- Expert Academic and Article Professional Writing Service
- +1 323 471 4575
- support@essaysolver.com
The Growth of New Digital Media Case Assignment
The Growth of New Digital Media Case Assignment
Order ID 53563633773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages to Order 5-10 Pages
Description/Paper Instructions
The Growth of New Digital Media Case Assignment
- Introduction
Section:
The growth of new digital media in the first decade of the twenty‐first century has seen a transformation of marketing communication, with 94 per cent of marketing executives responding to a 2010 survey indicating that they expect to spend more on social media over the following three years ( Busby et al. , 2010 ). One of the newest forms of social media is micro‐blogging, most commonly associated with Twitter. Since its launch in 2006, Twitter has accumulated more than 175 million users ( Twitter.com, 2011 ), with recent growth described as ‘explosive’ ( Lefkow, 2010 ). Twitter and other social media platforms create additional marketing communications channels, but can also add to an organisation’s costs: for example PepsiCo’s Gatorade brand has five full‐time employees working in what the organisation calls “Mission Control”, monitoring Twitter conversations, blogs, and online and social media performance ( Busbyet al., 2010 ; Ostrow, 2010 ). However the effectiveness or efficiency of the strategy is unclear, with Gatorade’s major competitor, Coca‐Cola’s Powerade, experiencing much larger growth in sales, despite a much lower social media presence ( Bauerlein, 2010 ).
One of the challenges for organisations attempting to develop an effective and efficient Twitter strategy is the lack of theoretical or empirical evidence on use of Twitter. While there has been substantial research into why individuals use Twitter (e.g. Honeycutt and Herring, 2009 ; Java et al. , 2007 ), there are only a few studies on the use of Twitter by organisations, and, at the time of writing, most of these were published in conference proceedings, and no studies of organisational Twitter use were found in a search of marketing journals. Thus, despite its potential, importance for external communications, there is very little research evidence to guide managers in developing a cost‐effective strategy for organisational use of Twitter.
Previous research into the use of Twitter by organisations has included studies of Twitter use for internal communication ( Ehrlich and Shami, 2010 ; Riemer and Richter, 2010 ; Zhao and Rosson, 2009 ), and for research, with Twitter described as an online listening tool ( Crawford, 2009 ) and as a means of crowd sourcing ( Ehrlich and Shami, 2010 ). Twitter’s greatest potential for organisations is, arguably, for external communication with customers, but very few peer‐reviewed studies have analysed this usage: in this context, Twitter has been described as a tool to create electronic word of mouth ( Jansen et al. , 2009b ), as a viral marketing mechanism ( Asur and Huberman, 2010 ) and as a form of online word of mouth branding ( Jansen et al. , 2009a ). Twitter is, however, different from other marketing communications media, which can be classified inter alia, as one‐to‐one (e.g. e‐mail), one‐to‐many (e.g. mass media) and many‐to‐many (e.g. the web and online groups) ( Hoffman and Novak, 1996 ).
In contrast, tweets by an organisation will typically be one‐to‐many (since the default is for all tweets to be public) but will often function as a one‐to‐one mechanism (when a tweet is a reply to an individual) with a potentially large audience for that tweet, since the reply will usually be visible to others. Tweets can be only one‐to‐one, since a private message can be sent to a follower (that is, to someone who has elected to receive tweets from the account).
However this option is not available to reply to someone who is not following the organisation, so an organisation cannot reply privately to a tweet by someone who is not a follower. Thus, Twitter is perhaps unique among interactive marketing communications in that a reply to an individual (a one‐to‐one communication) is visible to a much larger audience, which, as will be discussed later, can result in problems with the use of Twitter as a response medium. In the next section, we review earlier research on interactive communications, and develop a theoretical framework for the analysis of organisational use of Twitter.
1.1 Twitter as an interactive communications medium
In a review of the changing role of corporate communication, Duncan and Moriarty (1998 , p. 8) concluded that interactivity between the organisation and customer is a “hallmark of the paradigm shift in both marketing and communication”, and argued that an increase in interactivity makes communication “an even more valuable element of marketing”. With its potential for personalised communication with individuals who have chosen to follow an organisation’s Twitter feed, Twitter clearly increases the scope for interactive communication by organisations with their customers. It is unsurprising, therefore, that more organisations are developing Twitter accounts as an additional way of communicating with customers: for example 60 per cent of Fortune 500 organisations had a Twitter account by late 2010 (up from 35 per cent the previous year), compared to only 56 per cent with a Facebook account at the same time ( Barnes, 2010 ).
Despite growing interest in interactive communications, there is no clear agreement on the definition of interactivity ( Koolstra and Bos, 2009 ), with a recent book stating that “an exact definition of interactivity is still being debated” ( Pavlik and McIntosh, 2011 , p. 69). Two contrasting interpretations of interactivity have been identified in the literature ( Hoffman and Novak, 1996 ; Sicilia et al. , 2005 ; Song and Zinkhan, 2008 ); the first, reflecting communications research, has been termed the “interpersonal view” ( Macias, 2003 ), and sees interactivity as involving communication between individuals and/or organisations, with a continuum of interactivity ranging from non‐interactive, one way communications (such as radio and television), reactive communications, when messages respond to or refer to earlier ones, and fully interactive communications, when communications incorporate preceding messages, in a process which has been described as a “related or threaded manner” (e.g. Rafaeli, 1988 ; Rafaeli and Sudweeks, 1997 ; Sundar et al. , 2003 ).
The second view of interactivity suggests that it is based on the structure of the medium, and is typically ascribed to Steuer (1992) , who defined interactivity as “the extent to which users can participate in modifying the messages they receive” (p. 84). This view has been summarised by Hoffman and Novak (1996) as “machine interactivity”. Under this view of interactivity, web sites have been classified as providing different levels of interactivity, depending on the presence of features such as links, chat facilities and access to extra features such as video and audio ( Coyle and Thorson, 2001 ; Ha and James, 1998 ; Macias, 2003 ; Sicilia et al. , 2005 ). Research into web sites has suggested that increased interactivity is associated with higher comprehension ( Macias, 2003 ), more information processing, higher favourability and greater flow state ( Sicilia et al. , 2005 ) and a more positive user response to the subject of the web site ( Sundar et al. , 2003 ). Increased interactivity in an online advertisement has also been associated with increased involvement with the advertisement ( Fortin and Dholakia, 2005 ).
Twitter can provide both types of interactivity: it allows both “interpersonal interactivity” (through exchange of messages between an organisation and individual, and by referencing others’ messages) and also “machine interactivity”, for example through the use of embedded hyperlinks, which allow a tweet receiver to access extra information by clicking on links embedded within tweets.
Organisational tweets can therefore be classified, as we describe in the following section, as reflecting different types of interactivity. The research into interactivity in web sites discussed previously would suggest that tweets demonstrating higher levels of interactivity might lead to more positive recipient response. However organisations may have different strategic aims in their use of Twitter; variations in the use of Twitter might also arise from variations in organisational type (for example a service organisation might use Twitter differently from an organisation selling physical goods). There may also be differences in the use of Twitter in geographic markets with varying levels of Twitter usage. Duncan and Moriarty (1998) have argued that strategic consistency is critical for marketing communications, and that executional consistency is a basic premise of relationship marketing; that is, messages should be consistent and appropriate for their target audiences. While different organisations may therefore use different forms of communications, and may use varying forms at different times, the principle of strategic consistency would suggest that in the absence of market specific differences in strategy, organisations will use similar content mixes in their communications in different geographic markets. However, there has been very limited academic work examining organisational use of Twitter, and no comparative studies across different geographic markets. Use of Twitter is greatest in the USA, with 62.1 per cent of all Twitter users, with Australia the fifth largest user, with 2.2 per cent of users ( Cheng et al. , 2009 ). As a result, in addition to classifying tweets according to their level of interactivity, we classify and contrast the message content of tweets from comparable organisations in different geographic markets, and consider the implications for strategic use of Twitter as a marketing communications channel.
The Growth of New Digital Media Case Assignment
RUBRIC
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper.
GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
CLICK ON THE LINK HERE: https://essaysolver.com/orders/ordernow
You Can Also Place the Order In www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow / www.essaysolver.com/orders/ordernow
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME] and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!
PLACE THE ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME] and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!
Why Work With Us!!
Tired of getting an average grade in all your school assignments, projects, essays, and homework? Try us today for all your academic schoolwork needs. We are among the most trusted and recognized professional writing services in the market.
We provide unique, original and plagiarism-free high quality academic, homework, assignments and essay submissions for all our clients. At our company, we capitalize on producing A+ Grades for all our clients and also ensure that you have smooth academic progress in all your school term and semesters.
High-quality academic submissions, A 100% plagiarism-free submission, Meet even the most urgent deadlines, Provide our services to you at the most competitive rates in the market, Give you free revisions until you meet your desired grades and Provide you with 24/7 customer support service via calls or live chats.
