Institutional Voice: What Are We Trying to Say? #MCN2016
•Als PPTX, PDF herunterladen•
0 gefällt mir•915 views
The first social media platforms were designed for individuals to communicate with other individuals, before businesses and organizations got involved. Now that every platform contains millions of competing voices, ranging from our grandmothers to multi-national corporations, how do museums bridge the gap between representing themselves as exciting, diverse institutions and interacting with audiences on a personal level? How can we talk to people in useful ways without trying to shout louder than everyone else? The answer is by creating a unique and effective institutional voice. But is this voice meant to be friendly, irreverent, hilarious, inviting, educational—or all of this at once? Should we try to teach people or make friends? Can we do both? Short answer: yes! But then how do we navigate sharing high-level curatorial writing, marketing and promotional posts, community-oriented posts that engage our local audiences, and participating in cross-museum campaigns, while also factoring in administrative requests to “be funny” and “go viral”? Will trying to do all of this at once make us seem dangerously unhinged? Just as museums are (and must be) many things to many people, all different types of content are related, regardless of what voice is used, because all voices represent the institution. I will explore the concept of institutional voice as a multitude of related voices and examine if it’s possible (or desirable) to maintain consistency across platforms when multiple people manage social accounts. I’ll also explore the relationship between digital institutional voice and the voice represented in signage and curatorial labels. Much of our energy is spent trying to get people in the museums doors, but how does digital institutional voice carry over when they get there? Like a bad Tinder date, is there a danger of museums not living up to the promise of their online personas?
Empfohlen
Weitere ähnliche Inhalte
Was ist angesagt?
Was ist angesagt? (20)
Andere mochten auch
Andere mochten auch (20)
Ähnlich wie Institutional Voice: What Are We Trying to Say? #MCN2016
Ähnlich wie Institutional Voice: What Are We Trying to Say? #MCN2016 (20)
Kürzlich hochgeladen
Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)
Institutional Voice: What Are We Trying to Say? #MCN2016
- 1. Institutional Voice: What Are We Trying to Say? Stephen Boyd Albright-Knox Art Gallery @textsfrommyself
- 2. Think about the ways you talk to people on the internet.
- 3. If you’re like me, you started here. artobserved.net
- 4. Then we went here. dailydot.com
- 5. And now we’re (more or less) here.
- 6. But they’re here too.
- 7. …talking about things like this. sproutsocial.com
- 9. Brands quickly figured out that if they want to be effective on social media… …they need to create the presence and energy of a funny, popular, charming person. wikipedia.org
- 10. Some brands adopt an indulgent, comforting tone. Others want you to know how cool they are. They get it. adsoftheworld.com
- 11. But brands are on social media to sell you things. Brands are not people. They reinforce a consistent image and generally use one voice. If you spent time with a person like that, you’d be bored to tears. pixel.nymag.com
- 12. A museum has more than one voice on social media... …because people act differently in different situations, and museums are made of people! thereelnetwork.net; whorunsgov.com; washingtonpost.com; biography.com
- 13. In the museum field, we call this .
- 14. Institutional voice on social media includes: • Promotion • Marketing • Curatorial content • Conversations and questions • Museum competitions and campaigns • Events • Education • Jokes • Cats
- 15. Therefore, institutional voice should be: • Friendly • Irreverent • Hilarious • Engaging • Inviting • Educational • Timely • Jokes • Cats
- 16. An effective institutional voice means we can post about this. And then this. And then this. And then this, all without seeming unhinged. David Douglas Duncan Brenda Bieger Luke Copping
- 17. What are we selling? Who are we talking to?
- 18. Above all, we’re selling experiences. This one. And these. Photos by Tom Loonan and Brenda Bieger
- 19. We’re talking to everyone about everything we do. • Institutional voice should be open and inviting, not exclusionary. • We can have conversations and answer questions. • Unlike brands, we CAN be personal. Because we have personalities!
- 20. What can an effective institutional voice accomplish? • Make people want to share our content – “Go viral!” • Make people think we’re funny and cool • Associate us with their personal brand • Inspire people to donate money • Make people want to visit the museum
- 21. The way museums present themselves on social media is an invitation to potential visitors (even if they don’t come). serenataflowers.com It’s like we’re asking them out.
- 22. So does the tone of our institutional voice on social media need to match our printed texts and labels? SOCIAL MEDIA VOICE MUSEUM VOICE griddaily.com
- 24. Is This Like a Bad Tinder Date?
- 25. Also no. Institutional voice should focus solely on enhancing the visitor’s experience, no matter where that experience takes place. The museum voice can and should differ from the social voice because it’s in a different setting. Social media followers and visitors want (and possibly need) different things at different times. Long Answer:
- 26. Tone Creep What I call “Tone Creep” happens when a prevalent voice or slang enters public discourse and is adopted (with mixed results) by brands and advertisers.
- 27. This. Just This.
- 28. In some cases, Tone Creep can lead to a deliberate lowering of the discourse that goes back to brands attempting to win your trust: by being indulgent or being cool. You’ve worked hard to establish your voice, so stay consistent.
- 29. Public Focal Points • Don’t co-opt public sentiment for your voice. • Brands don’t have empathy—they’re there to sell you things. • Museums CAN be empathetic, as long as they stay true to who they are.
- 30. To Review • Museums are made of people. • People have different personalities. • An effective institutional voice represents a diverse institution with many personalities and voices.
- 31. • Follow your institution’s social channels! • Even if you don’t work on digital or social media projects, start thinking about the voice that represents the institution to you. • Start conversations with digital/web/social colleagues about how this voice impacts and represents your work. What YOU Can Do
- 32. Thank you! Stephen Boyd Albright-Knox Art Gallery Buffalo, New York sboyd@albrightknox.org @textsfrommyself
Hinweis der Redaktion
- I’ll give you a minute or two to think this over. To be clear, I am referring here to social platforms, not tone or content or any potentially weird subject matter that may arise. I’m going to be referring to institutional voice as it relates to social media throughout this presentation, though a presentation on institutional voice in object labels and texts would be equally worthy of exploration.
- The first social media platforms were designed for individuals to communicate with other individuals, before businesses and organizations got involved. Person to person communication. It was slow, but it was authentic, and it was PRIVATE. No one was peeking over your shoulder or reading your personal messages. No one was mining your data for keywords. No one was yelling at you trying to get your attention, unless you have really needy friends or owed some money.
- Then we got a bit more sophisticated. Facebook kept the person-to-person communication angle but added a public layer that let you see what other people were doing. You could argue that this was the birth, or maturation, of social media as we know it now, and also possibly the start of the culture of sharing (or over-sharing) we currently inhabit.
- Now we’ve transitioned more fully to PUBLIC person-to-person communication. Each of these platforms have a direct messaging functionality, just like our old beloved AOL Instant Messenger, but they are predicated on the public sharing of photos and information. They’re truly social. Without that angle, they wouldn’t work…it’s not like you will see anyone using AOL Instant Messenger these days. So now we’ve started putting all this information out there for everyone else to see…what was bound to happen?
- And now, yes, they’re here too. When I refer to brands, I’m talking about corporate entities, products, and marketing accounts. Brands have invaded what was once a purely personal, and a then purely social space, with blanket advertising messages and marketing disguised as communication. In some cases, they don’t even disguise it. In other cases, it’s hard to tell what is advertising and what is actual user-generated content. Some brands blur the lines intentionally so they fit in better with the posts and subject matter around them.
- Brands want you to love them. They really do.
- And they’ve figured out that social media is the key to everyone’s collective heart, stomach, mind, and body, often all at once. One of the most convincing arguments for being on social media, if you’re a brand, is to go where the people are. This is where they are. Just for the sake of examples, Facebook accounts for one in every 6 minutes spent online, and one in every five minutes on mobile. Here’s another: 68% of Instagram users engage with brands regularly (and I got these facts from Hootsuite, who has some skin in this game). https://blog.hootsuite.com/social-media-statistics-for-social-media-managers/
- Essentially, brands are trying to represent themselves as people. People you know and love. People you’d want to be friends with. But as we all know, brands aren’t people. They’re made up of people trying to pull a fast one on you and get them you like you. Brands on social media are the digital version of door-to-door salespeople. They want you to think they’re like your friends and then…whoosh. It’s all an illusion.
- Some brands treat you with “You’re worth it”, others play on your location or jokes that only you will get. Social media allows for both of these possibilities with easy sales discounts and promotions, or the ability to target certain locations. Through the appearance of exclusivity, in-jokes, flattery, and an informal tone, brands are telling you to “treat yo self.” Examples of these styles of advertising are everywhere…now more serious entities like banks, hotels, insurance agencies, and other more established luxury brands are picking up on this informal, indulgent tone, both in terms of their design and written communication.
- It bears repeating. Brands are not people. They have one speed. Museums are dynamic! We have varied interests! We are cool!
- Brands want you to forget that there are many people working to craft their messaging. They want their people to remain invisible so that the pitch is the only thing you see, and internalize. But people act differently in different situations, because people are people. Museums, on the other hand, are made up of many people!
- I’m referring here specifically to the institutional voice we use on social media. Institutional voice is the way our institutions present themselves on social media through the tone, voice, and style of the posts that we create. Institutional voice is mediated in that posts are created and then published—there is, or should be, a period of review before things are posted, but it’s an authentic representation of both the institution and the people who work there.
- Museums are many things: event venues, promoters, retailers, restauranteurs, publishers, educational resources, and more. We talk about all of the things we do. Since museums are made of people, we have conversations. We ask and answer questions. We engage with each other and with cultural themes and trends, things like #MuseumSelfie day or #AskACurator day. We play games. We make jokes.
- Since we cover such a wide range of topics, an effective institutional voice is, almost by definition, multiple voices. Remember, we are made of different people. When more than one person manages social accounts, or when there are more than one social account for different parts of the museum, the voice can differ. It should remain similar enough to be recognizable, never deviating wildly or staying static. This is how we can be all of these things at once. We’re engaged with our followers and fans, we’re engaged with pop culture, we’re engaged with each other. This is how we can show it effectively. The only one on this list that gives me pause is “hilarious”—that’s tough to achieve. Given the proper context and some quick thinking, it can be possible.
- Institutional voice is a multitude of related voices that represent the personality of the institution. It’s how we can share information about upcoming events and then talk about the history of an artwork without seeming unhinged. We can post about all of these things
- The big question: What’s the point of being on social media? Should we operate like a brand? Why are we here in the first place?
- The bottom line is that we want people to come to the museum. That is why we exist. Some of our registrars often say otherwise. We’re on social media to participate in conversations, to be accessible, and to engage with people where they are. While we’re doing that, we’re selling ourselves and the experience of being at the museum—not just the “great moment with art” experience, but all of the others as well.
- And we’re talking to EVERYONE. We can have personal interactions as actual people! One of the things I hold dear to my heart that I learned at MCN is that “Social media is not a Band-Aid or a bullhorn.” We don’t want to shout loudly above the fray, but we want to make ourselves available and talk with enthusiasm and positive energy about all the things we are and do. We are selling experiences, yes, but we are public resources. We’re here for everyone.
- Social media is a way for people to experience your institution even when they will never visit. I think of social content as an extension of the on-site experience, and as such, we want to present high-quality curatorial content as often as possible. If this goes viral, then hey great, though I think we all know the chances of that happening. But you miss 100% of the shots you don’t take, right? So maybe one day. I’ve been taught by our Advancement department, the Albright-Knox is in the midst of our capital campaign, that everyone and everything is a fundraiser, so everything we put out is a possible way to generate donations. If people think we’re funny and cool, that is to say, if we ARE OURSELVES, they’ll want to associate us with their personal brand and possibly plan to attend some events or programs or donate. But the big question is: can social media content make people want to visit the museum?
- Most of the time, the people who write the social content don’t write the curatorial content. Also, there can be more than one person posting the social content, so it’s important to try to standardize the voice as much as possible. Too much of a shift can give the impression of multiple personalities.
- So if our social media institutional voice, as funny and cool as it may be, presents one version of the institution, does the on-site voice need to match?
- No! For a few reasons, but I’ll get to those in a minute.
- So if we’re using one voice in the digital space and another in the institution, and they don’t match, does this create a disconnect? Are we setting up a false promise that we won’t live up to in reality? Do people want the same tone they get in social posts when they get to the museum? Is that important?
- Also no. All voices represent different aspects of the institution, and people do not generally experience these different aspects simultaneously. Institutional voice should focus solely on enhancing the visitor’s experience, no matter where that experience takes place.
- So now that we’ve answered that all-important question, there are a few things to note. The first is Tone Creep. I invented it, you won’t find this term any other place (unless anyone wants to start a band) but it’s a relevant and timely thing to note. Brands talk about tailoring your voice to your audience and keeping relative consistency. This applies to museums, too—make a list of things you will and won’t do (I referred to it in my notes as “minimums” and “maximums”) and my personal example is that I will never use emoji smiley faces in museum posts. Ever. I saw it happen once and I lost it. Never again. But the message is, keep your voice YOU. Don’t try to be someone you are (or your institution is) not.
- Tone Creep can change the level of discourse for your institution. Brands often try to lower themselves to the simplest, most direct pitch, and often this takes the form of being motherly or indulgent, or attempting to use slang in incorrect or forced ways. The Twitter account Brands Saying Bae is a great repository for some of these. This tweet sums up everything I’m saying: brads do not feel sadness or empathy. Museums are different—because we are made of people. We do feel genuine sadness and empathy, and we can connect with larger conversations on a meaningful and personal level.
- By public focal points, I mean occasions on which public discourse is focused on one event, often via social media. This year, sadly, we’ve experienced the deaths of many beloved and iconic celebrities. We’ve had a lot of important issues in the headlines. We’re inundated by political rhetoric. Navigating this can be tricky, especially if the event has a political or moral dimension that is divisive or controversial. The rules should be the same as for brands, who don’t always follow them. It’s important to note that institutional voice might not represent the entirety of the staff at your institution when it comes to issues like these, but museums can and should participate in public discourse on current events, as long as they don’t co-opt public sentiment to promote themselves, and they don’t deviate from the boundaries of their natural institutional voice. Consistency is key, and anything that rings false is entirely more damaging than something said with authenticity.
- To review: Museums are made of people. We are people, we make up museums. People have different personalities and a multitude of voices. An effective institutional voice represents a diverse institution with many personalities and voices. Institutional voice is the personality of the institution: it’s primarily a marketing tool, yes, but it’s also one of many things that defines the character of the museum. When people find your museum on social media, they’re going to remember if something makes an impression on them.
- And everyone can help with this! The first step in helping to create an effective institutional voice is to follow your institution on social media! I’m always amazed at how many people don’t do this. Once you’ve got a sense of how your institution’s voice works, think about it, and then talk about it. Institutional voice is often created by aggregation, not planned in advance. A periodic assessment of where and how your voice is working, and where and how it could be improved, is vital. If you don’t work on web or social projects, remember that you still represent your institution, and its voice should represent you. You can start thinking and talking about this with the people who manage it. If you’re among the people who manage social channels at your institution, reach out to people who don’t and start these conversations. Arrange a lunch and learn or a focus group to see what works and what doesn’t. The better your institutional voice represents your people, the stronger it will be.