Sydney social media forum - ACON Health


Published on

Presentation at the Sydney social media forum by Yves Calmette from ACON Health, titled 'The power of Facebook and Twitter for reaching and (re)engaging about HIV prevention: Is social media the new holy grail?'

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Sydney social media forum - ACON Health

  1. 1. The Power of Facebook and Twitter for Reaching and (Re) Engaging about HIV Prevention: Is Social Media the New Holy Grail?Connecting Up, 14 November 2012
  2. 2. About ACON
  3. 3. About ACONACON is a health promotion organisation based in the gay,lesbian, bisexual and transgender communities with a primaryfocus on HIV prevention.ACON provides HIV prevention, health promotion, advocacy, careand support services to members of our communities includingindigenous people, people who inject drugs, sex workers and allpeople living with HIV.
  4. 4. Everything has changed…
  7. 7. Social media venues 79% of gay men are on Facebook 30% of gay men are on Twitter
  8. 8. Campaignbackground and objectives
  9. 9. Background • Understandings of education and prevention often rely on the assumption of an understanding of HIV, condoms and their meaning, which often no longer applies. • Through conversations with gay men, the project revealed some common misconceptions and misunderstandings about the epidemic. These included: ‘There were more people living with HIV in 1996’ , ‘Young people are the most at risk’ , ‘HIV is only in older guys now’ , ‘No-one dies of AIDS now’, ‘The number of infections was much higher in the nineties than now’.
  10. 10. Objectives • The Big Picture campaign seeks to bring the knowledge of gay men about the HIV epidemic in NSW up to date. • The campaign also aims to provide a basis for re-initiating conversations among gay men in NSW about the HIV epidemic.
  11. 11. Objectives A fantastic opportunity to start building online communities on gay men’s sexual health.
  12. 12. Campaign primary resources Booklet Online banners Website
  13. 13. FACEBOOK
  14. 14. Building the FACEBOOK community
  15. 15. Building the FACEBOOK community FACEBOOK UPDATES
  16. 16. Building the FACEBOOK community • A mix of formats • Open Questions • ‘Myth or Fact?’ questions: a more playful format • Poll Questions (YES or NO): to encourage fans to participate. • Text-only posts: to encourage fans to make a specific action. • Infographics • Several times a week • Some posts will promote the twitter account.
  17. 17. Building the FACEBOOK community
  18. 18. Building the FACEBOOK community FACEBOOK ADS
  19. 19. FACEBOOK ads 14 ads using different design, copy and targeting techniques: • Targeting men according to their interests related to gay clichés such as ‘fans of Lady Gaga’ or ‘George Michael’, targeting men who specified in their profiles that they were ‘interested in men’… • Design featuring infographics, symbols like ‘?’, photos of men… •Copy with or without words related to HIV, gay …
  20. 20. TWITTER
  21. 21. Building the TWITTER community
  22. 22. Building the TWITTER community • Tweets in line with the Facebook posts. • However, content has to fit within a tweet (due to character limit), they will include a link either to the website or to the Facebook page • Additionally, some tweets will also include an attached graph taken from the website and/or printed material. • Some tweets will promote the Facebook page.
  23. 23. Building the TWITTER community
  24. 24. Results
  25. 25. Traffic to website NUMBER OF VISITS • More than double traffic than for previous websites • Almost 50% of visitors used mobile devices to access the website TRAFFIC SOURCES • 3rd source: FACEBOOK! QUALITY OF TRAFFIC • 3 to 4 pages visited on average • 2 to 3 minutes per visit on average
  26. 26. Results on TWITTER Tweets Re-tweets Mentions Followers 120 27 31 54 +87%* +285%* +121%* +107%* * January vs December
  27. 27. Results on TWITTER ACTIVITIES • Modest but it takes time Is TWITTER the right venue for this campaign in particular and for campaigns in general? – Twitter is mainly used to share fresh content or events/news that are occurring at the same time the tweets are posted, such as events, etc. – Populations: influencers, journalists, media, celebrities…
  28. 28. Results on FACEBOOK Facebook is actually much more than just ‘fans’. •There are typically two potential audiences for branded content on Facebook. •The fans who have explicitly ‘liked’ the organisation are the easiest to reach but the friends of those fans also constitute an important additional audience.
  29. 29. Results on FACEBOOK •Friends of fans represent a much larger set of consumers (34 times larger on average) and can receive social media content by way of their friends. •The level of interest of the friends of fans might be as high as the fans’. •They might not be willing to explicitly ‘like’ a page but they are likely to be interested in what their friends who ‘liked’ the page see or are engaged with.
  30. 30. The power of ‘likes’
  31. 31. The power of ‘likes’
  32. 32. The power of ‘likes’ >60,000 reached up to 3 times
  33. 33. The power of ‘likes’
  34. 34. Barriers to interactionIt’s not totally clear what the main barriers to interaction were but research on other Facebook campaigns suggests that:• Facebook users are typically more engaged by content that relates to them and with which they can personally identify as opposed to factual content (such as the Big Picture campaign).• Facebook users also prefer the simple and clear over the unfamiliar, lengthy and complex.
  35. 35. Barriers to interaction The external campaign qualitative evaluation gives very valuable insights about the relatively low level of interaction: • Many gay men - in particular older men - have concerns about Facebook privacy and security. • Those who aren’t openly gay don’t want to be outed on Facebook
  36. 36. Barriers to interaction• Others, even if they are totally comfortable with their sexuality, aren’t entirely open to talking about HIV-related topics in a public space such as Facebook.• They don’t want their work colleagues, potential recruiters or families, to make assumptions about their sexuality or their HIV status.• Many men will never consider adding to the conversation. They prefer to read posts rather than contribute their own.
  37. 37. HOWEVER…According to the Facebook Engagement Rate (Number of People Talking About it/Number of likes x 100), the Facebook page presented an excellent performance (11.73), even whencompared to Facebook pages from popular brands.
  38. 38. Demographic Distribution 30% 37% 25%
  39. 39. Lessons learnt
  40. 40. Lessons learnt 1. Traffic booster : definitely! 2. Reach and frequency: absolutely! 3. Engage conversations/discussions: we can do better! 4. Facebook – effective channel to reach younger audiences: confirmed but older guys too! 5. Budget & resources: • Low cost in terms of media spent for similar traffic rates generated • 1 to 2 days / week
  41. 41. Social media planner DAILY • Monitor the online space via Google Alerts Upload required content to online platforms: Twitter, Facebook • Respond to fans on the Facebook site in timely fashion • View analytic data at the end of each day to analyse engagement levels • Follow new people on Twitter
  42. 42. Social media planner WEEKLY • Record engagement on each platform site via analytics program • End of each week make an assessment as to success of the content and refine as necessary • Review and compile future week content • Identify those that are advocates for your cause that are following you on Twitter or engaging on Facebook; be sure to recognise their support. • Post a comment on a recommended blog where appropriate.
  43. 43. Social media planner MONTHLY • Report on monthly statistics including Facebook Insights as well as key metrics for Twitter such as new followers. • Refine future content strategy • Create monthly content schedule
  44. 44. Acknowledgements • Tony Tang, Digital Campaign Planner, ACON • ComScore 2012 • Google 2011 • Spina A, Whytest Evaluation Report, 2010 / Spina A, Drama Down Under Phase 2 Evaluation Report, 2010 • Harris Interactive 2011 • Stokes Mischewski, The Big Picture Evaluation Report, 2012
  45. 45. Thank