Facebook Campaign

When the semester began, the independent game development company I started with my brother, father and our artist: Triple Pew Studios, already had a Facebook page. The intention, to reach our target audience more effectively and in conjunction with other Social Media platforms like Twitter and Instagram. We soon learned that simply posting on these outlets was not enough. We needed a way to increase the number of likes and views our page receives.

Our first thought, was to boost specific posts as the screenshot below indicates.

We paid Facebook to boost four of our posts and the results were mixed. Our first boosted post seemed promising, because the number of people reached was within the range we hoped for. The exception being that only seventy-six people actually engaged with the post.

We decided that doing a poll would create the level of engagement we expected. The next two images show that our post informing people of the poll got lower results than the post showing the result of the poll.

We noticed that individuals visiting the page were simply liking the post advertising the poll, rather than taking the poll itself. As a result of that, the image we used in that post became the winning image. Still, our Facebook page was not getting anymore likes than it had prior to any of our boosted posts. We needed another strategy. It was at that time we discussed promoting the page itself rather than individual posts. The image below shows that creating an ad promoting the page had far better results than any of our boosts.

Why was promoting our page more successful? When I looked at the data, I immediately realized that our boosted posts were targeted at too broad a market and our page promotion was created to reach a smaller, more specific group. Specifically, males between the ages of thirteen and forty-five, in the United States, Canada and Japan. Still a relatively broad demographic, given the international reach, though the promotion resulted in our Facebook page gaining over two hundred likes.

In conclusion, it is evident that the more effective course of action as our company continues forward, is to promote the Triple Pew Studios page itself and not be so ambitious as to try and reach the entire world, but rather start with a smaller area of influence, such as just Utah and its neighboring states, or just Saint George and Las Vegas for starters, then as the company's influence grows, target a broader market. Social media can surely aid us in that endeavor, though it is a tool that we need to learn to use more correctly and effectively to gain the results we seek.

Facebook Ad

Facebook Insights

Recognizing Additudinal Responses

In going through my OTM posts, I instantly recognized the glaring attitudinal response that I have and it was staring me right in the face all semester. All four of my OTM posts weren't about any hard hitting topics like race, politics, or religion. I literally avoided those topics all together. The exception being my Well Informed posts.

In and of itself, avoiding heavier topics is an attitudinal response and the reason is not entirely lost on me. I did not want to post about the same things as the rest of the class. I wanted to be different.

Wanting to be different, not going along with the norm, or what everyone else is doing has been an attitude of mine for as long as I can remember and every single time I have tried to fit myself within the confines of a specific point of view, or lifestyle; I have always felt constricted and have automatically rebelled against those constraints.

Said another way, I have always had the notion, or attitude that society is full of either sheep, or wolves and if I'm going to stand out of the crowd, I can't be a sheep or a wolf. I have to be something else entirely, because simply being a black sheep, or a white wolf is not enough. Being a lion, a dragon or even a unicorn is more my style.

On The Media: Under The Wall

I listened to "Under The Wall" one of the recordings included in "Race To The Bottom". In Under The Wall, Greg Mitchell; author of the new non-fiction book, The Tunnels: Escapes Under the Berlin Wall and the Historic Films the JFK White House Tried to Kill, speaks about his book and how NBC and CBS both ventured to document the heroic escape of refugees from East Berlin into West Berlin. With only NBC succeeding.

This recording interested me, for a couple of reasons. The first, being that it was about the Berlin Wall and refugees escaping from behind it. The second is because the Kennedy Administration tried to shut down any media coverage of refugees escaping from East Berlin.

The Berlin Wall was erected in 1961 and became the symbol of the Cold War. Beyond that, it was a physical representation of the Communist agenda: Peace through oppression. When the wall was built, it literally trapped people behind it, separating entire families, because citizens in East Berlin were not free to travel in and out at will. Neither were those in West Berlin able to cross over to the East. Imagine if a wall was built through the middle of the United States and you weren't allowed to go to the other side to visit family on the other side of it, or move to a state located on the East side of the wall. For nearly thirty years this symbol of oppression, of imprisonment stood. Until, on November 9, 1989 it was torn down.

I was a bit shocked at first to learn that JFK and his administration tried to keep the media from covering the refugees escaping from East Berlin by tunneling under the wall. I had thought that this was something the government would have wanted and even supported. Yet considering the tensions of the Cold War and the looming threat of nuclear war, it's reasonable that the government would be fearful of retaliation from the Soviet Union. Ironically, NBC was able to accomplish their goal and released a ninety minute documentary covering the event...and retaliation never came. Perhaps due to the fact that the film "The Tunnel" went "viral" worldwide. At least the 1960's version of going viral, which would be called going global.

What this really brings to my mind is the governments love hate relationship with the media. When it comes to things like the current run for President, the government can't get enough coverage. But, when there's something that the government deems as unnecessary for the public to be aware of, they go as far as undermining the second amendment to keep it from the public. Even in the days of the Cold War, there were things the government went to great lengths to keep hidden. In my mind, it's a different form of oppression, a wall if you will, preventing America from knowing the truth, or even hearing about it.

On The Media: A Face In The Crowd

I listened to A Face In The Crowd. A podcast about the recent interest in the 1957 film, A Face In The Crowd. A film about a man named Larry "Lonesome" Rhodes who rises from obscurity to radio/television star, to powerful politician and his eventual ruin. Though the podcast was short-only eight minutes-it really got me thinking about politics today and how a business mogul like Trump can become a candidate for the Presidency of The United States, with out ever being a Senator, or Governor.

In a way, it is a reflection of our current society, where status and popularity seem to be the most important things. After all, Trump is a celebrity of sorts since he has become a very famous and powerful business man, with his own empire and he has been on television.

In 1957, when A Face In The Crowd was released, the idea of a celebrity becoming a politician was unheard of and the film did not do well.

Perhaps that is one of the things that has changed in the last sixty years. A person with celebrity status can be a politician and run for office, relying on the fact that they are in the public eye to gain popularity. Though that might not be the message being conveyed in the pod cast.

Instead I think another question is being asked. And that question, is whether or not a public figure can become a political giant and be successful, or as the film illustrates, will that person fall from that high pedastal they are on and lose everything?

Presidential Debate 2016

I only watched a total of fifteen minutes of the debate. I hoped that for once, Clinton and Trump would really address the issues and answer the questions in an intelligent and well thought out manner. However, that did not happen. In the few minutes that I watched, the debate quickly turned into something of a farce.

That may be my opinion, but there is a reason behind it. At first, both candidates did their best to answer the questions asked, except that it was clear that Clinton was intentionally manipulating things to put Trump on the defensive. Her strategy worked and Trump, though he tried his best to not take the bait, ended up attempting to explain himself and attacking Hillary.  Once that happened, it was no longer a debate, but a contest to see who had the most dirt on who.

After I stopped watching, I checked my Twitter feed as well as my Facebook. Unfortunately for me, the majority of those I follow on Twitter and a few friends on Facebook are HRC supporters and it showed. A Tweet from Katy Perry: "I literally just did a dance around the room in my pj's!" in response to Hillary Clinton saying :" Yeah, I prepared for this debate AND i'm prepared to be President!"

Support for either candidate aside, the consensus on both of those social media outlets was that this wasn't a debate as much as it was an opportunity for Hillary to flex her muscle and for both candidates to sling mud at each other. Clinton was making Trump look bad and Trump was defending himself as well as making every attempt to make Hillary look bad.

From my point of view, there is a considerable amount of bias toward Trump and a plethora of support for Clinton in the media and among artists and entertainers, so it was difficult for me to get an assessment on what the medias views were concerning the debate and whether or not actual issues were addressed. Hence my conclusion that the whole thing was a farce.