Danny Whatmough.com

Over at the Guardian, Bobbie Johnson has written a little piece entitled Why I’m finished with ’social media’

In it, he suggests that social media isn’t new so why all the jumping on the bandwagon every time a new celebrity signs up to Twitter or has a shower.

In the comments, a number of people have replied, venting their fury about all things Twitter and proudly stating that they have now quit. So there.

But they are missing the key thrust of Bobbie’s post. He’s not saying that he is finished ‘using’ social media, but that he is fed up with the social media ‘craze’.

And I see where he is coming from. I’m also fed up of hearing about the latest celebrity doing x y and z. But then I get fed up of that anyway in the ‘real world’. I hate Heat magazine et. al. So of course I am going to get fed up of hearing about it on Twitter.

Bobbie’s other point is: “‘Social media’ is mainstream – we don’t need to claim any more victories for it.”

Again, I partly agree. But some platforms aren’t mainstream yet. Just because the technorati and digerati  have been using Twitter for ages doesn’t mean its dull to the rest of the world. I find the Twitter phenomenon fascinating. And so do all the people out there (journalists and PRs included) that are learning about it for the very first time [i.e. the public].

But Bobbie’s eventual conclusion is correct – “Social media is people. People talk about stuff. The end.” – and this is often forgotten. Social media is just a different platform for content or conversation or broadcasting or listening or research or socialising…

What we are seeing is two levels here:

On one hand, we have the ‘platform’ itself. What it does. How it’s used. Takeup. Popularity. Strategies for using it in marketing/business etc. As a medium or a platform, social media does continue to evolve and change and, for digital analysts/influencers/marketing-bods, this is interesting. It’s not fair to liken it to the telephone or the pub.

On the other hand we have the content on the platform itself. The ‘Stephen Fry is stuck in a lift’ story. This is gossip, news (yes, to some it is) etc.

So you have the platform – Twitter/pub/telephone – and the content – ‘Stephen Fry is stuck in a lift’.

You can choose what content suits you and of course you can choose which platform suits you. If you don’t like the content then buy a different magazine or follow someone else. If you don’t like the platform then select a different one.

Just don’t blame the platform for the content. And don’t blame the public for liking the content. And don’t blame the PRs/media for liking that the public like the platform/content…

So Stephen Fry has become the second most followed person on Twitter. He is now only bettered by a certain US President!

[Don't worry, this isn't a jumping on the social media bandwagon post]

That is quite some going and 100,000 is a big number.

In the PR game, where ‘reach’ is obviously important, what does this say about media and influencer outreach?

A few things to consider:

- 100,000 people wont be seeing (let alone acting on) every one of Fry’s tweets

- I wonder how many of the 100,000 use Twitter on a regular basis

- Targeting is also important and perhaps difficult here

- Being ‘remarkable’ is surely even more important when targeting people like Fry

Having said all that, I was just on TweetDeck looking at the TwitScoop (a constant update of what is ‘hot’ on Twitter) and I noticed that “Bletchley” and “bpark” were coming up particularly strong.

When I clicked to find out more, I found that the only reason for this was that @stephenfry had just tweeted about it and his followers were re-tweeting his post.

Power indeed!