol, a reference to the central city in the story, and has since been followed by over 66,000 people. Meanwhile, ‘The Hunger Games’ was mentioned about 1 million times on Twitter last month, according to real-time search site Topsy.com. In a move that suggests a sophisticated awareness of the series large female fan-base, the films marketers even created a Tumblr account called Capitol Couture to discuss the wild fashions worn by characters in the series. This this sort of interactivity has proven popular in the past. ‘Harry Potter’ fans take quizzes on Facebook to find out which ‘wizarding house’ they belong in and then post the results for friends to see. ‘Twilight’ of course has it’s ‘Team Edward’ or ‘Team Jacob’ campaign. The popularity of these social media efforts seem to be paying off. Though there is still a question of whether the success of ‘Hunger Games social marketing is due to the popularity of the series or if it is actually increasing awareness and eventually the number of tickets sold. While there is no concrete data yet to prove the usefulness of the social media, consider the case of ‘Hunger Games’, with it’s myriad uses of social media, vs. ‘John Carter’, which focused most of it’s marketing on the traditional marketing and on-line banner ads that most people seem to simply find annoying. The $250 million and counting racked up by ‘The Hunger Games’ on a budget of $80 million speaks a lot louder than the $66 million ‘John Carter’ has earned on a budget of at least $250 million. With those sort of numbers, it’s safe to say you can expect to see a major increase in social media usage by Hollywood in the near future.

Continued here:
Hunger Games Marketing Turns to Social Media

Do people trust your tweets? Twitter seems to have mushroomed overnight. The social network, famous for its mini-blogging format, has grown from a novel way to make it easier for your friends to keep tabs on you to a frequently accessed source of information. As people begin to get more and more information through tweets that are posted by strangers, concerns about credibility have begun to grow, as well. A new study from Carnegie Mellon took a look at how Twitter users determine whether or not a tweet is credible. They found that as people begin to rely more heavily upon search engines to locate relevant tweets from people they do not usually follow, they begin to be wary of trusting the content they encounter. The researchers culled their findings to come up with ways you can make your tweets more credible. The investigators began by doing a general study to determine how people use Twitter, what sort of tweets they find credible, and what criteria they use to determine credibility. Then the authors followed up their original findings by conducting two more tests in which they changed key features of tweets to see how the changes affected the posts’ credibility. They found that people find it hard to tell whether a tweet is legitimate just by reading it. As a result, users base their decisions about the credibility of a tweet on things like user names and whether or not the post has been retweeted. Study participants were told to conduct a Twitter search for information about a political candidate. They were asked to narrate their search, describing what they were doing and why. Assistants encouraged this process by asking about the tweets that were found, including such questions as whether the searcher thought the tweets were written by the candidate or came from legitimate news sources. Even though participants typically knew about such Twitter features as user biographies that help to establish credibility, they tended to pay attention only to features that were displayed on Twitter’s user interface. These include the content of the tweet itself as well as the author’s name and picture. To determine how these three tweet features influenced the way users viewed tweets, the study’s authors created tweets with varying levels of authenticity. Then they tried different types of user names and pictures representing common examples found on Twitter. For example, researchers varied user pictures for the faked tweets by inserting Twitter’s default picture, photos, avatars and logos. Their aim was to see what combination of user name type, pictures and content would be viewed as most credible by users. The researchers suggest that individual users who want to raise their credibility scores choose photos of themselves, rather than using the default picture or an avatar or logo. Topical names were viewed as the most credible, followed by names that appear to be ordinary first- and last-name combinations. Names that read like email addresses were viewed as the least credible. Keeping all tweets on the topic suggested by the author’s user name enhanced credibility, as did maintaining a strong geographical connection between the writer and the topic. For example, an author writing about the Indy500 who appears to be near the track will generally impress readers as being more credible. Using non-standard grammar and misspellings undermined credibility more than any other single factor. The authors caution, however, that in some industries or groups, non-standard usage may actually increase credibility. Other suggestions include amassing followers, posting content that stimulates retweets, including the URLs of your sources and retooling your bio to heavily reflect your topic of focus. From most effective to least effective, here is a list of features that are common to tweets that participants found credible: Tweet is actually a retweet from a trusted poster. The author appears to be an expert on the subject of the tweet. The writer is one the reader follows. The reader was able to click through a URL that was included in the tweet. The reader has heard of the author. The poster’s account has a verification seal The writer regularly tweets on the topic. The author often posts content that is similar. The tweeter uses what appears to be a personal photo as a user image. Other posters frequently refer to the author or post retweets of the author’s tweets. The researchers also noted some tweeting habits that tended to make authors appear less credible. Listed from least damaging to most harmful, here they are: The writer uses a logo as a user image. The poster follows a large number of authors. The tweeter uses a cartoon image or an avatar as a user image. The author failed to replace the Twitter default image with a more personalized one. The tweet contains improper grammar and punctuation.

The rest is here:
Dos and Don’ts of Twitter Credibility [Study]

Here are three members of the BU community telling you why you should cast your vote for Dean Elmore in the Shorty Awards. The Shorty Awards honor innovators in social media, particularly Twitter. Go to shortyawards.com/DeanElmore to vote today!

See the original post:
Vote for Dean Elmore for the Shorty Awards!

People with low self-esteem post more negative updates, which makes them less likeable. On the surface, Facebook would seem to offer important benefits to people who have low self-esteem. Sharing is easy and feels safe on Facebook, and sharing is an important way to improve friendships. Having a stable network of social connections helps to improve self-esteem. In reality, though, it may not work out that way. A new study conducted by Amanda Forest and Joanne Wood of the University of Waterloo found that people with low self-esteem tend to post too many negative updates, causing friends to see them as less likeable. The study will be published in the journal Psychological Science . Initially, the researchers, who have a special focus on self-esteem and how it impacts which emotions people express, thought that Facebook would be an ideal venue for people to go to learn social skills and improve friendships. People who have lower self-esteem typically find it hard to share their feelings in a one-on-one setting. However, Facebook allows users to share and have social interactions without the need for face-to-face contact. The researchers found that participants with low self-esteem often view Facebook as a chance to connect and interact with others in a safe setting without the awkwardness they often feel in live, in-person social settings. Participants were also asked to provide the ten most recent updates about their life that they posted for their Facebook friends to see. The updates were rated for negativity, then an undergraduate research assistant went through the updates and indicated how likeable they found the person who made the statements from the updates. Participants who had low self-esteem tended to post updates that were more negative on average. In turn, the assistants who rated their updates tended to find them less likeable than people with higher self-esteem. Although the raters did not know the people who posted the updates, according to Forest, a previous study showed that almost half of the friends people list on Facebook are strangers or mere acquaintances, rather than close friends. The study found that when participants with low self-esteem placed very positive messages on their pages, they received more responses from members of their actual Facebook friends list than they did when they placed negative or neutral messages on Facebook. However, participants who had high self-esteem got more responses from their friends when they posted negative messages. Forest and Wood speculate that this may be because, in both cases, these types of posts are more unusual for these users. The investigators concluded that, while people who have low self-esteem may be more willing to share on Facebook, they might not receive the same benefits from doing so that they would get from face-to-face encounters. This is because people may not be as willing to provide feedback on Facebook the way they might in person. According to Forest, in a live social setting, people may be able to pick up on a friend’s negative reaction to to something they said. “On Facebook, you don’t see most of the reactions.” Related posts: Facebook positively influences education, study says Facebook’s Effect on Interpersonal Relationships [Infographic] Almost Half of Facebook Users Have Profanity on Their Wall

Go here to see the original:
Don’t Use Facebook If You Have Low Self-Esteem [Study]

Our lives are awash in the blue-white light of our smartphone screens. It is hard to walk down a street without bumping into someone, often literally, who is busily typing into their smartphones. More and more Americans are cancelling home phone service in favor of using their cell as their primary number. Servicing or even purchasing a non-smartphone is becoming harder and harder. Our phones keep our schedules, take our photos and videos, store our contacts, and –oh yeah– make phone calls. One of the primary reason we love our smartphones is the ability to keep in contact with friends far away. The pioneer application for this is of course Facebook. Facebook has altered the way this generation socializes. We can keep up with our friends who we may have otherwise fallen out of contact with years ago. Grandma can see all the photos from Junior’s birthday party in Time Square from her comfortable living room in Phoenix. A whole host of  apps have been spawned to give you Facebook on your phone. Each app offers different levels of access and features. Likewise each application has its own unique quirks and shortcomings. Let’s explore a few of them to better our understanding: Blackberry Facebook 2.0 beta Positives Facebook Chat – catching up in real-time New Navigation Grid – easier to find what you’re looking for Negatives Still sluggish for photos – don’t expect to thumb through an album quickly Bugs in chat app –these will likely be ironed out in the near future. Android: Friendcaster Facebook App Positives All in one app, instead of accessing some features through the browser. Tablet friendly taking full advantage of the larger screen Negatives Invasive notifications open the app itself despite what else you might be doing most of the time. Your farm will miss you if you don’t use a browser to keep up with it and your other games. Facebook Version 4 for iPhone Positives Games! You won’t have to open a browser to keep up with your farm and more Apps – access your favorite apps on the go! Navigation and Notification – Send a message or see your notifications or browse without losing your place in News Feed Negatives Scaling for the iPad causes spacing issues Comment bugs – sometimes the posts tease you from just off screen tapping around randomly will often fix the problem Related posts: The Facebook Obsession and Its Effect on Communication [Infographic] Facebook Profile Picture Statistics [Infographic] Study: Facebook photo sharing reflects focus on female appearance

View original post here:
Facebook App Comparison for Your Smartphone

With over 48 hours of video being uploaded to YouTube every minute, 200 million Tweets posted daily, and an average of 90 pieces of content per user posted to Facebook every day, we are uploading our personalities, our thoughts, and our ideas onto the web, but what happens to these online personas after we die? Already services are offering options for this — such as IfIDie.Net — which lets you record a last video or Tweet to be posted once you die. Even Facebook’s recent rollout of Timeline allows users to make a digital archive of their lives. But SVP Content & Exec Editor at Mashable, Adam Ostrow, takes it once step further in this video as he discusses the implications of these ideas mixed with machine learning, where computers can make intelligent decisions based on data. Ostrow notes that computers grow more advanced at analyzing content every day. He wonders whether a person’s death and the personification of their analyzed content can extend their life virtually. For example, what if we could program robots to act like a person based on their created content? This isn’t too far of a stretch. One site, My Next Tweet, already offers a service that will analyze all your tweets to predict what you’ll say next. What if Adam is right? Will we need to redefine our definition of “life?” Related posts: Fotoshop by Adobé Makes Fun of Media Beauty Standards [Video] The Ramifications of Social Media On Actual Social Interaction Perry Hewitt on Harvard’s Social Media

See the original post here:
Social Media After Death [Video]