Social Media Update Millennial-Style

A previous article about social media use was published last year.  Andrew Watts, a 21-year-old college student, has written a follow-up.

Click on image to enlarge.

Click on image to enlarge.

On January 2, 2015, I wrote a viral post entitled “A Teenager’s View on Social Media,” in which I dissected popular apps and what I thought about them. It got over one million views. Many people have asked me to write a follow-up or, at the very least, an update. I haven’t felt there was a dramatic enough shift to warrant a new post, until now.

I will start this post off with transparency, since it influences my view of the landscape.

I am a 21-year-old male attending The University of Texas at Austin. I am heavily invested in social media and I try out all of the latest social apps whenever I can. I really love following and paying attention to the trends surrounding social media, often observing both my own and my network’s usage of it.

I have previously interned at Facebook and Google, but the views in this post are my own and any commentary about product feature requests or these companies’ product roadmaps are purely speculative. No hot scoops here.

Similar to the previous post, I will break this down by network and what I’ve observed over the past two years.

Facebook

Facebook was definitely my hottest take in my first article, when I announced, “It’s dead to us.” It seemed like such a stale social network, with mostly publications and distant friends populating the News Feed. However, sharing among my friends has recently increased dramatically due to a few main factors I’ve noticed:

  • Users are better educated on how to tag people in the comments of posts and how to share posts, which has helped viral content spread.

  • The emphasis on videos over text has made the platform more engaging and shareable, since videos are (currently) one of the most engaging formats.

  • The emergence of “Weird Facebook” — Facebook pages and groups that are focused on memes or other niche topics.

Messenger has also become a valuable tool. I know plenty of people who prefer Messenger to traditional texting. It’s the communication platform of choice when I (as an iPhone owner) have to message an Android user.

Facebook Live has also become increasingly influential among my peers. I know at least a dozen friends who have gone Live in the past month. For now the feature still seems fairly niche, with a ton of barriers to user participation (people often don’t have enough content for a continued stream, so they shut it down within a minute or two). Also, the fact that going Live (seemingly) notifies your entire Friend List can make for a pretty stressful process with a lot of pressure.

But for my friends and me, Facebook is still not the dominant social network many people see it as. If people meet at a party, they’re more likely to add each other on Snapchat or Instagram. That isn’t to say people don’t friend one another on Facebook anymore — they definitely do — but rather that other networks dominate the conversation. Facebook is seen as a fairly formal means of connecting. If a friend of mine meets a guy at a party, she doesn’t want him to see all of this information about her that’s on Facebook. She prefers Snapchat because it opens a line of communication, gives a more honest look into a person’s life, and is just more lightweight as a platform to talk on.

Instagram

Instagram is still one of the most used social media outlets for my age group. I would argue that it isn’t the most, since Snapchat has definitely acquired more influence over the years. Many of the observations I made two years ago still hold true:

  • I’m not terrified if I like something on Instagram that it will show up in someone’s feed (though, I’m not really as worried about that on Facebook as I used to be).

  • There isn’t pressure to follow back on Instagram, making the content inherently more curated.

  • The content on Instagram itself is generally higher quality.

  • Instagram still (which is honestly surprising) hasn’t been flooded with the older generation yet.

  • People often don’t post as much content on Instagram but, with the new algorithm (which I’ll get to shortly), even if they did it wouldn’t matter as much.

The one thing that has changed is my stance on links on Instagram. I believe links should be added to Instagram, given that the release of their new algorithm would prevent link spamming, and given that the integration Instagram did for links on Stories (having users simply swipe up from a Story in order to visit a link) was brilliant.

Speaking of Instagram Stories, I’m actually a huge fan of this feature. I don’t have too many friends who post on it, causing it to mostly be populated by celebrities or brands. However, the organization and implementation of Stories is genius, making me want to engage with it anyways. Their unobtrusive spot at the top of the feed, sorted based on the engagement you’ve had with the Instagram accounts, and the navigation of the Stories themselves is brilliant. Plus, tagging friends in the posts on Stories and adding links have both been integrated terrifically.

The content on the Stories often mimics what users see in the feed — highly curated, often artistic photos. That being said, you won’t see the sort of raw view into someone’s life on Instagram as you would on Snapchat. Snapchat is still a much more personal network and is the only place where I feel like I can be myself when I post. But I’ll get to Snapchat later.

Instagram’s Direct Messaging has also improved dramatically, mainly because of the addition of the share button on posts and the (seemingly forced) inclusion of comment tags → DMs. Whenever you tag a friend in the comments on Instagram, it defaults to sending them a message of the image, rather than leaving an actual comment with the tag. I don’t have conversations with anyone over Instagram DM, mainly just sharing photos back and forth on the platform, which I think is the perfect use case for it.

My views regarding Instagram’s Live functionality are the same as my views on Facebook’s, though I would feel more comfortable using Instagram’s because it deletes automatically.

Many people in my immediate circle hardly use Twitter at all, but I am aware of other groups within my age bracket who use it as their primary platform to connect and share. I’ve personally grown to appreciate Twitter much more. It’s a terrific place to express your views and meet like-minded individuals from around the globe. However, a few problems really plague Twitter that I think are inhibiting it from growing more:

  • Harassment, spamming (just go to any political person’s Twitter), and lack of a transparent review process (at least compared to other sites, such as Facebook).

  • Difficulty with curation compared to other networks. It’s hard to find Twitter accounts I may like, since “People to Follow” generally seems pretty random for me (or it’s just simply accounts I’ve recently viewed).

  • The blatant stealing of content from accounts such as Dory, Common White Girl, and more discourages content creators from publishing on the platform.

  • Tweets are often shared on other social media platforms (such as Instagram), so many people just follow Instagram aggregator accounts that steal content instead of finding it on Twitter. I wonder if there’s a way for Twitter to prevent this in the future or, on the other hand, embrace the fact that this is occurring and find a way to lead people back to their platform.

Twitter

Many people in my immediate circle hardly use Twitter at all, but I am aware of other groups within my age bracket who use it as their primary platform to connect and share. I’ve personally grown to appreciate Twitter much more. It’s a terrific place to express your views and meet like-minded individuals from around the globe. However, a few problems really plague Twitter that I think are inhibiting it from growing more:

  • Harassment, spamming (just go to any political person’s Twitter), and lack of a transparent review process (at least compared to other sites, such as Facebook).

  • Difficulty with curation compared to other networks. It’s hard to find Twitter accounts I may like, since “People to Follow” generally seems pretty random for me (or it’s just simply accounts I’ve recently viewed).

  • The blatant stealing of content from accounts such as Dory, Common White Girl, and more discourages content creators from publishing on the platform.

  • Tweets are often shared on other social media platforms (such as Instagram), so many people just follow Instagram aggregator accounts that steal content instead of finding it on Twitter. I wonder if there’s a way for Twitter to prevent this in the future or, on the other hand, embrace the fact that this is occurring and find a way to lead people back to their platform.

Snapchat

Snapchat has grown tremendously in the past two years. In my 2015 post I called Snapchat addictive and liberating, mostly for the way its design swept away social pressure. By now, everyone I know has a Snapchat account and almost all of them use it on a regular basis. It has become an essential app not only for posting and sharing photos, but for messages as well. The Chat functionality of Snapchat has improved tremendously and I have at least a couple conversations a day on it. Snapchat definitely helped spur its growth by having a “swipe up to reply” functionality for Stories, which I use daily and which makes it easy to start conversations on the platform.

What I love so much about Snapchat is that the product embraces being fun. People are their authentic selves when they post on Snapchat, using funny filters, lenses, stickers, or inserting their own Bitmoji into Snaps (which is fantastic by the way—a perfect acquisition for Snapchat to make. Everyone I know uses Bitmoji regularly). I also think Snapchat’s stickers are the best stickers in the game right now, and their search functionality for stickers is always on point.

When someone finds a new lens and tries it, you can see the network effect throughout your feed and see everyone else giving it a shot as well, even if the lens isn’t the most flattering. Snapchat allows you to have fun and be yourself in a way no other social network can right now, especially with the absence of most of the external social pressure of other networks, where you worry about how many likes you’ve collected.

Even so, lately I’ve been running into some issues with Snapchat. Because everyone I know uses it, there’s often too much happening, especially with Stories. Snapchat has implemented a few product features to try to combat this, but it still seems pretty tedious to go through my entire feed to find specific friends whose Stories I want to see. Snapchat should take a cue from Instagram (since Instagram took so many cues from Snapchat) and organize their Stories based on engagement/interaction from the user. As of now, my feed honestly kind of stresses me out. I also wish you could hide Stories from friends—for some people who post a lot, I don’t necessarily want to see their Stories, but I still want them to be able to message me (and vice-versa).

The Others

A 3D printed Whatsapp logo is seen in front of a displayed Facebook logo in this illustration taken Thomson Reuters

  • LinkedIn — Ugh.

  • Tumblr — It’s really hard to gauge how relevant Tumblr is since it often isn’t discussed. It seems like to many, the appeal of Tumblr is to have a personal account away from everything else where you can post and share with total strangers (who are generally interested in the same things you are). People don’t often go around advertising their Tumblr accounts or, if they do, they have a public account AND a separate, more personal account for what I just mentioned. I think Tumblr could do a better job of making itself more social and shareable (so people talked about it more), but I also think the closed platform is part of the appeal.

  • Kik — Very popular messaging application with the younger crowd (13–18). Family members who are still in high school tell me they use it all the time. The bots that exist on Kik are well made, and its developer environment and bot store make it one of the most approachable bot applications for developers and users alike.

  • WhatsApp — Although I do not personally use it all that much, WhatsApp is a force to be reckoned with abroad and is definitely not going away anytime soon.

  • GroupMe — Still by far the most used group messaging application in college, although iMessage may eventually take this title away, especially as more people switch to the iPhone. GroupMe has had a few improvements over the years, but I think there’s much more potential for this application than the developers are currently utilizing.

  • YouTube — Really the only place anyone watches videos aside from Facebook. There has been some drama between YouTube and its creators over the past year, and I think YouTube could possibly improve on how it communicates with its creators, given that many have complained about being caught off guard with major changes to the site.

R.I.P.

This section is for social networks that have essentially gone away and are completely off the radar for both myself and my peers. This isn’t to say that the networks themselves are bad or anything, just that no one I know ever uses them. Like…ever.

I was most surprised to see Vine and Yik Yak fall. As a user of Vine, I could tell the content on the app was becoming stale and people were moving to other platforms. However, I felt a better integration with Twitter could have saved it. Even though the app will become a “Vine Camera,” Twitter could have done more to engage with influencers on the platform and connect it more to the main Twitter app.

Yik Yak is different from others on the list because many students in college not only have heard of it, but have even tried it for themselves. However, the lack of continued engagement as well as bullying and harassment sadly proved to be detrimental to the app.

Up and Coming

  •  Musical.ly / Live.ly — Musical.ly is a social network where users post lip-syncing videos to everything from music to Vines. Live.ly is a livestreaming application made by Musical.ly. Musical.ly became popular just a few months after my first blog and has taken the social media world by storm. My family members who are still in middle school tell me about how everyone they know is on Musical.ly and how they use Live.ly to keep up with their favorite celebrities, albeit middle school celebrities (what’s up, Jacob Sartorius). Musical.ly has a really smooth interface and a thriving community — it’s definitely one to watch.

  • Curious Cat — Think of Curious Cat as a more social, next generation version of Ask.fm. It’s a popular Q&A social network, focusing more on personal questions rather than the more general ones that Quora or Yahoo Answers address. Curious Cat has mainly been spreading through Twitter, yet I could see the site becoming more influential if they nail down how to handle harassment on the platform (which is not an easy feat).

  • Discord — Discord is a chat application focused on gamers. It has myriad features that help serve its over 300 million users every day. This chat app is highly influential in the gaming sphere and will likely extend beyond that market very soon.

Conclusion

Social media has changed dramatically over the past two years. A perfect example of this is how Live video emerged at the forefront of companies’ product strategies.

I don’t think there will ever be “one network to rule them all.” Every network has its own merits. So if I were to offer one piece of advice, let it be this: social networks should stop trying to make one app that does everything. Instead, they should strategically focus on the communities or needs that aren’t already being served by other networks.

The Divergent Paths of Music Radio & Its Listeners

Since 2001 Bridge Ratings has been tracking and trending media consumption. Broadcast radio, internet radio, satellite radio, streaming, social media - it all is part of the daily manner in which audio consumers spend valuable entertainment time.

Traditional radio is no longer the only option.

So why are radio programmers missing the boat and not reflecting the tastes of their audiences.

Much has been writing in recent years about the strengths of traditional AM/FM radio (its reach of 93% of the population) and its weakness (annual time-spent listening reductions).

Traditional radio’s music exposure structures no longer align with audience need.
— Dave Van Dyke, President Bridge Ratings

For many, music radio these days still uses structural exposure playbooks from the 1970s.

What's wrong with that?

Music radio song category structures and exposures no longer align with how the audience consumes music and in our latest findings here at Bridge Ratings, we've discovered that passion for music radio is slipping for 75% of the four major music formats we analyzed: Top 40 (CHR), Country, Urban Contemporary and Alternative.

Reduction in passion for music radio doesn't necessarily mean less passion for the music; on the contrary.

Of the four music radio formats we studied, only Urban Contemporary continues to align its programming to the needs of its listeners.

The Study

Methodology: Bridge Ratings has been tracking radio usage since its founding in 2001. Since 2001 each year we have randomly selected 5 radio stations in the four music formats in three market categories: Major Market (Ranked 1-10), Medium Market (Ranked 11-40) and Small Market (Ranked 41+). This totaled 20 radio stations per music format in each market category. Sample sizes varied by format and by year.

We tracked listening occasions per personal interviews and on-line surveys.

For each member of our sample aged 12 and over, we tracked their preference and passion for each type of music associated with each of the music formats (Passion Index).

The result was a comparison of weekly listening tune-in occasions and the passion.

The following charts summarize our findings:

Top 40

Click on image to enlarge.

As with all of these format examples, Passion for Pop music on Contemporary Hit Radio/Top 40 remains high over the sixteen year term of this study. What has changed is the number of weekly occasions of listening. Drop-off began as early as 2006 - long before many of the alternative methods of consuming Pop music became available. The divide between the passion and the tune-in is significant for this format yet provides an opportunity.

The gap between the Passion Index and the Tune-in Listening Occasions represents the growth potential for these formats.
— Dave Van Dyke

Country

Click on image to enlarge.

According to our samples, passion for Country music has sustained its high numbers throughout this period having reached its highest point today. And as well-programmed are many of the Country radio stations reflected in this study, the passion for the music and the number of times listeners tune-in each day has slipped and in 2010 began to diverge into a Country music life group that is not as satisfied with Country radio as it could be. The gap between the passion index scores and the tune-in occasion number is the potential the format has for growth.

Alternative Rock

Click on image to enlarge.

Evidenced in most of these music formats is the growing gap of non-alignment and nowhere is it more evident than in the Alternative Radio segment. Passion for the Alternative music category which can include everything from Alternative, Punk, Indie, Rock and Alternative Pop remains greater than the satisfaction levels delivered by the stations represented in this next chart. Despite the drop-off, the passion for the music is only 14% lower than it was in 2000 while tune-in to these radio stations on average has dipped faster after a high in 2007.

Urban Contemporary

Click on image to enlarge.

An example of well-aligned radio to its audience is Urban Contemporary as shown in the following chart. Passion for the music and tune-in occasions have followed similar growth trajectories since 2000 and today the format is performing better than ever. Does this have anything to do with the fact that Urban music tends to be the most-consumed whether by stream, download or physical purchase? We believe it does.

Solutions

According to a separate research study of radio program directors conducted late Summer 2016, only 44% of radio programmers used some form of music research. 70% of the group that doesn't use music research depends on published airplay charts to choose and manage their playlists.

The slow disintegration of station tune-in occasions not only aligns with advances in technology but also seems to align with an era when budget for solid station product research began to be cut or reduced and as revenues dried up since 2005, costs were eliminated and research was one of the victims.

The disconnect between listener expectations and radio’s music programming provides an opportunity.

Radio today continues to reach over 90% of the U.S. population weekly. And it's no secret that with all the entertainment options available, traditional radio has competition for the short attention span of most listeners.

With the varied audio options available to radio consumers, frankly they've gotten more sophisticated in their tastes, needs and expectations.

Our listener panels and the charts in this report point to one of music radio's key vulnerabilities: listener expectations are not being met.

Even listening behavior of older demographics have significantly adjusted to the influence of new technology.

The disconnect between listener expectations and radio's music programming provides an opportunity.

The radio industry can view this data in hindsight and wonder why time spent listening is dropping. However a return to investment in the product in the form of research, talent and marketing could resolve or at least halt the deterioration in listener commitment to radio stations that play music they are passionate about.

Music Radio's Poison Pill

While discussing the Bridge Ratings' streaming data for his station the other day, the station's program director and I raised the question of what traditional radio's purpose was in 2016.

With so many options available to consumers, studies have consistently shown in recent years that traditional radio's role is to play the hits, the songs listeners want to hear again and again.

Yet, radio's role has always been to play 'the hits'.  It's just that today we are fortunate enough to have the tech that actually shows what the hits are.

Radio has proven to be the curator of choice.
— Dave Van Dyke, President Bridge Ratings

We see it time and again in our radio usage field studies: today consumers choose radio for the most popular music and choose streaming platforms like Spotify, Apple Music, even Pandora when they desire to control what they listen to and when. Radio has proven to be the curator-of-choice. It is clear that traditional radio and music streaming together have been expanding the consumption of music in the last two years.

Then why are so many radio stations not reflecting as close as they can to 100% of their listeners' favorite music?

The information is readily available through on-demand streaming research which Bridge Ratings provides to stations around the country on a weekly basis.

As I've written in this space previously, on-demand streaming is a much better indicator of true music appeal and consumption that any other music research radio relies on.

The least effective method of managing music rotations is a poison pill by programming by consensus, i.e. watching the published airplay charts available and programming based on how songs rise and fall on those charts.

Read my blog "Stop Programming By Consensus" for more detail.

This method causes slow station death as listeners tune out more than they tune in because they are seeking the quick satisfaction of hearing their favorites.

Those industry publications are printing charts based on hundreds of similarly formatted radio stations the results of which is a chart of averages of airplay by programmers who are each watching each other's playlists.

Add the music industry's release strategies and we end up with a chart that really is the furthest thing from reliable data on radio listeners' favorite music.

Using published airplay charts to determine music popularity causes slow station death as listeners tune out more than they tune in.
— Dave Van Dyke, President Bridge Ratings

Case in point.

We recently did an analysis of four key radio music formats: CHR, Urban, Country and Alternative to see the correlation between published airplay charts and true music consumption reflected in on-demand music streaming charts.

Radio finds itself in a position to be led by the available technology - on-demand streaming data.

High correlation means that the two charts - published airplay vs. on-demand streaming of identical lists of songs - are fairly well aligned or similar.

These results may surprise you.

Keep in mind the definition of the word "correlation". Correlation measures the strength of association between two sets of variables. In this case, we are checking the correlation between published airplay chart rankers and on-demand streaming rankers.

Here are the correlations:

How to read: 65% of the top 100 Top 40 (CHR) songs on published radio airplay charts correlate in rank with on-demand streaming charts. 35% of the top 100 Alternative Music songs on published radio airplay charts correlate in rank with on-demand streaming charts.

  • CHR/Top 40 - 65%
  • Country - 60%
  • Urban - 44%
  • Alternative - 35%

The CHR/Top 40 correlation is surprisingly high. The airplay and streaming charts are fairly highly correlated at 65%. This may be attributed to the fact that Top 40 hits are more universally consumed or that Top 40 programmers are more unified in their song choices and rotations.

The same can be said for Country with a 60% correlation. 60% of the top 100 songs on published industry music charts hold rank positions with a margin of error +/- 10%. The remaining 40% hold weekly ranks that do not represent the true consumption by fans of the format as determined by the on-demand streaming research Bridge Ratings analyzes each week.

But it gets more interesting.  

Of the radio music formats dissected for this report, Urban is next with 44% correlation to the published charts top 100 songs by rank.

There are many examples of songs that rank considerably higher on station streaming charts compared to the published charts available.

And we often find songs on published charts with lower rankings for longer periods of time when compared to on-demand streaming data especially when examined by station and market.

The Alternative charts we've studied only correlate with 35% of the songs ranked by airplay. The format certainly offers a unique mix of hit singles and hit album cuts and that variety may be feeding the significant variance between actual airplay and actual consumption determined through on-demand streaming analysis for both Alternative and Urban radio.

For Alternative radio, Twenty-One Pilots is creating all sorts of challenges for radio programmers these days. With the huge success of their current album, we're seeing a number of 21 Pilots' songs rising into the top 75 most-consumed songs by that format's primary listeners. Some of these songs are currents released in the past 45 weeks but many are gold and radio programmers using old school format playbooks are struggling to properly reflect the popularity of this group.

So they don't play many of the most-highly listened to songs by this group. Or if they play some of them, they are not being heard nearly enough by the target listener.

Coldplay is another example. And there are many others.

Traditional radio doesn't seem to have truly migrated to using on-demand streaming data to program its stations. For the first time, radio is no longer able to dictate its musical approach to listeners. Rather, radio finds itself in a position to be led by the technology - on-demand streaming data.

And that reversal of roles is causing consternation among those whose responsibility it is to reflect the tastes of today's music consumer as it applies to radio's role as the source of hit music.

Through viral sharing and social media recommendations, music fans and radio are now on divergent paths.

Bottom line: published airplay charts - in general - do not correlate with actual consumption of music as represented by on-demand streaming charts. Radio listeners have very good taste in music and through viral sharing and social media recommendations, music fans and radio are now on divergent paths.

Radio station programmers who understand this reality will reflect today's true music consumption behavior and will properly reflect consumer tastes.

Dave Van Dyke

Methodology: Correlations were calculated by running correlation analyses comparing an average of four of each music format's top 100 published lists during the month of September 2016 with Bridge Ratings' on-demand streaming rankers for each music format. Song rankings outside of the standard deviation of +/- 10% contributed to the overall correlation variances noted in this analysis.