Content Clusters recognise that the content you create, is in itself an opportunity for multiple content ‘events’ across your channels, extending the life cycle of your marketing beyond a single content execution.
Take for example a client creating a single piece of video content (as seen in the diagram above). Naturally the release of the video is a content event, but there is a micro-system of other opportunities that can be explored for promotion and cross promotion around the video.
Prior to the shooting, an announcement can be made on Twitter creating expectation of intended shoot and content.
On the shoot day itself social post of On-set stills, Gif’s or video snippets can be shared as Teasers, building on the momentum of expectation.
When the content is published, short promotional cut downs should be released across social platforms, essentially acting as advertising for the audience to view the longer content, extending the reach and promotion of video.
Finally, in the period after the content has been released and consumed, a ‘Behind the Scenes’ video can further prolong the audience engagement.
This Cluster approach is ultimately an amplification of your content efforts and should assist in bolstering your content calendar.
To learn more about how you can leverage Content Clusters in your next campaign, contact Charlie Porter at Burninghouse.
Rice bunny says, “the only thing I want for the coming Lunar New Year is anti-sexual harassment rulings… You can take my plate away, but you cannot shut my mouth.”
So reads the opening line of a discussion page for the #MeToo campaign in China, posted on the Chinese social media platform Weibo.
“Rice bunny” (米兔), pronounced as “mi tu”, is a nickname given to the #MeToo campaign by Chinese social media users. The #RiceBunny hashtag, accompanied by emojis of rice bowls and bunny heads, is used by Chinese women to expose sexual harassment – often in conjunction with other Chinese hashtags, such as #IAmAlso (#我也是）and #MeTooInChina (#MeToo在中国).
Using emojis to circumvent censorship
The adoption of nicknames and emojis is not just a public relations strategy designed to increase the popularity of the campaign, it also serves as a tactical response to circumvent online censorship.
Similar practices of using homophones and images are widely used in China as a form of coded language to avoid censorship on social media.
“River crab” and “grass-mud horse” – both invented by internet users – are two cases in point. Because of their pronunciations in Chinese, the former is used to indicate censorship and the latter refers to a Chinese obscenity.
Internet censorship is a major challenge for the #MeToo campaign in China. Internet users have reported numerous instances of posts and chat pages relating to the topic being removed.
Around January 19, the primary hashtag of China’s #MeToo campaign – #MeTooInChina – was temporarily blocked. In response to this, Weibo users launched the alternative hashtag #RiceBunnyInChina to continue the campaign.
How #MeToo came to China
On January 1, Luo Xixi – a Chinese citizen who now resides in Silicon Valley – decided to bring the #MeToo campaign to social media in her home country. She began by publishing a 3000-word post on Weibo, revealing a secret she had kept to herself for 12 years. While studying for her PhD at Beihang University in Beijing she was harassed by Chen Xiaowu, a renowned professor and Luo’s former supervisor.
Luo’s post received millions of views, and was widely circulated through both state media and social media. The university and education authorities quickly responded to the scandal by sacking Chen Xiaowu.
Encouraged by the triumph of Luo’s allegations against Chen, more women from China broke their silence and shared their own accounts of sexual harassment at the hands of university professors.
According to a recent report, students and alumni from over 50 colleges have signed online petitions, demanding their schools develop mechanisms to prevent and deal with sexual harassment on campus. In solidarity, professors from over 30 universities also reportedly signed an open letter, calling for educational institutions in China to strengthen regulations and institute a reporting system for sexual harassment claims.
Why universities are ground zero
It is no coincidence that universities became China’s first battleground in the fight against sexual harassment.
The institutional power structure of universities leads to a power imbalance between students and their advisors. That disparity is particularly problematic when the education system is opaque and corrupted.
From primary school through to university in China, gift giving and bribery are common practice among students and parents to secure opportunities. This culture is ripe for abuse.
As several victims of university sexual harassment have revealed, predatory teachers often used coursework scores, scholarships, and even the outcome of degrees to lure or blackmail students.
But mistreatment is not unique to male professors and female students. In late December, a male PhD student Yang Baode was found drowned in a river in Xi’an. His girlfriend later published an open letter on social media claiming that Yang committed suicide after years of abuse from a female supervisor. According to her statement, and the results of the university’s own investigations, during Yang’s PhD study he was forced to become a servant to his supervisor, watering her plants, going shopping with her and picking her up from parking lots.
Calls for anti-harassment mechanisms in educational institutions have been supported by the Ministry of Education and state media, but this success might not be easy to replicate in other sectors of Chinese society.
Feminists as ‘trouble-makers’
Unlike its Western counterpart, the #MeToo campaign in China lacks the freedom to turn into a large-scale movement due to inevitable government intervention.
For the ruling party, online campaigns that seek to mobilise large swathes of the population are like wildfire that can easily spread out of control. At this stage, those exposed are mostly relatively low-profile figures, such as university professors, but it is not hard to imagine the scandal escalating up to those in positions of power.
Popularity is the the kiss of death for any civil movement in China. The Chinese government is known for preventing online activity from growing into collective action – especially demonstrations – no matter how politically innocent in nature.
In 2015, five women’s right activists were arrested by Chinese authorities for “provoking trouble” for organising protests against sexual harassment on public transport. In 2017, Zhang Leilei, an activist based in Guangzhou city, made similar efforts. Zhang attempted to crowdfund a nationwide anti-sexual harassment advertising campaign. But it was eventually rejected by local officials, and Zhang herself was asked to leave the city.
It is naive to expect women in China to follow a Western trajectory to achieve gender equality. But as the #RiceBunny hashtag on social media shows, even under political pressure activists continue to use their creativity to circumvent the system. So long as these fighters do not cease “provoking trouble”, we can feel optimistic about a safer, more equal future for women in China.
Well over 80 million people watched Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump face off on television, setting a new record in the sixty year history of televised presidential debates. According to Nielsen, the debate averaged a total of 84 million viewers across 13 of the TV channels that carried it live in the U.S. This beats the previous record for a presidential debate held by Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan back in 1980. While it didn’t reach some predictions of 100 million (making it Super Bowl worthy), it was certainly a big audience.
Both candidates were very active on social media leading into the debate, and throughout it used platforms, especially Twitter, to push out key messages. Twitter streamed the debate live and it was the most tweeted debate ever.
But which candidate won over Twitter? According to the social media monitoring tool Brandwatch, neither of them. Both had more negative than positive mentions. In fact, the night’s big Twitter winner wasn’t a presidential candidate, but a hip hop star.
@chancetherapper tweeted’ Dear God, the words law & order shouldn’t strike so much fear in my heart as a law abiding citizen but I am so damn scared of Donald Trump’ which generated 58.5k retweets and 115k likes.
Dear God, the words law & order shouldn't strike so much fear in my heart as a law abiding citizen but I am so damn scared of Donald Trump
Aside from Ms Clinton, Mr Trump and Chance the Rapper, the Twitter handles with the most debate-related mentions included moderator Lester Holt of NBC, Fox News and the fact-checking site Politifact.
It is also fascinating to watch how companies and individuals responded to mentions during the debate. Take Ford for example, who Trump singled out by saying “Ford is leaving,” Ford quickly took to Twitter to tweet to its own defence.
For more than 100 years, the modern Olympic Games have been celebrated as a testament to human physical achievement and power. On another scale the games are also an opportunity for peaceful cooperation between nations. They’re also a huge global marketing opportunity. With the world watching, the right mix of communications can make or break an Olympic sponsor. With the large audience and participants involved in the international event, there has been some form of controversy in nearly every Olympic year since 1906.
Even before Rio had its official opening ceremony there was controversy surrounding it. One such problem affecting the Rio Olympics — not to mention the rest of Brazil — is the spread of the Zika virus, which was declared a public health emergency earlier this year. There was the slumping Brazilian economy and let’s not forget the water tests that showed the public that Rio’s Olympic waters were heavily polluted with human sewage; not to mention an alarming number of disease-causing viruses and bacteria that were present. These were all handled with poise by the respective Olympic representatives.
After years of preparation, what a party so far: the venues have turned out to be amazing, despite the original hiccups. The sport has come first (mostly), Rio2016 is now in day 5. Listed are 5 communication lessons we’ve learned and reviewed so far.
1. Practice makes perfect
The opening ceremony had to be planned just like any event. Brazil kicked off this year’s Olympics with a low-budget opening ceremony that was full of colour and a Samba bear. Throw in some dancing and some preaching about environmentalism for good measure.
The ceremony seemed flawless until it was leaked to media that Brazilian supermodel Gisele made a mistake in her walk – she was too fast (ironic at the Olympics really). Her walk in a thigh-split silver sequined gown (amazing) led to a 1,850% rise in Google searches for her name in just one hour. Richard Lawson, of Vanity Fair, said: “Gisele literally just walked across the stadium and it was an event.”
2. Watch your P’s and Q’s even in the pool
When the Mack Horton scandal erupted a few days ago, many Australians had never heard of the young swimmer. The 24-year-old was at the centre of controversy three days before the Olympics began when Fairfax Media revealed that a Chinese swimmer had tried to disrupt Horton by splashing him at the training pool in Rio. Horton responded by saying he had “no time or respect for drug cheats”, a jab at Sun’s positive drug test two years ago. Sun served a three-month doping ban in 2014, which the Chinese federation kept secret.
Earlier this week, Chinese fans took the grudge into their own hands, attacking Horton on his various social media accounts using the hashtag #apologizetosunyan.
“Your parents and whole country should be shame [sic] on what you’ve said,” one user wrote on Instagram.
Another wrote: “You even won the match, but you are still a loser, you don’t deserve to have an Olympic gold medal.”
Many other trolled Horton’s accounts with snake emojis.
Horton hasn’t taken to social media, and is charming the media, he claims his comments have been taken out of context and was quoted saying “what controversy”. It’s now up to the fans to decide as everyone looks towards the 1500m final – both of the swimmers main event.
3. Monitor your social…
London’s 2012 Summer Olympic Games had an official social media following of 4.7 million users across all platforms. Two years later, Sochi’s had gone up to over 5 million across two platforms alone: Facebook and VKontakte, the most popular Russian social media site. @Rio2016 is sitting at more than 500K followers on Twitter. Thinking beyond the official channels, and only five days in, the potential impact of social media on the games is endless.
4. Advertising and brands can make the most of any event.
Westpac put together a montage of Olympians’ family members attempting their sports. It’s funny, adorable, and leaves you feeling nice and warm. Susie O’Neills mum doing the butterfly stroke is cute. Lacoste for team France anyone? Rio 2016 marks the fifth time Ralph Lauren has dressed Team USA. Stella McCartney based the looks she created for Great Britain’s athletes on the signature silhouettes that commonly feature in her fashion designs. We saw Puma in the opening ceremony looking after Cuba’s team, but it is rumoured that Christian Louboutin has helped create outfits for the closing ceremony on 22 August. The Olympics gives these brands a whole new platform to expose themselves to a larger public.
5. Has Channel Seven’s Olympic coverage controlled and changed the way we can watch sports.
Channel Seven has decided to broadcast the Olympics solo. No Foxtel partnership. People who want to watch Gymnastics live for example have to pay for it via a subscription app. This has already upset the public. Why should we have to pay for an event that is broadcast for free in other nations? The Conversation explores this in a deep analysis.
Leonardo da Vinci may have been ahead of the curve in aerodynamics, anatomy and mechanics, but he also possessed an incredible foresight for another modern staple: cat obsessions.
In some of the last years of his life, Leonardo sat down, perhaps at his desk, perhaps on the street, took out his pencil and absent-mindedly sketched a cat. The resulting drawing is of not just one, but over a dozen of them, grooming, playing and fighting each other, with a couple of stalking lions thrown into the mix and to top it all, a slinky little dragon sinuously twisting backwards and baring its teeth. Evidently he appreciated them for their personalities and characteristics: not such a jump from cat doodles to the ubiquity of cats on social media today.
In the week that the latest blockbuster exhibition on Leonardo da Vinci, The Mechanics of Genius, opens to great fanfare at the Science Museum, a second, much smaller show is opening in Newcastle. The Laing Gallery’s exhibition showcases just ten of Leonardo’s best drawings from the extensive collections at Windsor, cats included. Whereas the Science Museum showcases the extraordinary mechanical genius of this remarkable artist, these drawings offers a more playful insight into Leonardo’s mind.
Cats were a commonplace sight in medieval and early modern houses, kept as pets to curb the mouse population. They sometimes left quite unexpected traces, such as the medieval moggy who marched over the still wet pages of a manuscript, much to the consternation of its scribe. And clearly they featured in more of an esoteric manner too: there are countless depictions of cats within medieval manuscripts, as featured in Nicole Eddy’s fabulous post on the “Lolcats of the Middle Ages”.
So it’s not so surprising to find Leonardo caught in the act of doodling. It seems as though Leonardo’s cats are drawn from life, attesting to his often commented on interest in first-hand observation. He lets his imagination run riot in the process of turning his playful cats into a writhing dragon.
What makes his drawing so charming is that ultimately, what he is interested in here is nothing more significant than the playing cats. He draws cats on other occasions, such as in some studies for the Virgin and child (with cat), but there the cat is drawn as an attribute, becoming a subsidiary accessory to the telling of the story. In the cat doodle, the purpose of the drawing is nothing other than to record Leonardo’s delight in the carefully observed play and movement of his feline companions.
There’s a rich history of associating cats with imagination and creativity, as well as more negative connotations with heresy and wilfulness. This is especially true of medieval imagery. Cats, with their noted reputation for autonomy and independence, provide a bridge between the unruly and uncontrollable chaos of untamed nature, and the quiet, submissive, orderly domesticity of a well-ruled household. A cat can function both as a symbol for obedience (and is often depicted as such, for example as a companion to devout women) as well as a sign of heresy, in the shape of a witch’s familiar.
So cats are not inherently good or evil. Instead they appear to reflect the moral character of the household they interact with: in accordance with their mercurial, quirky nature. In this light, they seem the perfect companion for a creative and scholarly owner.
Fast forward 500 years and perhaps it doesn’t seem so surprising that social media has become the perfect vehicle for displaying this connection. While Salvador Dali needed to take long walks with his pet ocelot Babou to generate interest in his unusual status pet, Twitter and Facebook offer platforms for often quite witty plays on the link between cats and creativity.
My favourite example of this is the #AcademicsWithCats Twitter feed, which led to the annual “Academics with Cats awards”. I like to think that Leonardo would have entered with gusto. He definitely would have won. With a cat dressed as a dragon.
In news this week: Nike, Porsche and Tag-Heuer have all suspended their sponsorships of Maria Sharapova after she announced to the world that she had tested positive to a banned substance at the Australian Open.
This is a loss for the tennis legend and a swift manoeuvre from her sponsors to disassociate their brands from the negativity (of a positive drug test).
Sharapova or her agents started to manage the situation early. She had her game face on. She called a press conference in LA straight away. Fronted up to the media and her public and explained why she was on the drug.
Meldonium, which Sharapova said she had legally taken throughout her career, was placed on the banned list by the World Anti Doping Agency (WADA) at the beginning of the year following “evidence of its use by athletes with the intention of enhancing performance”.
Dressed head-to-toe in black corporate attire, she said: “I let my fans down, I let the sport down that I have been playing since the age of four and I love so deeply.” One of the world’s richest sports stars went on to say: “I know with this I face consequences. I don’t want to end my career this way and I really hope I will be given another chance to play this game.”
She had apologised to her fans, but via social media not so much as a flutter post press conference from Sharapova. Until today, when she posted a thank you to her dear fans – on Facebook with a linked to her post on Twitter.
When will companies and celebrities recognise that social media platforms need their attention too? When will they learn that they are a conversational tool and not a broadcasting tool alone.
There was one twitter comment alerting her 2 million plus fan base to the upcoming press conference. And then radio silence – and even though there was plenty of support with #IStandWithMaria and #LetMariaPlaymaking it could seem to some that she was hiding in the dark, avoiding the aftermath. Not giving her side of the story.
She did acknowledge the support noting that she had remained offline on purpose and her friends had supplied a collage of comments.
When will people and companies learn that social media is a tool to converse with other people, and like in “real life” keep that conversation flowing. It’s a two-way street. Answer the publics questions. Keep the faith.
Media tycoon Rupert Murdoch puts his thoughts out on the Twittersphere just like any other Joe Bloggs. Last month, Hugh Martin from La Trobe University wrote this great piece in The Conversation examining why a media mogul, billionaire and powerful person like Murdoch might bother with Twitter – and gives us an insight into Rupert’s tweeting style.
Murdoch is nothing if not a prolific tweeter. But why does he bother?
As the head of News Corp and 21st Century Fox, Murdoch has more media outlets at his beck and call than anyone. His editors famously either intuit or are told what he wants published and act accordingly. He has more reach than any single individual on the planet. And he uses it.
So, why would a man with so much media power at his fingertips, and political power on three continents to match, choose to expose himself to the raw landscape of the Twittersphere?
It’s a question that has exercised at least one of his biographers. Michael Wolff has said Murdoch uses Twitter to “express himself”, which really doesn’t explain why a global news organisation isn’t satisfying enough.
To anyone familiar with his newspapers and TV networks the views Murdoch expresses on Twitter are not surprising. It appears he is not “expressing” anything different on Twitter.
In the past week Murdoch has tweeted in support of Ben Carson as the potential Republican US presidential candidate, drug threats faced by rural communities, and the political situation in Australia. His news organisations comprehensively covered all of these topics and apparently represented his viewpoints accurately (pro-Carson, anti-drugs, pro-Tony Abbott).
So it’s clear Twitter serves a different purpose than simply allowing Murdoch to express a personal view. Nor is his use of the social media network about engaging directly with other users. His responses to specific tweets are rare – he uses it as a broadcast medium.
Murdoch has 609,000 followers on Twitter, which is tiny in the context of News Corp’s global audiences. He follows 110 people. Social media conversation is not what he is interested in.
Murdoch’s use of Twitter may be far more revealing on a personal and sentimental level than has previously been recognised.
Murdoch, at 77, can’t use a computer, doesn’t get email, can’t get his cell phone to work properly, can’t even imagine changing the variables on a spreadsheet.
Some of that, at least, is simply wrong.
While it is true that Murdoch isn’t a digital native, he has always demonstrated a hands-on approach to technology that pertains to the media industry. Whether that is sub-editing copy onscreen for early editions of The Sun, running printing presses during the Wapping strikes of the mid-1980s or tweeting from his iPad, he knows how to use the tools.
In November 2005, at a small gathering of News Limited editors in Adelaide that I attended, Murdoch said:
When I get up in the morning I check the news from all over the world. I am constantly amazed by the rich variety of offerings on the web.
This was at a time when News was gearing up for a digital fight with its competitors. Murdoch said very clearly that day that he wanted News to be at the forefront of digital publishing:
It’s where our audiences are moving to. And it’s where we have to be.
This is a man who has always led from the front. Murdoch is far more comfortable with technology than his legend would have us believe. And yet, something is odd about his use of Twitter.
For one thing, Murdoch’s style is unfamiliar to modern readers. Twitter is defined by its 140-character limit. But he uses this restriction to pack description via adjectives and terse use of verbs into the available space and make this relay his meaning:
2 stories. Carson, Detroit ghetto to brilliant neurosurgeon. Obama white upbringing to community organizer. Sincere men, different values
Why should we be surprised at the incisive use of language? Murdoch has always identified as a journalist. He is, after all, the son of a celebrated journalist. But Twitter’s 140-character limit lends itself to a wonderfully eloquent and antiquated style of writing: telegraphese.
Rupert’s father, Keith, would instantly recognise his son’s tweets as exactly the sort of writing employed by journalists sending breaking news reports by telegram.
From the battlefields of the US Civil War to Murdoch senior’s own reporting from the Dardanelles in the first world war, telegraphese was the essential mode for journalists.
And that is how Rupert tweets, as if he is reporting to the world and paying for each word. The only thing missing is the characteristic “STOP”. If we were to add that into the above tweet the effect is immediate:
2 stories STOP Carson, Detroit ghetto to brilliant neurosurgeon STOP Obama white upbringing to community organizer STOP Sincere men, different values
In Rupert’s dotage, it seems the son is reliving the father’s glory years as a global correspondent.
You wouldn’t think it would be possible, but there is another crisis brewing (or perhaps brewed) at the ABC’s Q&A office. With staff just recovering from the controversy involving Zaky Mallah, accusations of being terrorist sympathisers and a government-ordered inquiry into the program, producers are now facing criticism over the tweets they choose to flash up on screen on Monday night.
All was forgiven, and the questions and answers were flowing again, until some (opposite of a genius) decided to tweet under the Twitter handle @AbbottLovesAnal, which slipped through ABC’s moderators mouse clicks and landed Q&A back in hot water. The content of the tweet itself was not offensive (although an insult to the English language), it was the crude tone of the @handle.
With the right use, an appropriate handle and a “normal” person behind a smart phone, Twitter can really come into its own, especially when wanting to interact at a networking or professional development event.
The skill involved in live tweeting is common sense, a good use of language in 140 characters or less, and keeping content clear and precise. Here are our top five tips when attending a corporate event and using the tool.
Make sure you’re using the correct hashtag – if it’s trending you want to be involved. There’s no point tweeting for the sake of it –unless you’re Kim Kardashian then you can do whatever you like.
Engage with people prior to the event. Get Twitter handles of speakers in advance. Connecting with people before the event is the perfect opportunity to learn more about them, set up meetings and learn about their companies (and what they can do for you – or more importantly what you can do for them).
Quote speakers correctly. Always add their Twitter handles to attribute their authorship. If they’re not on Twitter, simply include their name in the Tweet so you don’t confuse their ideas with yours.
Add visual content
There is so much more to tweeting than just text. Add pictures of the speakers and the venue. This is engaging and shows your audience what you’re talking about. The quality of pictures taken by our smartphones is more than adequate for the budding photographer.
People love seeing themselves in pictures. Take a selfie with your new “friends” and tag them to enforce your new connections and get more retweets.
Live tweeting from an event is a great way to get high number of followers in a very short time. Be generous, retweet and favourite other posts to increase your social footprint. Using the event hashtag, your tweets will appear in the live stream and people will start following you. Make sure you follow them back so the newly created connections can extend to offline meetings too. Tweet consistently but wisely – keep your “digital footprint” out during the event to keep appearing in the tweet stream. This keeps your brand out there for everyone to see. More and more events are holding live streaming of tweets during the day which allows your content to be displayed. So if you don’t want it out there don’t tweet it. Think of it like a live campaign for your company and what you say reflects on you.
Lastly, if you are the moderator of the tweets. Set the ground rules, block any content that shouldn’t be displayed and be thorough. Make sure your hashtag is prominent and the audience knows it.
The moderators at Q&A blamed the large volume of tweets coming through for this recent mishap. It’s critical that you arrange a small bundle of tweets and sort through these. Avoid any anal abbott outbursts or any other overtly political statement for that matter.