Sra. Sanderijn Baanders, Freelance Resum ponència: Tothom en parla, molts les utilitzen i pocs analitzen els seus efectes. Aquest és el cas de l'ús, l'abús i la utilitat de les xarxes socials relacionades amb el transport públic, malgrat que és un fenomen creixent amb importants repercussions a tot Europa.

1. Impact of social media in public transport
Use of Twitter in The Netherlands
Sanderijn Baanders
Ambrosius Baanders
AMTU, Martorell, 14 March 2012

2. Content
• New media, social media, Twitter
• Use of Twitter
• Twitter in public transport
– use by passengers
– use by operators
– private Twitter-initiatives
• Conclusions

3. Introduction
• Fast growth of use of smartphone:
5,5 mln in NL end 2011
• Twitter especially suitable for smartphone
• Very popular in public transport; easier use than
while driving car or bicycle
• Expectation of twitterers that public transport
companies act on their tweets

4. New media and social media
• conventional
• social media
• image banks
• apps for smartphones

5. New media and social media
• conventional
– website
– newsletter
– e-mail- and sms-service
• social media
• image banks
• apps for smartphones

6. New media and social media
• conventional
• social media
– Facebook
– Linked In
– Twitter
• image banks
• apps for smartphones

7. New media and social media
• conventional
• social media
• image banks
– You Tube
• apps for smartphones

8. New media and social media
• conventional
• social media
• image banks
• apps for smartphones
– 9292, NS, …
– QR-codes

9. Use and terminology of Twitter
• tweets
• at signs and hashtags
• following
• followers
• trending topics
• retweeting

10. Use and terminology of Twitter
• tweets
– maximum of 140 characters
– public to everyone
– in general or addressed to someone
• at signs and hashtags
• following
• followers
• trending topics
• retweeting

11. Use and terminology of Twitter
• tweets
• at signs and hashtags
– how to find what interests you among millions of
tweets per day?
– @ tweets to someone
– # tweets about something
• following
• followers
• trending topics
• retweeting

12. Use and terminology of Twitter
• tweets
• at signs and hashtags
• following
– who you are following, who would you like to read
updates from?
• followers
• trending topics
• retweeting

13. Use and terminology of Twitter
• tweets
• at signs and hashtags
• following
• followers
– who is following you, who would like to read updates
from you?
• trending topics
• retweeting

14. Use and terminology of Twitter
• tweets
• at signs and hashtags
• following
• followers
• trending topics
– popular subjects, hashtags, list publised by
Twitter
• retweeting

15. Use and terminology of Twitter
• tweets
• at signs and hashtags
• following
• followers
• trending topics
• retweeting
– repeating the tweet of someone else  more people
view the message

16. Use and terminology of Twitter
Example of a profile

17. Use and terminology of Twitter
Example of a retweet: by Qbuzz, tweet from RET

18. Different benefits for different users
examples:
• NGO’s, lobbyists
• commercial companies
• services
• associations
• politicians
• public figures
• journalism (as source and as publication)
• individual users

19. Who tweets about public transport?
• passengers
• operators (and public transport authorities)
• private initiatives

20. How is Twitter used in public transport?
Communication in various directions:
• operator (authority)  passenger
• passenger  operator (authority)
• between passengers
– easier than with other media

21. How is Twitter used in public transport?
Types of information:
• travel information, delays, disruptions
• Q & A: information, complaints
• exchange of information about
ticket inspection
• compliments, sympathy,
encouragement

22. How is Twitter used in public transport?
Types of information:
• travel information, delays, disruptions
– through other media as well, but Twitter often faster
– often between passengers, often faster than operator
(but possibly less reliable and less complete)
• Q & A: information, complaints
• exchange of information about ticket inspection
• compliments, sympathy, encouragement

23. How is Twitter used in public transport?
Types of information:
• travel information, delays, disruptions
• Q & A: information, complaints
– through other media as well, but Twitter often faster
– difference with service desk or telephone service:
answer is read by many  pros and cons
• exchange of information about ticket inspection
• compliments, sympathy, encouragement

24. How is Twitter used in public transport?
Types of information:
• travel information, delays, disruptions
• Q & A: information, complaints
• exchange of information about ticket inspection
– much more effective than through other media
• compliments, sympathy, encouragement

25. How is Twitter used in public transport?
Types of information:
• travel information, delays, disruptions
• Q & A: information, complaints
• exchange of information about ticket inspection
• compliments, sympathy, encouragement
– wider spread than through other media

26. Passengers, what are they tweeting?
• tweets in general
• tweets addressed to operators
• discussions between passengers

27. Passengers, what are they tweeting?
• tweets in general
– observations
– frustration (sometimes abusive language)
– sightings of ticket inspection teams
– absence of ticket inspection (National Railways)
• tweets addressed to operators
• discussions between passengers

28. Passengers, what are they tweeting?
• tweets in general
• tweets addressed to operators
(remain unanswered by a decreasing number of
operators)
– complaints
– questions
– reporting aggression and vandalism
– encouragement, critique
• discussions between passengers

29. Passengers, what are they tweeting?
• tweets in general
• tweets addressed to operators
• discussions between passengers
– various subjects

30. Passengers, what are they tweeting?
Operators that do not respond:
• complaints and accusations remain uncontested
• tweets remain visible (though in time less prominent)
• tone of voice of passengers appears more aggressive
than to operators who do respond

31. Passengers, what are they tweeting?
Answered complaint

32. Operators, what are they offering through
Twitter?
• information about delays, disruptions, news
• RET Rotterdam: separate account about inspections and
safety
• increasing numbers: answering questions and
complaints from passengers, but others: not
– requests for information, especially during disruptions
– questions about press statements
– remarks about time table
– remarks about littering, vandalism, aggression
– remarks about staff behaviour
– sometimes tweets from company president
• next to information through other media
• next to information from 9292 (= national travel
information centre)
– also on Twitter

33. Twitter accounts of the important public
transport operators
for 16 weeks: 14 November 2011 – 5 March 2012
number of followers as growth in number of tweets
of followers per week
14-11-11 5-3-12 highest lowest
NS (national railways)
27.348 39.107 +43,0% 1.035 468
HTM (The Hague) +47,4%
5.994 8.836 99 25
GVB (Amsterdam) (1) +114,4%
3.129 6.615 411 2
RET (Rotterdam) (1)
4.749 6.201 +30,6% 124 36
Arriva (regional bus, train)
4.127 5.813 +40,9% 69 10
Connexxion (regional bus, train)
2.227 2.841 +27,6% 164 2
Veolia (regional bus, train) +38,5%
4.009 5.556 54 1
total 51.583 74.969
TotalOVNL (ticket inspections) 4.898 8.742 +78,5 1.219 246
Source: www.twitter.com, accessed every Monday during this period.
(1) Several accounts and therefore some double counting in the number of followers.

34. Operators, what are they offering through
Twitter?
• growth of followers 45% in 16 weeks
• large differences between operators, National
Railways clearly largest scale
• some inconsistent in their effort (depending on
single employee?)
• are questions and remarks answered by the
operator? interactive or not

35. Operators, what are they offering through
Twitter?
Operators that do reply to tweets:
• sometimes operators solve problems, sometimes they
can’t solve them
– it helps to reply to complaints about filthiness, vandalism, or
nuissance (passenger feels he is being taken seriously)
– it can help to show sympathy to complaints about disruptions
– complaints about staff behaviour are not always answered
• if the passenger feels he has been taken seriously: it
helps to create a positive image
• a bad answer contributes to a bad image
• not answering always contributes to a bad image

36. The operators: NS (national railways)
• one account: @NS_online
• interactive: usually fast answer, good quality
• language and tone of voice match that of the public
• all subjects
• separate account of CEO
• largest scale of all operators
– 39.000 followers = 6,5% of the 600.000 passengers who daily
use the trains
– 500 – 1.000 tweets per week, strong fluctuation
• “twitterfeeds” on larger stations

37. The operators: NS (national railways)
@NS_online started 29 March 2010, straight away interactive
– on 10 Augustus 2010 1.000 followers were reached
• at this moment they operate with a team of 3 staff members, they
aim for a team of 10
• used for investigation into market and publicity
• “tweet-ups”: inviting Tweeters and followers in Utrecht
– 1st time with 20 most critical Tweeters
– 2nd time with 20 supportive Tweeters, about ideas for improving Twitter
possibilities on trains

38. The operators: NS (national railways)
Benefit of being active on Twitter:
• providing the right answer in discussions can take the
edge off
– room for improvement
• it is a source of information for what motivates
passengers and the situation in publicity
• damage control in case of bad publicity

39. The operators: NS (national railways)
Use of social media by NS, for various goals:
• Twitter: for dialogue with passengers
• Facebook: for campaigns, events, projects
• Linked in: for discussion and recruitment
• YouTube: image bank

40. The operators: HTM (The Hague)
@HTM_Reisinfo started on 10 January 2011
– ending the private initiative @htminfo
• started answering on 8 January 2012, quality needs
improving
• number of followers: 8.800; of 180.000 passengers per
day = 5,0% is follower; 74 tweets last week (incl.
answers)
• larger number of disruptions mentioned than with GVB or
RET: depends on decision when to report a disruption or
not

41. The operators: HTM (The Hague)
Foto’s HTM

42. The operators: RET (Rotterdam)
Three accounts, now all three interactive:
• @RETRotterdam
– for disruptions
• @RET_controle
– for news from the security department
– anounces ticket inspections, without too much detail
• @RETnieuws
– for other news
– in total: 6.201 followers, growth in 16 weeks = 30,6%, highest
number of tweets in any week: 124, lowest: 36 tweets
• CEO also Twitters along

43. And the public transport authorities?
Authorities granting consessions:
• many politicians are active on Twitter, including the
officials responsible for public transport
– does the public address them?
– no examples found for public transport, but some for road traffic
• use of Twitter for communication with passengers?
• use of passenger Tweets for evaluation of performance
of operators?
- very few cases found yet
Authorities responsible for roads, streets and other
infrastructure:
• munincipalities also start to use Twitter, including inter
alia public transport subjects

44. And the public transport authorities?
• An interactive Twitter account (and other social media)
might be included in the conditions of public transport
consessions. But this is not yet the case. It appears
these authorities still have too little knowledge about
Twitter.
• The (unanswered) complaints are interesting material for
public transport authorities. Useful next to the existing
customer satisfaction surveys (which offer limited
insigts).

45. And the public transport authorities?
• Example of joint initiative of local governments
and operator:
• ‘MerwedeLinge Line’: seven involved
munincipalities along this regional railway line,
using a common Twitter account
– they use passenger feedback to put pressure on the
operator Arriva, the rail infrastructure company
ProRail and the public transport authority the province
of Zuid-Holland

46. Private initiatives
• Are they filling a need in the market?
• Or are they filling the initiator’s need to
send out information?

47. Private initiatives
different types of accounts:
• about disruptions and delays
• about the presence of ticket inspection
• about news and facts about public transport
• by public transport staff as a private initiative

48. Private initiatives
different types of accounts:
• about disruptions and delays
– @htminfo, due to lack of presence of HTM
– actions out of dissatisfaction
– other accounts, incl. commercial
• about the presence of ticket inspection
• about news and facts about public transport
• by public transport staff as a private initiative

49. Private initiatives: @htminfo
• set up in January 2010 by an 18 year old because HTM was not
active on Twitter
• became popular in December 2010, during massive disruptions due
to snow and simultaneous failure of HTM website
• activity mainly the retweeting of messages from various sources,
incl. observations from travellers
• ended in January 2011 in agreement with HTM, at the start of the
official HTM Twitter-account

50. Private initiatives
different types of accounts:
• about disruptions and delays
• about the presence of ticket inspection
– @ZwartrijdenOV, @TotalOVNL
– @OVcontrole and others
• about news and facts about public transport
• by public transport staff as a private initiative

51. Private initiatives: ticket inspection
@TotalOVNL, formerly @ZwartrijdenOV
• 250 to 1.200 tweets / week about sightings of ticket
inspection teams, in 12+ cities
– distinguishing between: inspection in uniform, under cover, with
police escort
• 8.700 followers, growth in 16 weeks: 78,5%
– claim: 80.000 users
• hardly any travel information or delays
• “use is at own risk”
• daily statistics about chance of meeting inspectors
• mission: “free public transport” ( website)
• unclear how information is obtained or statistics
calculated

52. Private initiatives: ticket inspection
exemple abroad: France
• Twitter-accounts about ticket inspection in
existence for some time
• resulted in the initiative in Paris for funds that
pay the fines for subscribing fare dodgers
also in France:
• accounts with whereabouts of parking
inspectors
• flash mob rally against the unreliability of
certain SNCF-lines on a platform

53. Particuliere initiatieven
different types of accounts:
• about disruptions and delays
• about the presence of ticket inspection
• about news and facts about public transport
• by public transport staff as a private initiative
– drivers of trains, trams and buses
– en route?

54. Conclusions, food for thought, questions
• Twitter usage among public transport travellers grows rapidly. It is becoming
indispensible because of the poor quality of other communications during
disruptions.
• Passengers expect operators to actively participate in Twitter: they have no
choice, it just happens to them:
– some take up Twitter succesfully (lead by NS)
– others don’t or are unable to and abandon efforts
• Staff often takes initiative instead of management. Different way of
communicating with passengers, consequences for company organisation?
• What is the cost of not answering (or contesting) of publicly visible
complaints?  damage of image
• Is Twitter a threat to working with roving ticket inspections?
• Authorities responsible for concessions do not at the moment stimulate
operators.
• Authorities responsible for concesions do not seem to use available material
from Tweets.
• Possible role of Tweets in evaluation of the performance of the operator?

55. Conclusies, food for thought, questions
• Use of Twitter in The Netherlands substantial since 2009
• How long will Twitter be fashionable and what form of
new media will succeed it?
• Hard to imagine that the fast dialogue between
passengers and operators through new media will
disappear