Typical social media errors made by political parties - part 5

 Think each social network is the same

It's easy to lump our favorite social networks together. We bucket each platform under the "social media umbrella" when talking about, thinking about, and planning our political parties' social media strategies. By routine, we update Facebook, scan Twitter, and check Instagram every day, swaying us to view these platforms as a package, not as individual tools. The underlying commonality is that they're all great at connecting us directly with our potential voters. But just because Facebook and Instagram can both put us in front of your prospects doesn't mean they should be treated the same. By recognizing the respective value of each tool, we can connect with our audience in even more valuable ways. Every system has its peculiarities as well as a unique set of benefits and drawbacks that are specific to that system. For example, Twitter is great for sharing short and snappy updates, whereas Instagram is better for sharing visual content. Both platforms allow users to connect. In addition, when it comes to professional networking, LinkedIn is superior to Facebook, whereas Facebook is superior when it comes to connecting with family, friends, and voters.
 
Even though it is easy to think of all social networks as being the same, it is essential to examine the individual features of each platform to determine which one is best suited to meet your political needs. This can be done by comparing the features of each social network.
 
Deciding how to use each platform requires not only a solid knowledge of the various social media sites but also a high level of emotional intelligence and someone who can put themselves in another’s shoes. Facebook is a slower platform with the largest reach. For many (but not all) brands, their Facebook page operates much like a website. On the other hand, information flows very quickly through Twitter, which is also the most successful platform for connecting celebrities, politicians, and brands with people. The rules often seem looser on Twitter and engagement; flash deals, goofy accounts, and randomness can be appropriate for the right brand. Instagram is, at its foundation, simply about aesthetics. Political parties need to understand what defines their ideal aesthetic and create content that appeals to their audience. The real challenge is evaluating an image’s fit with the political party. 

Typical social media errors made by political parties - part 4

A political party must be on all social networks

To make a long story short. Political parties should be present on social media, though they need not be everywhere. For one thing, different media cater to different audiences, and for another, political parties don't have to win over everyone. A political party should concentrate its efforts on a few key platforms for maximum effect. Keeping up a strong presence on every major social media platform can be time-consuming and expensive for a political party. Burnout is a potential barrier to getting to know voters on a personal level. Political parties can save money by opting out of some services.

Social media and political parties go together like peanut butter and jelly. Why? Because social media is an excellent platform for communicating with voters, launching campaigns, raising awareness about initiatives, and serving as an essential tool in crisis communications.
 
Whether you focus efforts on Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, or a different platform entirely, social media will always be a solid place to keep the public informed and updated about important issues and engage with an audience on a deeper level. Communicating and engaging with voters will help establish and build credibility and trust if you don’t use social media to broadcast messages and engage with the people who follow you. 
In general, the public has a negative view of politicians. Social media for political communications and establishing a personal brand based on transparency can help counteract the negative stereotypes of politicians as being dishonest, greedy, and sleazy. Growing your social media following and developing a personal brand that people can relate to and trust takes being genuine on the platforms themselves, using photos to back up your brand's image, and posting content that's actually interesting to others.

Typical social media errors made by political parties: 3. No one is keeping track of the results

According to 2022 data from Pew, the top social networks in the USA for news are Twitter (53%), Facebook (44%), and Reddit (37%). Surprisingly, TikTok (33%) isn’t too far behind these sources. 

 

It’s quite easy to set up channels on Facebook, Twitter, TikTok, Instagram, and YouTube, but it’s a lot harder to maintain them. It takes time, effort, and resources. Unfortunately, when it comes to social media, it seems that no one in political parties is keeping track of the results. Poorly managed social media accounts can actually be damaging to your party's reputation. As mentioned before, it’s easy to set up a social media account; but it’s what you do with it going forward that truly matters. Having a strong social media marketing plan, understanding why you’re using it, what message you’re trying to convey, what content you have to post, how to measure your activity, and how to convert fans into voters - all these things play a much bigger role than simply setting up your account. 

 

This is a major oversight, as social media is a powerful tool for political parties to reach out to potential voters and spreadtheir message. Social media allows political parties to reach a wide range of people, from different backgrounds andlocations. It also provides them with an opportunity to interact with their audience in real time. This makes it easier forthem to gauge public opinion and understand what their supporters want. However, without tracking the results of theirsocial media campaigns, political parties are missing out on valuable insights. By tracking the results of their social mediacampaigns, political parties can identify which strategies are working and which ones are not. They can also use this datato refine their messaging and target specific audiences. Additionally, tracking results can help them measure the success oftheir campaigns and make adjustments as needed. In conclusion, it is essential for political parties to track the results oftheir social media campaigns. This will help them make informed decisions and ensure that their campaigns are assuccessful as possible. Without tracking the results, political parties are missing out on valuable insights that could helpthem reach their goals.

 

 

Some of the most important reasons to keep track of results and look at analytics are:

-       Improved ROI: Tracking results and analyzing data helps political parties figure out what works and what doesn't, which can help them get a better return on their investments (ROI).

-       Better targeting: Data analysis can help political parties learn more about the demographics, interests, and behaviors of the people they want to reach. This can help make campaign messages that are better targeted and more effective.

-       Increased efficiency: By looking at the data, political parties can find ways to streamline their campaigns and make them more effective.

-       Better decisions: Data analysis gives valuable information that can be used to make decisions and help political parties make better choices about how to run their campaigns.

-       Increased adaptability: By keeping track of results and analyzing data regularly, political parties can quickly adapt to changes in the political landscape and change their strategies to fit.

Typical social media errors made by political parties: 2. No social media strategy

 Any modern political party cannot function without a robust social media strategy. Over the past few years, political parties use of social media as a channel for communicating with voters, building relationships, and engaging in substantive discourse has grown in popularity. It allows them to interact with their supporters and address any issues or questions they may have. A good social media strategy helps the party to reach more people with a specific message and strengthen connections with their allies. Additionally, it allows them to monitor the activities of their rivals and remain abreast of emerging trends and news in daily politics. 

 

A social media strategy is not complete without a detailed plan for implementing Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram, among others. In addition, a plan for interacting with their supporters should be included, detailing how they intend to do things like respond to questions and feedback and develop useful and entertaining content. It should also detail how they intend to gauge the efficacy of their efforts, such as by counting their followers and analyzing their posts' levels of engagement. This needs to be written into the document. 

 

A social media strategy document should detail the party's plans for using social media to reach its intended audience, as well as its plans for dealing with any negative comments or criticism that may be posted. Include a strategy for using social media to spread the word about the party's platform. The document also needs to detail how the party plans to track the results of its social media campaigns. 

Typical social media errors made by political parties: 1. No internal digital department

Any modern political party would be remiss to not have its in-house digital section. In the age of ever-growing digital media, political parties need to have a staff of digital professionals that can help them stay ahead of the competition. All of the party's online activities, including outreach to voters and content creation, should be managed by this team. They must also be adept at using digital tactics to further the party's agenda. Political parties in the modern day need to develop digital sections if they want to compete. This team needs to be able to come up with interesting material for party members and think of fresh ways to reach out to potential voters. They should also be able to track the success of their digital marketing campaigns and make adjustments as needed. When a political party has its digital department, it can better adapt to the rapidly shifting nature of online discourse. This team needs the ability to identify promising new technologies and develop strategies for incorporating them into the effort. They should be able to monitor the efficacy of their digital marketing campaigns and alter their tactics accordingly. It's a tremendous error for a political party to not have its digital department in the modern era. A team like this can help the party embrace the digital age, creating material and ideas that will help them win. Without a specialized digital department, political parties are at a disadvantage in today's information era.

Main social media mistakes in political parties:

1. No in-party digital department
2. No social media strategy
3. No one tracking results
4. Thinking that the party must be on all social networks
5. Thinking each social network is the same
6. Avoiding, deleting, and negative comments
7. Spamming – mass share content
7. Not engaging with followers
8. Not targeting party target
9. No human touch
10. An excessive amount of party/president promotion
11. Buying followers
12. Not posting daily
13. Unproved Content
14. Not using paid promotional tools
15. Using foul language

 

How long does the transformation of a political party take?

“Most people overestimate what they can achieve in a year and underestimate what they can achieve in ten years.” Gates’s Law

Do you remember the words of that old Bond song by Louis Armstrong, “We Have All the Time in the World”? In politics, nobody says this, ever. Politics is often a fight with time, in time, against time. Long-term plans often get crushed by unforeseen events. Tactics beat strategies. Generally, there is too little time for everything–anything that does not immediately advance the interests of the party and its leadership is at risk of getting sidetracked. This makes one question even more pressing: how long does a party transformation take?

For companies, the acute phase of a critical turnaround is around 1.5 years; more comprehensive transformations take up to 5 years. But in companies, at least for some time, decision-making can be centralized and execution directed top-down. This does not make corporate transformations necessarily better, but quicker.

Transformations in Government take longer - up to 20 years, close to a generation (just think of education in many countries).

Parties somehow fall between companies and Government in terms of timescale. There are two axes to consider: the age and size of the party; and the depth of the transformation. Younger and smaller parties are quicker to transform, in contrast to older and bigger parties; a shallow transformation is quicker than a deep one.

A “Shallow Transformation” is limited to more superficial or partial aspects of the party: a rebranding, a change in communication style, a partial programmatic repositioning, a change in key personnel, or a combination of those things.

The temptation for any party is to stop there, particularly if success at the voting booth returns quickly. The risk with such an approach, however, is long-term. Underlying issues do not get fixed and may come back to bite the party later.

A “Deep Transformation” encompasses the core aspects of a party: its mindset, strategy, program, culture, structure, and key delivery processes. While riskier in the short term, as they do not produce quick and easy fixes, deep transformations hold the promise of a long-term payoff.

The hardest transformations are for older and bigger parties in Government. In such a situation, the party is only the third priority, after the Government and the Parliamentary group; as the party is in power, there may be no obvious crisis, no burning platform. The encroaching complacency increases inertia, and resistance to change.

A Deep Transformation of an old and big party in power therefore may take 10 years. Consequently, time is one big factor why deep transformations of old and big parties often fail. Most party leaders do not last 10 years.

In politics, with its comparably rapid turnover of staff, and with all the brutal pressure in the daily arena, staying on a transformation target for as long as 10 years poses a severe continuity challenge. Expectation management is exceedingly hard. Even the 3-5 years for smaller and younger parties afford a high amount of discipline, strong leadership, and smart process design.

So, while the number of failed corporate transformations is around 70% - for political parties, while there are no solid statistics, I would put the number closer to 90%. It is much easier for the party leadership to satisfy themselves with the small changes they can get away with, before selling a shallow transformation as a deep one (which comes back to bite them -or their successors- later).

True transformational leadership, however, sometimes means planting trees under whose shade one does not expect to sit. And this is why, in the end, some pull it off.