#embracing traditional again as i near 1 year in the fandom lol

[bressynonym]

wipwipwip

[decoding1432]

The Art Behind Manipulating & Guarding a Fandom (p. IV)

Part four, sorry it took to long guys...

NOTE: *Most of the posts I direct you to, are SHORT & in my opinion not too dense to read. In fact, the great majority are Q&As. I’ll identified every post with a letter, it means that throughout the various parts you’ll see them repeated, so no need to read one twice*

Previous parts:

The Art Behind Manipulating & Guarding a Fandom (p. I)

The Art Behind Manipulating & Guarding a Fandom (p. II)

The Art Behind Manipulating & Guarding a Fandom (p. III)

Astroturfing it’s not a conspiracy thing because...

Reason 1: *link H*

I mentioned I would bring up again this link. I’ll explain: Apparently the blog answering the question is someone that knows plenty about the industry, bla bla, bla but never claimed to be an insider that worked near the band. The thing is the 1D bloggers appreciate him/her a lot because it has helped them understand things better, etc, etc…

“You mentioned Twitter watchdogs in an answer so that prompts me to wonder how aware the 1D Management team is of the things that are discussed online…”

“I’d say that, yes, they’re very aware of what goes on in the social media world, both on Twitter and on tumblr. It would be bad business to ignore it, especially since the majority of their success has come as a result of fans on social media.

In terms of purely monitoring social media, the different platforms require different techniques. Twitter is fairly easy, as you can just search hashtags and scroll through mentions or search by keyword. Tumblr is a bit more of a difficult one to monitor, as it’s more newly popular and generally harder to control. The best way that I’ve seen to get a handle on tumblr is to set up what basically amount to burner accounts. You create a tumblr account with an unassuming username and do nothing to the actual account. You leave the layout at default, don’t change the icon, don’t make posts, and don’t reblog or favourite anything. But you use the account to follow the blogs that control the conversation in whatever fandom you’re trying to monitor. There are usually a handful of bigger blogs in a specific fandom, and they’re the ones who control the discussion. Keeping track of what they’re saying lets you keep track of what people are saying in general, for the most part.

As far as astroturfing goes, that’s definitely not a conspiracy theory. It happens in the industry, absolutely. I’m not sure how widespread it is within One Direction specifically, but I’d be surprised if they didn’t have at least a few dummy accounts set up to try and sway fan opinion in one way or the other, both on Twitter and on tumblr.”

I’m not choosing to believe in this concept of astroturfing because a random blog in the 1D side said it... NO, I don’t know if this person works in the industry or what, I don’t know if it’s a “plant blog” itself. But I’m certainly going to validate him/her the sentences that I put in bold.

It’s obviously no secret that they actually monitor us through our SM since that’s where a big part of Fifth Harmony’s success comes from. They need to keep an eye on us, in order to assure “brand loyalty” & guide us wherever they want in concern to the narrative.

Reason 2: *link R*

“Mark Hardy is the ex marketing director for Syco, here is what he had to say about social media monitoring...

‘Hardy explains that key performance indicators included number of Facebook likes, Twitter followers, retweets, as well as YouTube views, and interaction and engagement across social media platforms.’

“It was a bit like herding cats, you had to be on top of it all the time with constant monitoring.” he points out.”

No additional comments needed... on to the next one:

Reason 3: *link S*

Explained below is the importance of astroturfing fandoms here in Tumblr, courtesy of a directioner.

When I met with social media Rob the first time, he told me that our fandom was basically a “hostile market” then went on to explain that Tumblr in general is a hostile market place. Here is a nice little article into why Tumblr in particular is a hard market place to broach.  

Why historically tumblr is the best place to seed information in a seemingly organic fashion?

“It’s why Tumblr has been so loathe to embrace any sort of traditional display advertising, preferring to keep all posts “native.” It doesn’t even use the word advertising for its paid products, it’s all strictly “sponsored posts;” that is, content that looks like a regular Tumblr user could have made it, but that happens to be sponsored.”

Why target certain blogs?

“Engagement begets engagement: In order to give your posts a greater chance of getting reblogged, it helps to be a big reblogger of other users’ posts. Not only does it help your Tumblr page show up in more places, it also increases the chances of fellow users returning the favor.”

In the first paragraph it is mentioned the 1D fandom is a “hostile market”, IT IS ABSOLUTELY OUT OF THE QUESTION IF OURS IS TOO.

Reason 4: *link S*

“Understanding Social Media Campaigns:

3 SOCIAL MEDIA MODELS THAT WILL GUIDE YOUR BRAND INTO THE CONVERSATION LANDSCAPE– This article basically outlines what things to look for if you feel conversation is being swayed.

This article is more information pertaining to how to actively engage an audience in a sales campaign but what is very interesting is this little snip bit.

‘With social media, they even trust the opinions of some perfect strangers more than brand messages. This has important consequences in all kinds of relationships: buyers are more educated but so are journalists, potential future employees and everyone else in the social ecosystem of our business.’

Now what I would like to add to the conversation is how corporations successfully go about swaying an audiences conversation.”

Reason 5: The TED talk alone must make you believe (this one attached previously on part 1)

Video description: “In this eye-opening talk, veteran investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson shows how astroturf, or fake grassroots movements funded by political, corporate, or other special interests very effectively manipulate and distort media messages.”

Reason 6: *link T*

[NOTE: This is not the complete article]

Fake Twitter Followers: A Dirty Marketing Secret

A few weeks ago, I alerted readers to the growing problem of Twitter spam and now news comes that this is not the domain of underground players but one where large brands and stars may also be playing, purchasing fake followers to puff up their social media presence.

To understand how one identifies the presence of fake followers, a little pattern study must happen. In the case of someone who has purchased fake followers, the account generally sees a spike in user numbers followed by an equivalent drop in the number of followers about a month later.

But why would brands or stars do something like this? Since the early days of social media, the number of followers has been a key metric of value but getting there is tricky business. With services like Klout and PeerIndex, the raw number of followers has come to be equated, in the public mind as a measure of popularity. Agencies dealing with endorsement contracts, publishing deals, and even credit reports often take number of followers into account when figuring out who to go with and how much money should go in those deals. So having a large number of followers has come to be equated with a value of quality, which may be based on some flawed assumptions.

Reason 7: *link U*

[NOTE: This is not the complete article]

Social's Value Measured in Engagement Over Sales

Engagement, brand lift are leading social goals

“Marketers struggle to get the most out of their presence on social sites, and with brands’ continued tenure on the networks, their goals and the metrics they use to measure their performance have changed. According to a 2013 survey of US marketing professionals by Pivot Conference, which hosts leading social business events, consumer engagement and brand lift were the No. 1 goals of social media marketing, each cited by 67% of respondents. This was up significantly from 2011, when those goals were cited by about 50% each.”

In 2013 the goals were cited by 67% of respondents, now imagine 4 years later where we know SM presence in celebrities is practically vital.

“Last year, using social media marketing to garner positive sentiment was the leading goal, whereas this year it dropped to No. 4. Marketers may be finding that it is less important that their posts get a warm reception from social users and more important that they keep consumers posting, “liking” and sharing social content.”

In 5H’s case add to that last sentence “the marketers are definitely finding more important that they keep the social users making drama out of every little thing” LOL.

You might be wondering why reasons 6 & 7 are part of this. I included them mainly to show you the relevance of social media engagement to brands. Astroturfing is one of the various strategies implemented for this latter.

Reason 8:

I already show you this (if I’m corrected it was on p. II) but I’m bringing it back.

I think many of the bloggers here that surpass the standard number of followers have a handful dummy accounts or burner accounts following them…

Seriously in what world an inactivated account would follow you out of nowhere for the sake of it?!

Reason 9: *link V*

[NOTE: This is not the complete article]

Astroturfing: A question of trust

The practice of astroturfing – faking support for a product or cause – is on the rise on and offline. But how can it be stamped out?

“What do healthcare reform, climate change and financial regulation have in common? The answer is that they are all issues covered by astroturf, the practice of creating fake grassroots movements, usually by lobbyists and PR experts. These attempts to manipulate the media and public opinion seem to be on the rise – spurred on in part by the political mood and the reach of the internet.

"Astroturf front groups have been everywhere this summer, spreading misinformation about healthcare reform, carbon emission caps and financial regulation," says Timothy Karr, the campaign director for the US website freepress.net. "A healthy 21st-century democracy doesn't need phoney front groups. We need openness, accountability and real debate."

While the term astroturfing goes back to the mid-1980s, the practice began many more years ago. Unscrupulous marketers and lobbyists have long found ways to advance their paymasters' agendas – including manufactured mail campaigns, fake crowd protests and, increasingly, use of the web.

A "sock puppet" is a fake online identity created to support an argument – and, in many cases, they are untraceable. Richard Levangie, who writes about climate change astroturfing at the One Blue Marble website, says he first came across it in the mid-1990s. "I was passionate about slowing the rise of teenage smoking in my home province, and thought about starting an advocacy group that would work with teenagers ... that's where I first came up against astroturfing, in the form of smokers' rights groups who were ignoring the science about secondhand smoke, and who were trying to reframe the issue as freedom of choice." Astroturfing can range from a few forum posts or a comment praising a company to something closer to harassment, and from genuine disagreement and independent troublemakers to organised "trolls", all the way to the entirely fake campaigner.

Faked Reviews

Advertisement

Several authors have been found leaving glowing reviews of their own books on Amazon, while a bizarre case emerged in 2007 involving John Mackey, the chief executive of high-end US supermarket chain Whole Foods, who used a pseudonym to disparage competitors on message boards. More recently, a US PR company was found to have been writing fake positive reviews of a client's iPhone software.

The question of astroturfing comes up regularly in the world of public relations, says Jon Silk, the creative director of Lewis PR in London. "Clients new to online PR will often ask the question: 'Can't we just anonymously post positive comments?'," he says. "It takes time to explain how influence works – that it should start with a good product or service, and have a clear message that must be communicated to the right people in the right way."

Reason 10: *link W* (& last cause the list is endless tbh)

“Fake "grassroots" groups have started springing up like toadstools after a rain, and this time they're coming at us from every angle: they're on TV, Twitter, Facebook and YouTube… With all these corporate fronts coming out of the woodwork, how can citizens tell true grassroots organizations from corporate fronts operated by highly-paid PR and lobbying firms? Here are some tips to help readers spot this kind of big-business hanky-panky.

What is a "front group," really?

A front group is an organization that purports to represent one agenda while in reality it serves some other party or interest whose sponsorship is hidden or rarely mentioned. The front group is perhaps the most easily recognized use of the third party propaganda technique.

One of the best examples is Rick Berman's Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF), which claims that its mission is to defend the rights of consumers to choose to eat, drink and smoke as they please. In reality, though, CCF is a front group for the tobacco, restaurant and alcoholic beverage industries, which provide all or most of its funding. Not all organizations that engage in manipulative efforts to shape public opinion can be classified as "front groups," however.

The shadowy way front groups operate makes it difficult to know whether or not a seemingly independent grassroots group is really representing some other entity.”

What’s the 3rd party technique?

<“The third party technique has been defined by one public relations (PR) executive as, "putting your words in someone else's mouth.

PR firms have been known to put their words in the mouths of journalists by hiring reporters to write stories which favor their clients, or by funding tendentious university research which they then publicize as "proof" of their client's position....”>

 *cough* Written interviews are a prime example *cough*

<“Corporate-sponsored front groups often are created or used by PR firms to appear as "independent" third parties.”>

I’m really considering doing a separate post about the 3rd party technique, just from reading those short extracts I want to dive deeper into the concept. Anyway continuing with the main article...

Characteristics of a corporate front group

“A front group typically has some, but not necessarily all, of the following characteristics (decoding: I didn’t copy paste all of the characteristics, just the ones I consider relate to the fandoms situations):

Is set up, operated or maintained by another organization, particularly a public relations, grassroots campaigning, polling or surveying firm or consultancy;

Engages in actions that consistently and conspicuously benefit a third party, such as a company, industry or political candidate;

Effectively shields a third party from liability/responsibility/culpability by making statements a corporation cannot make, but that nevertheless advance a specific corporate interest;

Re-focuses debate about an issue onto a new or suspiciously unrelated topic, (for example, casting the secondhand smoke as an issue of property rights)”

Rolling back the astroturf

“Documenting the activities of front groups is perhaps the single most important step in helping roll back the rise of astroturf groups.”

Soooo...

The reasons listed above were primarily articles to solidify the main argument that astroturfing is not a conspiracy thing because it happens ALL OVER THE WEB.

It’s not about being completely paranoid about everything you read on the internet. Be smart. It’s about not believing every piece of info you get served on a silver plate.

From something as “seemingly innocent” as faking a simple comment/ review of a certain product to influence the consumer’s opinion on it & discredit the competition to something blatantly serious as sending misleading information about the healthcare reform that involves the common well-being.

This unethical & deceitful phenomenon extends to the entertainment industry (fanbase social networking) up to the political world (campaigns). IT IS REAL & IT IS HAPPENING.

Yes, this fandom is gullible af & a total pain in the ass. But no, it didn’t go downhill on its own. It was a separated & very badly influenced to serve of support to the label & mgmt’s antics with the narrative. They use the fans & each one of their accounts as their SCAPEGOAT. But no one ever blames them & that’s how MIS (new acronym for men in suits) take advantage of the situation & get away with their shenanigans.

DON’T BE NAIVE, KIDS ;)

P.S. I might add a fifth part to explain how to use the astroturfing protection tools (Statcounter, TOR, etc.) It’s important to start taking measures bloggers.