Look at me I’m Engaging!!!

One thing Social Media “gurus” are experts at is making up definitions for words that already have established meanings. I bet old Merriam & Webster are pretty pissed about this and rolling in their graves. Wait are they dead? Alive or deceased, it’s pretty ridiculous for people to think they can change the meaning of something just because the context is new or unique.  This is exactly the case with one of my favorite social media buzzwords “Engagement.” Yes, you could logically argue that in the 15th century, when the transitive verb first entered into colloquial speech, that it’s creators weren’t thinking, “gee we ought to put a clause in here for how this relates to internet marketing.”

No of course they didn’t. They couldn’t predict the future, and they were marveling over the recent discovery of my favorite portion of the food pyramid- chocolate. But I am not going to judge them because-hey-even though they didn’t throw us a media tailored definition,  the standard serves as enough to easily judge any type of social media related meaning we could throw at it. Look at the beauty of M&W’s fine work:

Engage: to hold the attention of: engross <her work engages her completely> b: to induce to participate <engaged the shy boy in conversation>

Now you could argue that anytime someone liked something a brand produced that they were technically “engaged” with the brand.  Let’s be blunt here- my specialty.  Do you walk around telling people, wow I am really engaged in those boots right there, I have to have them? No you don’t. Okay. Well.  I know you’re yelling at me in your head saying- “boots aren’t content, stupid!” I ask you this, when you read a blog, watch a youtube video, or listen to something on the internet how often would you feel comfortable using the word “engaged” to describe your experience? And further more how often do you share that content that you read, watched, ore heard that did not “engage” you? I would bet the family farm that it’s probably around 85% of the time.

Now I’ve heard & read time and time again that engagement is best measured in RTs, reblogs, shares & etc. I don’t agree.  RTs don’t show engagement. Why?

1. How many times do we retweet something solely because it has a good title? I’ll admit I’ve done it more times then I am willing to say. We ALL have. If anyone says they haven’t they’re a liar and -if you believe in some sort of god-he knows when you lie…

2.  A retweet doesn’t show any actual engagement with the content.  It just shows that you know how to copy & paste, or if you’re using more “advanced” means of tweeting, it means you know how to click a button. Clicking a button is not engagement, it’s showing you’re about as smart as the average monkey.

3. That said, even if you did read the content and like it and retweeted it for all the right reasons, did you really engage? Do we measure engaging with a TV commercial by how much people liked the content?  No, we don’t. There have been plenty of awesome & amazing commercials that have generated little engagement. I know several ad agencies that can tell you all about this.

This leads me to what I would like to call my REAL Social Media definition for engagement: (ta da)!

Engage: to hold the attention of: engross <her work engages her completely> b: to induce to participate <engaged the shy boy in conversation>

Duh. You should have seen that coming.

PS. if you want to “engage” with this content leave a comment, start a discussion, or etc.

PPS. If you don’t want to “engage” and just want to share this, please do. Even though it isn’t a good measure of engagement, it is a good measure of popularity.  Just like an insecure teenager, I don’t mind sitting at the cool table.

This entry was posted in Random Thoughts. Bookmark the permalink.
  • http://www.JohnPaulAguiar.com/ John Paul

    Very Nice Post!

    Now I’m confused, When I RT or Comment does that mean I am only “Participating” or am I really “Engaging”? lol

  • http://www.JohnPaulAguiar.com John Paul

    Very Nice Post!

    Now I’m confused, When I RT or Comment does that mean I am only “Participating” or am I really “Engaging”? lol

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention » Blog Archive » Look at me I’m Engaging!!! -- Topsy.com()

  • http://christopher-berry.blogspot.com/ Christopher Berry

    The word ‘engagement’ is one that needs careful definition.

    The components of engagement ought to align with goals.

    If PASS-ALONG or REACH is a goal, then the number of RT’s could be a good proxy. It’s not perfect at all. But it’s an ‘indicator’, isn’t?

  • http://christopher-berry.blogspot.com/ Christopher Berry

    The word ‘engagement’ is one that needs careful definition.

    The components of engagement ought to align with goals.

    If PASS-ALONG or REACH is a goal, then the number of RT’s could be a good proxy. It’s not perfect at all. But it’s an ‘indicator’, isn’t?

  • Anna

    I don’t feel engagement can or should be this blanket term that we use for all of social media. By all means using RTs for popularity or reach is a great idea. But reach is not engagement. It is more active or rather interactive measure.

  • http://twitter.com/ramonsuarez Ramón Suárez

    Action equals a higher degree of engagement. After all, how many people see a tweet and do nothing about it?

    RT is the equivalent of citation and it shows a higher degree of engagement. Peer review is not scientific, but has an effect on defining your audience and your value to them. A nasty or wrong RT can ruin your reputation. Isn’t risk taking linked to engagement?

    Using your boots example, your engagement would be to the brand itself or to yourself. You buy the boots and wear them often or in special occasions= big engagement. You talk about it in social media=variable degree of engagement.

    Just because we don’t know all the variables does not mean we can not talk about it. It is just more art than science.

    What would be the variables you would use to measure engagement? I am afraid a lot of them would be qualitative.

  • http://twitter.com/ramonsuarez Ramón Suárez

    Action equals a higher degree of engagement. After all, how many people see a tweet and do nothing about it?

    RT is the equivalent of citation and it shows a higher degree of engagement. Peer review is not scientific, but has an effect on defining your audience and your value to them. A nasty or wrong RT can ruin your reputation. Isn’t risk taking linked to engagement?

    Using your boots example, your engagement would be to the brand itself or to yourself. You buy the boots and wear them often or in special occasions= big engagement. You talk about it in social media=variable degree of engagement.

    Just because we don’t know all the variables does not mean we can not talk about it. It is just more art than science.

    What would be the variables you would use to measure engagement? I am afraid a lot of them would be qualitative.

  • http://www.nextstagevolution.com/ Joseph Carrabis

    Very good and entertaining. Thanks for this. – Joseph

  • http://www.nextstagevolution.com Joseph Carrabis

    Very good and entertaining. Thanks for this. – Joseph

  • Anna

    I don't feel engagement can or should be this blanket term that we use for all of social media. By all means using RTs for popularity or reach is a great idea. But reach is not engagement. It is more active or rather interactive measure.