Author: Jim

For years now, folks have been bemoaning the death of the attention span. One of the most famous of these pronouncements came all the way back in 2008, published in the Atlantic:

It is clear that users are not reading online in the traditional sense; indeed there are signs that new forms of “reading” are emerging as users “power browse” horizontally through titles, contents pages and abstracts going for quick wins. It almost seems that they go online to avoid reading in the traditional sense.

And in the interim, social media and technology have just sped things up:

The study by Lloyds TSB insurance showed that the average attention span had fallen to just 5 minutes, down from 12 minutes 10 years ago.

But the over-50s are able to concentrate for longer periods than young people, suggesting that busy lifestyles and intrusive modern technology rather than old age are to blame for our mental decline.

This shorter attention span has evolved how people digest information, especially news. There have been lots of studies to investigate what news should look like, especially as the mass media struggles to figure out where they live in today’s world. This study from the Guardian seems to confirm that:

People are checking the news more frequently and for shorter amounts of time.
Forget news reading. Today, it’s all about “news snacking,” meaning people are checking the news more often and typically on mobile devices. 75 percent of readers with smartphones and 70 percent with tablets check the news more than once a day.

It’s all about aggregators.
According to the study, 73 percent of those surveyed said they use aggregators intensively, up from 33 percent a year ago. Use of branded news applications (such as leading national dailies), on the other hand, decreased from 60 percent to 40 percent in the same period.

Social media is on the rise for checking news.
The report also indicates that people are increasingly checking sites like Facebook and Twitter for news updates; 43 percent of readers now use Facebook to check news, an increase of seven percent from last year.

Gerald Baron has been an absolute leader in examining this field of “nano news,” as he calls it. He’s defined it a couple of times, “Defining Nano News,” and “NanoNews—understanding the new news environment. ”

But my reason for posting these links is to implore our government communication friends to rethink how we talk. Looking at yesterday’s post on using images, made me wonder why images were so important. I think it has something to do with this idea of snackable content, or nano-news. The old saying is that pictures are worth 1,000 words. Are images how people are more quickly digesting information?

Thinking about information that my Department puts out, I wonder, is it truly snackable? Can someone stop by on their phone and digest the information in less than five minutes? Or do our fact sheets require an in-depth reading of inches and inches of text? Are they snackable? Now what about your fact sheets?

I’m a words guy. 1,500 words a week on this blog and untold thousands on Twitter. Thousands more at work and that’s not even counting the love letters I write my wife. I like the written word. But maybe I’m just old-fashioned.

Because today, visually conveying information is where it’s at. From pictures to videos to infographics, text is seen as stodgy, out-of-date and stale. But it even goes beyond being cool. There’s real data that images do better on social media. We turn to our favorite social media data hounds, Buffer.

On Facebook:

1. Photo posts get 39% more interaction
Not only do photo posts get more engagement than links, videos or text-based updates, they actually account for 93% of the most engaging posts on Facebook. According to Kissmetrics, photos get 53% more likes, 104% more comments and 84% more click-throughs on links than text-based posts. And as we’ve mentioned before, self-explanatory photos seem to perform best.

On Twitter:

2. Tweets with image links get 2x the engagement rate of those without

These data are precipitating a huge change in how folks do social media:

But before marketers jump into this visual web, it’s important they take a step back and recognize that a new approach is required. No longer will quick-witted 140-character tweets and traditional monitoring tools be sufficient. In order to reap the benefits of image-driven engagement, marketers need to expand their current wheelhouse of social media knowledge and tools.

Below, you’ll see how images are changing the role of social media marketers and discuss three musts for brands that are eager to conquer the visual web:

1. Build art director skills.
As visual engagement grows, marketers will be required to produce great images that still fall within their branding. At the most basic level, they’ll need to understand what makes a great photograph — and it’s more than just implementing the “rule of thirds“.

2. Always be closing (carefully).
Pinterest and Instagram allow consumers to engage at a product level for the first time. Not only do they express interest in brands, but they also reveal the exact products they love down to the style, color and size. Social media teams now have the opportunity to gauge purchase intent in real time and push consumers to buy.

3. Research and master image marketing tools.
As mentioned earlier, images are being shared at a record pace. Without the ability to leverage this trend, brands have no part in the process. Luckily, dozens of platforms, services and tools have emerged to create an ecosystem of companies that are aligned by one common goal: to help brands market with pictures.

But wait, what’s better than pictures? Lots of pictures put together: videos! And with the explosion of popularity in short-form video like Vine and Instagram, there are folks who think video is the way to go:

Most of the time, though, I don’t want fantasy. I want authenticity. When I’m trying to capture my kid’s birthday party, I don’t want the best moments. I want the truest moments—I want to remember exactly what it felt like, what it sounded like, how frustrated and stressed-out and over-the-moon I was all at once. And for authenticity—or, better authenticity—videos handily beat photos.

But, you say, I’m so busy! How can I add videos to my repertoire? Well, the inimitable Kerry Shearer has some tips for you:

So, what do you think? Am I a dinosaur? Should this blog be just videos of me?

My son’s favorite saying right now is that something–anything really–happens “like a boss.” He brushes his teeth like a boss. He plays video games like a boss. And I’m old now, so I think to myself, I’m already a boss, what does that mean for my toothbrushing? What does that mean for my tweeting? Do I tweet like a boss?

And surprisingly, there’s an answer for that last one. I apparently don’t tweet like a boss. Not a boss like my son says, but a real boss. A CEO or Commissioner. One study showed that less than 2% of Fortune 500 CEO’s tweet. Let’s try to guess how many local and state government Commissioners (not politicians) do.

And that’s a real shame because there are definite benefits to being present on social media. (And remember, we’re talking about the big guy and gal, NOT our agencies. I think hope that issue has been settled by now.)

Megan Jasin says there are three reasons why executives should be tweeting for themselves:

1. It’s refreshing to read unscripted content, ideas and opinions from today’s corporate leaders. (They’re leaders for a reason.)

2. There is less risk of a PR crisis for the executive and his or her company. (Well, less risk than an intern being the voice of the company or agency.)

3. It’s good practice for CEOs, CMOs, CFOs and Managers looking to connect directly with consumers and learn future behavioral trends.

But it’s not all day-to-day and tweeting during corporate lunches. Civil service executives (read: brass) have seen some real benefits from holding the Twitter reins, especially during emergencies. At the recent #NCRSMEM conference, I got the special chance to hear Boston PD Deputy Commissioner John Daley speak about one of his major roles during the Boston Marathon bombing and subsequent manhunt.

What’s unique about Boston Police is how completely their executives have embraced Twitter, and Deputy Commissioner Daley is at the forefront. The best example is the following; one of the single most retweeted tweets ever, and it was sent literally SECONDS after the arrest was made:

How the heck did it get approved that quickly? Why wasn’t the Incident Commander informed first, how were the five levels of approval gone through so fast? Simple, because it was sent by the Incident Commander. Because the sender was also the approver.

Now think about your executive. Would they ever do that? If not, why not? Do they relish a lag in releasing information? They like to be second or thousandth? Or do they not care who is the voice of the agency and would rather some lackey speak for them? Or do they not think that actually representing their agency to the world is important enough?

I think that each one of those cases would merit a very special discussion about priorities and goals for your organization.

I’m also interested in what other reasons you’ve heard for why your executive can’t tweet. Leave me a comment below with your best excuses!