|
Forums >
General Industry >
Why is social media presence so important?
Lately I have seen job postings that require a large social media following even before you apply for a job. If you don't have one don't bother applying. Is this the way we have to compete now a days? Is social presence more important the talent and experience? Example: I have a wapping 170 followers on instagram. Been there a few months. Now I am being told i can and should buy followers and how important that is. Isn't that cheating? I never thought i would be too old Ha Ha but here i am!!! R- Nov 13 15 10:32 am Link Really? I've never found a job posting looking for that. Then again, I don't work in a field that deals with the need for social media. Also point out that the job field I'm in, if anything of embarrassment should come to light it being found on the internet, may cause me to lose my job if at all anything. Nov 13 15 10:36 am Link I see the same thing with freelance writing jobs! Nothing is more important than your social media standing! Nov 13 15 10:39 am Link I've never had it happen to me but I have heard of it. Though I can't say I'd guess that it allows for hits back to the company. Most people make post about what they have done and sometimes for whom. This helps add credibility and interest in the company that you are shooting for. I've even heard of some companies that go so far as to require a Klout score that isn't below a certain level. Often no less that 45 but sometimes higher. Hell, there are even events that only allow participants with Klout scores of no less than 45 or 50. Silly stuff if you ask me but ---- Nov 13 15 10:42 am Link I'm noticing job posting requiring a social following in the beauty field. There is one that is currently posted now here. Maybe to gain followers to the company as was suggested? R- Nov 13 15 10:50 am Link rick lesser wrote: I think the reason why is that the beauty field is looking to social media is that it would gain attention, so social media presence is definitely a plus. Almost like a free form of advertisement for the company since your followers will see who it would be you are working for, and spread the word. Nov 13 15 10:52 am Link Barry Kidd Photography wrote: Correct, it's all about instant marketing and reaching a wider audience. Nov 13 15 10:56 am Link udor wrote: For the type of work that I do, or at least most of my work, it's not a consideration but I can see how it would be. More so than a lot of work even. Regardless, I never post anything about those jobs until after the "main event" so to speak so it would be to late to really matter anyway. Nov 13 15 11:11 am Link I'd almost rather have a root canal than deal with social media. Nov 13 15 11:15 am Link HI Rick, We're in an age of instant gratification. To some, a large "following" of people you don't know is an important aspect of who they are. I've never experienced a job that required it but I do believe you that is out there and happening. With everyone so linked into social media it was bound to happen. My question is would you want to work for someone who makes such a ridiculous requirement? Talent and experience are always more important than false exposure. Buying exposure as people have suggested shows how far society has slid down a very step slope of ethics. Three true followers of your art is worth more than three thousand phony followers, in my opinion. Truth comes with a paycheck. Are you able to market your talent and experience elsewise? Your work says volumes about your skills. Best wishes in all you do. Nov 13 15 03:52 pm Link Rick, I'm sorry to have to say this to you, but you and I are getting older, and social media does play a huge role in certain careers. I love shooting with film, but because of print publications collapsing all around us while online publishing is predominate, I have had to switch to digital media myself. For my writing and photography that involves musicians on the Internet, you better believe I am conscious of the number of "followers" myself and others have on Facebook, Twitter, Youtube and Instagram! It's a New World when it comes to certain occupations that are effected by technology. Although I'm aware of all this, I'll still shoot film when I can. With hairstyling, I've been aware that cosmetologists do need to build a clientel. Why you would need to build a "cyber" followers list with people who will never use your services does not make sense to me. There is no way that I would "buy" followers, and especially in your career. If it helps to make you feel better about this, the lady who cuts my hair is the manager of a chain cutting store, and she also models. Her name is Megan, and she is in my portfolio. Megan does NOT have a large number of cyber followers for haircutting or her modeling. Yet Megan stays very busy. So if you are applying for jobs that require a large following, it might be more for the corporations benefit than yours. I wouldn't worry about it too much if I were you. Best wishes! Nov 13 15 04:46 pm Link We are right in the middle of a paradigm shift in communications and how organizations act/interact with the wider audience. Previously, the standard was push marketing. Try to tailor a message to your hoped for group, push it at them through radio, print media, and television. Measure, over the long months, see if something works, and if there are problems that need to be addressed. Now, the "wider audience" is completely connected, or has the opportunity to be easily connected, to everyone else and we all , or a sizable chunk of us, have easy access to the accumulated knowledge of mankind. The individual now has a democratized technology for getting their voice heard. People from different areas can now share their stories, beliefs, and experiences. People don't trust "advertising". People do trust the opinions of friends, family, and associates. "Word of mouth", always a strong influence, is now, because of technology, "world of mouth". Marketing, and communications, heck "the establishment" is still strongly occupied, and controlled, by older people that cling dearly to their ideas about push marketing and reach. Push marketing: every time an ad pops up and covers the content I am looking at, I think, "good lord, when are the old people going to stop doing this." It alienates people and disrupts their experience. It causes resistance to the message. It is a failing way of marketing. Native advertising and interstitials are much better and, if properly crafted, generates interest in the viewer; thereby reducing resistance. Reach: this is an old measurement that still has impact, especially for a huge business that is selling a product through many channels, but is often poorly used and misunderstood. An example: let's say you have a local, upscale French restaurant. The owners, let's say, are in their sixties, they are vaguely familiar with social media/platforms/marketing. They may actually believe having 50,000 likes on the FB fan page is a measurement of success, but is it really? Are they using social platforms to nurture relationships with their customers? Addressing problems? Showing appreciation? Do those "likes" transform into more business? They would be much better off with a few hundred relationships where they are part of a community. A community that is passionate about them (that will share those feelings with others) and the restaurant showing, sincerely, that they are passionate about their customers is vastly more important than a "like". Likes and followers have 'low meaning", but they are easy metrics to follow and it provides easy BSing rights. You can buy them, as mentioned above, for all of the channels, and they are cheap (I was looking at a pricing list yesterday and was shocked how cheap it is to get hundreds of thousands of followers). If someone is going to hire you and they are using "followers" and "likes", your Klout score, without looking deeper into your connections, and influence, then they are using a false, and misleading, metric. The are taking the lazy route and ignoring context and actual value. Obviously, "followers" and "likes" have their place, but they need to be understood in context. Eventually, the old ideas will dwindle, they especially don't apply to smaller businesses, as more people realize the real, valid measurements are in the relationships, authenticity, and community building. Push and reach won't disappear, but they will become less valuable as a measurement and their value, as measurements, will align with their true "social" value. It takes time and it will take time. Nov 13 15 05:26 pm Link In olden times, newspapers and magazines with large subscriber lists could charge more for advertisements. Ratings are still important for TV programs. I certainly see some similarities. Nov 13 15 05:26 pm Link I have followers because it is part of being a wedding photographer. My photographers on my team have a lot more than my business, though. I am not sure how important it is unless you have a business model that needs followers. I'm not sure how much of my business comes from just internet followers for most people. I collect fb and instagrams from people I have met so I think it translates better into them becoming customers of mine. Nov 13 15 05:53 pm Link Social media is the new platform for consuming content. Remember how years ago being "published" meant something? Well being published is near worthless now. Social media has taken its place. It is a form of validation in the public eye. Once upon a time if you had a lot of publications under your belt it meant you were a "somebody". These days the metric is your social media following. Do people follow you for your content? There is nothing wrong with it. The underlying idea is the same as it always was. Its just a different approach. Roll with it. Nov 14 15 07:03 am Link Peter House wrote: I agree with your summation, but it neglects a few things. Mostly, social media isn't just another way to consume content, it is also a communication media. It can be directly two-way and also extend in almost any direction and the signal can quickly fade or become amplified. Nov 14 15 02:17 pm Link I've been pumping my social media presence pretty heavily last couple of months, but I'm using each network a little differently. Snap Chat to send out coupons and time sensitive information, Pinterest to generate advertising revenue, Tsu to build a world-wide following, Tumblr for SEO, and so on.. The one I was stumped with for a long time was Instagram. What to do with it. Then it hit me. Behind the Scenes captures of my shoots in progress and instantly uploaded to generate interest in the actual image set to be posted later that evening. That's what I decided to do with Instagram. Nov 14 15 02:22 pm Link Everyone's take is interesting and brings new thoughts and information to light. I love that I am not alone wondering. I found it so confusing with trying to figure out all these sites. So I am not on that many and the ones i am on I don't really use or understand how to use them. At the moment I am on here of course, (this site has been good to me over the years) and instagram. Which I joined because it seems to be the one photographers go to, to hire. Though I have not gotten any job offers! They say a picture is worth a thousand words. So I am waiting! ha ha R- Nov 14 15 04:16 pm Link I'm wary of buying followers because they are mainly dormant accounts. On facebook for instance, it is easy to see who brought their likes by the number of interactions each post. Those that brought likes have brought people that are not liking their page because they care. One magazine has over 100k of followers but barely van muster 10 likes on each post they make. Another mag has around 30k of followers but can get 50-200 likes per post. Easy to see who brought their likes. Nov 14 15 06:25 pm Link What I find problematic about the requests to see social media sites is that with most often images I have worked on, I do not have full permission of the model's agency and/or companies involved to go posting them everywhere. This is in part to some of the crazy rights grabs that sites, or even artists have. They do not want to see an image become the front page or even back page of sites that are not their own. If they want the content out there at all, not everyone does. Then add in the various copycat pages that simply copy and paste photos, videos, and articles as if they are their own. Many subjects, companies, etc, want to have control over content that is posted. Often you can do more harm than good. Example, the uproar of reposting of jokes on twitter, and the bad feelings surrounding the fame/infamy of the copycats. Example, Try to post something of Taylor Swift without her team's permission and see what happens to you. Nov 14 15 08:34 pm Link It occurs to me that some next level what-the-fuckery will be when someone starts a Go Fund Me in order to be able to hire a social media marketing firm to build their social media presence. Nov 15 15 12:42 am Link Social media is really important to me because I get about a third of my jobs that way. I also have raised my price a bit because I want people to see that I am branded and they can see that by my social media presence. Nov 15 15 02:06 am Link Koryn wrote: I so agree but the tendency now a days is everything is done on social media. Employers think they'll take advantage of your followers because it gives you an instant customer base. Look at all the major companies that have a Facebook page. Almost every retailer on the net has a page on all the social media sites. Nov 15 15 04:25 pm Link I think it's not important it is mostly for narcissistic people to bullshit other people ... Nov 15 15 05:24 pm Link Koryn wrote: but it IS what all the popular people are doing. Nov 15 15 05:40 pm Link DougBPhoto wrote: I think it's great. People often talk about "evening the playing field", and I think mastering social media is the answer.. How else can you reach billions of potential customers all over the world while sitting on the can? Nov 15 15 05:47 pm Link DougBPhoto wrote: What about all the people who already have been succeful have no need for earning money? Or any fame? Nov 15 15 05:51 pm Link D a v i d s o n wrote: Well, let's see, since this is part of social media, maybe people want to express their opinion to other people. Nov 15 15 06:10 pm Link Evan Hiltunen wrote: I agree, that's who I am, it's kinda fun but there is so many phonies. Its just so much better in person than on the web. It's like people in their cars are taking cuts in front of people, and just nasty but at a store wouldn't dare to take cuts. Nov 15 15 06:39 pm Link Koryn wrote: I recently had a root canal and it was much less tedious and less painful than using social media. Nov 15 15 06:53 pm Link D a v i d s o n wrote: True.. the independently rich or trust-fund baby doesn't need social media unless they want to make their money themselves, independent from inheritance. Nov 15 15 07:00 pm Link Frank Lewis Photography wrote: That's true Frank! Nov 15 15 07:05 pm Link John Jebbia wrote: It is still more about salesmanship than anything else. Not quality or substance, or even professionalism or talent. It is just selling/promotion. Nov 15 15 07:07 pm Link DougBPhoto wrote: The interesting thing, given your posting number, is that you have been deeply involved in social media for quite awhile now, but may not have seen it that way ... and you do make valid points. Nov 15 15 07:35 pm Link Vector One Photography wrote: Yeah, it sort of turns my stomach. Frank Lewis Photography wrote: I don't like hype. It makes my eyes roll uncontrollably. How am I supposed to hype myself when I find others hyping themselves so totally nauseating? Nov 15 15 08:09 pm Link Koryn wrote: I agree completely.... can't stand it... Frank Lewis Photography wrote: From what I watch on Facebook, it seems to make a huge difference though. The collaborations that used to be so commonplace here on MM (years ago) seem to have left here and become the normal there. Nov 15 15 09:54 pm Link udor wrote: Came from a low income family no inheritance more like, caring time and bills. Been hired made serious money payed my bills, it was my sole income although now split many ways even earning more. I don't earn anything from photography, and if I did it goes to my charity. Donate Life... Nov 16 15 10:04 am Link D a v i d s o n wrote: Good for you! Nov 16 15 01:45 pm Link Whenever I see people on social media (ironic, ain't it?) talking about how they "don't get", or don't like, social media, it reminds me of the conversation Al Swearingen, Deadwood, had about the incoming telegraph technology: Al: Invisible messages from invisible sources, or what some people think of as progress. Dan: Ain’t the heathens used smoke signals all through recorded history? Al: How’s that a fucking recommendation? Dan: Well, it seems to me like, you know, letters posted one person to another is just a slower version of the same idea. Al: When’s the last time you got a fucking letter from a stranger? Dan: Bad news about Pa. Al: Bad news! Or tries against our interests is our sole communications from strangers, so by all means, let’s plant poles all across the country, festoon the cocksucker with wires to hurry the sorry word and blinker our judgments of motive, huh? Dan: You’ve given it more thought than me. Al: Ain’t the state of things cloudy enough? Don’t we face enough fucking imponderables? Dan: Well, by God, you give the word, Al, and them poles will be kindling. Nov 16 15 02:24 pm Link What a money making gimmick, Facebook says build a business page. FB is the future. Want more followers to like your page? Give us money. Want anyone to see your page then give us more money Yelp. Give us money and we will show your good reviews for $500 per month. Google. Want to rank? Give us money Every time I turn around everyone wants money. I built my reputation on quality. My referrals came from other happy customers. Photographer - Wedding and social events then. Landscapes and portraits now Nov 16 15 03:14 pm Link |
