Sesame Street Goes Social

Last year, my sisters and I randomly asked my mother a question, “Did you ever get sick of watching Sesame Street with us when we were young?” Her answer sort of surprised us. She said that she did not really mind watching the show with us because it always had an uncanny way of making her laugh. That's exactly what I was reminded of when I saw this article. Through bringing in big name celebrities and telling jokes that go way over the heads of children, Sesame Street has always had it’s ability to still entertain a more mature audience. Now, Sesame Street has taken another step by using social media to connect with their older base.

The numbers speak for themselves. The Sesame Street Facebook page has over a 125,000 likes, and their Twitter account has over 268,000 followers. All of these numbers pale in comparison to Elmo’s Facebook page, which has over 457,000 likes. Also, Elmo is all over YouTube.

YouTube is really where Sesame Street succeeds with social media the most. They post some of their clips from the show so that everyone can see them at anytime. Many of these clips have gone viral. Here’s one video where Grover gives his own take on the well-known Old Spice commercial.

It's really cool how a child and adult could both watch these videos, and enjoy them for different reasons. Here’s another one that parodies HBO’s hit show TruBlood…

Furthermore, Sesame Street is yet another brand that has used social media to reach out to a different audience than they normally wouldn't be able to engage with. By creating content that is entertaining for all ages, Sesame Street continues to not be just another "kid show." I am sure that by maintaining their current strategy, they will keep on growing their popularity with an older audience, achieving a kind of a "cult following" on the Internet. I for one can personally guarantee that with their funny jokes and lighthearted humor, they got a 'like' and 'follow' from me.

Can Twitter Replace a Website?

Kamchatka Site Demo from Kamchatka on Vimeo.

Twitter is becoming an important part of every business's attempt to market their brand online. But has Twitter become so important that it can replace an actual website itself? That is exactly what a company called Kapchatka Digital Locro of Buenos Aires, Argentina has done to their website (http://www.kamchat-k.com/index_en.php). They have one main Twitter page as a homepage and then several other Twitter pages as the content sections of the website. By using the new Twitter, people will be able to search for the things that they are looking for. As more people get on Twitter, this could become useful since people will have no need to leave Twitter to learn information about them. Also, websites are expensive, and for some small businesses, they can be a very heavy burden to run.

So all of the positives considered, I still think that this is one risk not worth taking. By doing a little research (yes, I had to literally research), I've come to the conclusion, or even better, educated guess, that Kapchatka is a social media communications firm, not much unlike the one I intern for. I guess that this new Twitter website is supposed to show that they are "cutting edge," and that they think out of the box. Obviously, they are cutting edge, but I believe that they may be too cutting edge for their own good. The fact is that even though Twitter is continuing to grow in popularity, it is no where near popular enough to be able to reach out to everyone online. Getting acclimated to Twitter takes time, and a person who would be interested in their services would need to be a Twitter user himself to be able to fully understand what products they offer. I consider myself to be very acclimated with Twitter, and even I was confused. Also, far more people are on Facebook than Twitter. If they really wanted to make it easier for potential clients and their selves, they would have created a very in depth Facebook page using custom tabs. Therefore, although their idea is creative, I believe that it is just way too far ahead of its time.

Coping with Death on Facebook

Lately, we have been discussing the role of death on Facebook. Fortunately, I have never had a very close friend die and have their Facebook memorialized. Yet, I can tell a story about an interesting occurrence for the senior class at CUA when a student who had left after first semester freshman year passed away.

Charles Genner lived on Spellman 2 with a lot of us freshman year. Although I was not really close to him, I knew that he was a really good guy, and that he was very well liked by everyone on the floor. I am not really sure why he left after first semester, but I know that a lot of us were sad to see him go. Well time passed, and unfortunately, no one from CUA really kept in touch with him. Therefore, when Charles passed away on March 14, 2009, no one from the CUA community knew, and it was not until more than a year after his death did people realize that Charles had passed. In complete shock, I looked at his Facebook profile, and especially his wall, which was now being suddenly flooded with condolences from CUA. The thing that surprised me the most was that people from CUA had wished him Happy Birthday a few months earlier not knowing that he had died.

Looking at the big picture, I am not really sure what can be taken away from this story besides that you should try your best to stay in touch with people. Yet, in terms of Facebook, I can see the benefits of keeping your Facebook after you have passed. If not for Facebook, no one from CUA would have ever found out about his death, and I think that having a place to visit and recall memories is a great way to remember someone who has died.

This also raises an interesting question. How will Facebook remember deceased users? Will they list the anniversary of someone's death just like they would someone's birthday? Will they do a better job at notifying friends of a death? These questions will likely continue to press on as Facebook continues to grow and gain more users, especially among the elderly.

New Social Network or New Facebook Groups?

Last week, our class got into lengthy discussion about the possibility of creating a new social network for the Media Studies Department at CUA. During this conversation, I was very skeptical of any potential success especially in the face of the all mighty Facebook. Ironically, with the launch of Facebook's new Groups just a few days ago, it seems as if Facebook was listening to our conversation.

Facebook's new Groups product does everything that we were discussing in class. It allows people to make private and closed groups where only people who are invited can participate. People can chat, share documents, email members, and much more. Also, people are able to control all aspects of the privacy. Here's a story about the product:  http://www.insidefacebook.com/2010/10/06/group-email-chat-api/ 

I believe that it is better to stay within the Faceboom frame because everyone is already there, and all the work is done for you. In the past, groups have tried to start their own social networks, but have utterly failed. In 2008, the College Republican National Committee created their own network called "Storm," which was supposed to organize all College Republicans across the country to help the GOP cause, but it failed due to the fact that it had the glitches of many early social networks, and many college students didn't want to join a network and use it to do just one thing. I feel that the same would happen to the Media Studies' social network.

Yet the whole conversation did bring up an interesting question. What will be the next trend in social media? Perhaps, social media's rate of sharing grew so much that people will want to return back to a more private life on social networks. If people preferred to share less and with fewer people than they do on Facebook, then I think that CUA Media Studies social network could actually succeed. Yet until that trend begins, Facebook will always have the advantage over small social networks.