Study finds good ways to gain more Twitter followers

Researchers from the Georgia Institute of Technology did a study tracking the best ways to increase one’s Twitter following, according to Poynter. The researchers studied over 500 active Twitter accounts. They found that tweeting negative statements proves to be an easy way to shoot yourself in the foot. You’ll also alienate more people if you tweet a lot about yourself and less about “information.” “Informational content attracts followers with an effect that is roughly thirty times higher than the effect of [personal] ‘meformer’ content, which deters growth,” they wrote. “We think this is due to the prevalence of weak ties on Twitter.”

Poynter lists 14 points the study concluded, ruling on what’s good and bad. For example: A detailed profile description or “bio” (good); cramming too many useless hashtags into your tweets (bad).

Jeff Jarvis has some theories about trolls

Troll warning sign. (Martorell/Wikimedia Commons)

Troll warning sign. (Martorell/Wikimedia Commons)

Jeff Jarvis has a relevant and highly entertaining essay defining trolls, those maniacal critics all journalists know well. Jarvis uses Aaron James’ book Assholes: A Theory as a backboard for his analysis, arguing that trolls are a subset of assholes with a specific edge:

“What distinguishes the troll from the mere asshole is, I believe, that he (1) has a target; (2) seeks to get a response–a rise–out of that target; and (3) believes he is acting out of some ordained moral purpose to destroy, to bring down his target. By contrast, the asshole seeks only to enjoy privilege.”

Wisely, Jarvis recommends that we defeat our own trolls simply by refusing to feed them. Zero response. But he also says that we should seek to improve our modes of discourse by refusing to swarm around troll fights (when someone regretfully feeds them). We should also stick up for those we want to defend from trolls. It’s much better, in Jarvis’ opinion, to defeat another person’s troll than to attempt to defeat your own.

Trayvon Martin coverage offers lessons in covering diversity

Trayvon Martin's father and mother. (David Shankbone: Wikimedia Commons)

Trayvon Martin’s father and mother. (Credit: David Shankbone/Wikimedia Commons)

For the one-year anniversary of the death of Florida teenager Trayvon Martin, Eric Deggans at Poynter has a piece laying out takeaways from how the media covered the race issues involved in the story. He notes the process of how reporters gradually started to define the heroes and villains of the situation.

Journalists, he says, are driven by social justice imperatives, hoping to add context to their stories with diverse points of view (i.e. journalists of color weighing in on the more metaphysical layers of racial discrimination existent in America).  Most of all, he says, publications and reporters hope to be first to print big scoops, evident in how CNN used audio analysis of a 911 call to falsely say that Zimmerman had used a racial slur.

Deggans also discusses a “myth of life” view that reporters sometimes get during these troublesome stories, as if the killing of an unarmed black teenager violates the notions of how people believe life works. According to him, online media perpetuates the “myth of life” approach: “With so few nuggets of news connected to the real questions the audience wants answered, a default for some media outlets can involve talking about ancillary issues, which distract and complicate.”

His conclusion: “In the Martin case, the toughest task journalists may face is ignoring the perceptions and judgments of the outside world to focus on telling the most accurate, incisive stories possible.”