Using Facebook

[Smallpotatoes]

At my last job, the employers really stressed using Facebook to promote our work.

The reasoning was that most people do not go directly to your web site to read what's on it. They find a story on Facebook and click on that.

I guess that's true, but I didn't really buy into the idea that every single thing you do should be on Facebook. I couldn't understand why I saw the more routine stuff like youth photos and write ups and the routine, week-in, week-out high school stories promoted on Facebook.

To me, it made sense to promote the big stuff, the features, the stories about the teams winning states or the league.

I guess you never know what is going to catch the readers' attention, but if everything is a big deal, nothing is a big deal.

One day I said that to one of the higher-up people on the digital side. Her reply was if it's not a big deal, why report it at all?

While I didn't answer, there are some routine things that you publish because a part of your readership expects to see them. They're not anything that needs to be shouted from the highest mountaintop and the people who are looking for them will find them.

Part of it is my own personality. I'm not one to shout everything from the highest mountain. I tend to be rather understated. Not everything is huge and acting as if it is diminishes what really is a big deal. Every football game isn't the Super Bowl. (Though I know one photographer who acts like every fire is the Towering Inferno).

On the other hand, the three most important words I've ever learned about the business are "You never know." It might not seem like a big deal to me, but it might be to a lot of other people.

Where does everyone here come down on this? Promote the **** out of everything or just the big stuff or only report the big stuff and maybe tell some readers "I'm sorry, but we don't do that anymore." about certain stories?

 

[Slacker]

 

[wicked]

I’ll bite.

If it’s good, people will find it.

This is what’s happened in multiple newsrooms where I’ve worked. Seeing a story spread organically via Twitter is a helluva lot more effective than any social “campaign.”

Does this mean you don’t boost tweets and Facebook posts and don’t put effort into social language? Of course not. But you’re not gonna get 10,000 eyeballs on that story about the car crashing into Stanley’s barn, no matter what you do.

 

[justgladtobehere]

I think it is better that a reporter or newspaper promotes everything. The nature of a newspaper was that it had everything. People bought it because it would have the big news but there was other stuff that the reader might be interested in. Social media promotion should try to replicate that.

 

[nempreps]

I don't think EVERYTHING should be posted on facebook.

Your higher up asked you 'if it's not a big deal, why report it at all? Well... the truth is youth photos and other press releases are needed to be in the paper BUT no one really cares about them aside from the family that wanted it in. It is a necessary evil in papers, I'm afraid.

So, if your facebook page posts EVERYTHING, including youth photos and JV recaps that some assistant coach sent in, people are just going to ignore it. However, if you only post major things people are going to take note and say 'Wow, these guys don't always post on here, so it must be a big deal'

Just my two cents

 

[Liut]

I don't think EVERYTHING should be posted on facebook.

Your higher up asked you 'if it's not a big deal, why report it at all? Well... the truth is youth photos and other press releases are needed to be in the paper BUT no one really cares about them aside from the family that wanted it in. It is a necessary evil in papers, I'm afraid.

So, if your facebook page posts EVERYTHING, including youth photos and JV recaps that some assistant coach sent in, people are just going to ignore it. However, if you only post major things people are going to take note and say 'Wow, these guys don't always post on here, so it must be a big deal'

Just my two cents

Your last sentence really strikes home. Let me preface by stating we do not post everything on FB.

A few days ago, a gentleman who had been missing for two weeks was found dead. We broke the story on our website, then teased that on FB. The number of "shares" was almost mind-boggling and contributed mightily to the thousands of hits on the story.

 

[Severian]

Daily PSA to delete your Facebook, WhatsApp and Instagram account. Stop supporting a company that doesn't care about users and harvests user information to enrich its shareholders. Not to mention the company is hellbent on making while disregarding its negative impact on societies worldwide.

 

[goalmouth]

I don't use FB anymore except for work accounts. A total 25% of our online page views was thru FB, and about 6% from Twitter. Like it or not for now FB drives a substantial amount of traffic.

Per, @Raven, Zuckerberg's a tool and dork billionaire beholden to Russian money but when something's free, YOU are the product. You can opt out of all of its ad categories, and report any ad for any reason. In the more than a decade of personal use of FB, I saw maybe one politcal ad, and few ads at all. I NEVER posted any controverrsial content, NEVER shared such content, and NEVER got into an argument of any kind with anyone. I dropped 90% of my personal friends from my feed as I was on mostly for pastime and professional groups. My account was recently disabled for no apparent reason, then re-enabled, but I'm off for good.

I will add that the selling of FB user info for nefarious purposes is overblown. A friend conducted a serious study a few years ago with a federal health agency and found way more valuable data and info by analyzing tens of millions of Likes, which are free to download by anyone. To close, anyone who is persuaded to vote one way or the other by an online ad is a lamebrain and should seek help.

 

[Severian]

My account was recently disabled for no apparent reason, then re-enabled, but I'm off for good.

Maybe because you weren't as active and kept mas many people as Facebook wanted. And the bots probably thought you were inactive enough to consider deleting your account.

 

[Sam Mills 51]

Where's Nancy Reagan?

When it comes to Facebook, Just Say No.

 

[goalmouth]

Maybe because you weren't as active and kept mas many people as Facebook wanted. And the bots probably thought you were inactive enough to consider deleting your account.

At the time, I was on throughout the day. The disable notice said I could contact FB to contest it. I did nothing and my account popped back on a week or so later.

 

[Severian]

a week or so later.

A week later? So much for helping user.

 

[Songbird]

****ing Facebook changed again but the new format is ****ing awful as if designed by a 3rd grader on cocaine and Flintstones chewables.

Does anyone know how to @ a name or business in the body of a post?

You can't just type @ in front of the name because it doesn't pull up a list to choose from. You can do that in comments though.

 

[Severian]

Dude. Just stop using Facebook.

 

[MNgremlin]

Here's a couple of things I hate about our paper using Facebook to share links to stories:

1. We have a paywall (as most papers do). Inviting people to click on link only to be told they have to pay to read it doesn't encourage them to subscribe, it only infuriates the potential readers. Then they post all over your comment section "why can't I read this" or "unfollowing since I can't read this" or "can someone copy and paste", which to me detracts other potential readers and invites more negative comments about the paper.

2. I don't know how other papers do it, but at my shop, non-breaking news stories don't go live on the website until midnight. This is an hour after we send to the printers. Usually the newsroom is cleared out by then, so nothing gets shared on Facebook until the next day. Thursday morning, there was a house explosion in town at 6:30 a.m. The radio station had an initial post on Facebook before 7 a.m. with an updated story with a photo online by 8:30 a.m. Thursday. Those two posts were shared a combined 526 times. Our shop's story wasn't posted on Facebook until 10:30 a.m. Friday....10 shares.

 

[wicked]

If the paper has a straight news lede on a story that will be 24 hours old when it gets in most of your reader's hands, that's the first problem.

A house explosion sounds like it should be breaking (no pun intended) news.

 

[MNgremlin]

If the paper has a straight news lede on a story that will be 24 hours old when it gets in most of your reader's hands, that's the first problem.

A house explosion sounds like it should be breaking (no pun intended) news.

They might've run a breaking news brief, I honestly don't remember now. Regardless, they still didn't post the full update until when I said.

 

[studthug12]

They might've run a breaking news brief, I honestly don't remember now. Regardless, they still didn't post the full update until when I said.

Feature stories and things of that nature where strong engagement is expected should be posted at strong online times, 7 am when people are getting ready for work and on phones, noon and 5/6 pm and 8 pm to have up when people are getting ready for bed. A dump onto FB all at once or at midnight is about the dumbest thing you could do. You're doing it wrong.