Análisis de la escucha digital

Both the MVPD and the PAPD used more than half of their examined tweets to respond to other users, but they employed contrasting methods to do so.

There are multiple ways that an agency can send a “reply” tweet to another user. The first way is as a direct reply, shown in Figure 31.

Figure 31. Example of PAPD Direct Reply

Source: “Palo Alto Police Twitter,” accessed October 21, 2015, https://twitter.com/PaloAltoPolice.

A direct reply, which can be identified by the agency beginning the reply tweet with the “@” sign of the recipient’s Twitter handle, is not sent to all of the agency’s followers. Instead, while it appears on the agency’s Twitter account and can be publicly viewed by anyone who elects to read through all of an agency’s tweets, it only appears in the feed of anyone who follows both parties (i.e., the agency and the user to whom the agency is responding). The user receives a notification that the agency replied. PAPD chose this method to send all of their replies during the study period, save one. Their followers did not see any of their two-way engagement on their timeline, except for a single reply (or if they also followed the account to which the PAPD was replying).

The second way an agency can send a “reply” tweet to another user is a period reply, as shown in Figure 32.

Figure 32. Example of MVPD Period Reply

Source: “Mountain View Police Twitter,” accessed October 21, 2015, https://twitter.com/

MountainViewPD.

A period reply, which can be identified by the first character of the tweet being a period, immediately followed by the recipient’s @ Twitter handle, sends the reply to all of the agency’s followers; it essentially turns a reply tweet into an original tweet. If a follower of the MVPD were to receive the tweet in Figure 32, they would also be able to see easily the underlying tweet to which MVPD is responding. It is important to note that any character (not just a period) other than the “@” symbol will accomplish this same action, though Twitter users most often use a period. In this study, a period reply is considered a reply tweet and not an original tweet. MVPD used this method of replying 28 times during the study period (in contrast, the PAPD used this method once, and the SCPD did not use it at all).

The third way an agency can send a “reply” tweet to another user is a creative reply, as shown in Figure 33.

Figure 33. Example of MVPD Creative Reply

Source: “Mountain View Police Twitter,” accessed October 21, 2015, https://twitter.com/

MountainViewPD.

A creative reply, which is challenging to identify easily, is a reply in which the agency embeds the recipient’s Twitter handle in the middle of their tweet. This sends the reply to all of the agency’s followers, yet makes the reply look like an original tweet. If a follower of the MVPD were to receive the MVPD’s tweet in Figure 33, they would also be able to see the underlying tweet to which the MVPD is responding. In this study, a creative reply is considered a reply tweet and not an original tweet. MVPD used this method of replying 57 times during the study period (in contrast, neither the PAPD nor the SCPD used it at all).

The MVPD is unique in this study as it is the only agency to regularly make use of the period reply and the creative reply. By structuring their reply tweets in this manner, they are essentially putting their two-way responsiveness on display for all their followers to see. While there is no way to know for sure, this may be a method by which the MVPD generates even more two-way engagement than they otherwise would, since their followers are able to regularly see them responding to inquiries from other users. By contrast, while the PAPD sent more overall reply tweets that the MVPD, their choice to use the direct reply method on all of their replies except one shielded their followers from seeing their high level of two-way engagement with others.

Agencies looking to increase opportunities for two-way engagement must make a strategic decision about which of the three reply methods to use (or, like the MVPD, to use all three methods in differing situations). While there may be a benefit to using the period reply or the creative reply to increase public visibility of two-way engagement and potentially to have an effect on the public’s perception of the agency, there may also be a negative effect of introducing user-specific tweets to all of the agency’s followers. Tweets sent as period replies or creative replies adds to the influx of an agency’s tweets on their followers’ timelines; if followers get accustomed to reading individual replies to other users, they may be less inclined to pay attention to the agency’s tweets.

The MVPD, however, seems to exercise great care in choosing which reply method to use in each situation; issues of potential concern to the broader community, or ones that put the agency’s accountability on public display (such as in the MVPD creative reply in Figure 33), merit a creative reply or a period reply. Tweets that may be more appropriately tailored to an individual and those that are not of potential concern to the broader community merit a direct reply.