I had an email recently in which the author suggested I try to extend my social media reach. This made me wonder what that was.
Based on data for the last four weeks, this is this blog's / my social media reach:
Figures with a * beside them are very accurate. Those without a star are best estimates based on observed read data that has not been easily accessible on an aggregate basis.
We are cracking both YouTube and TikTok in a way we have not before. Both figures would have been tiny or non-existent two months ago.
Instagram has, so far, gone nowhere.
LinkedIn is relatively new and is going surprisingly well.
Facebook has always been a bit of an afterthought, where I have posted but without much engagement.
And Twitter remains way out in front, although it tends to be freestanding posts unrelated to the blog that do best. The figure given is for those who have stayed over my posts for long enough to have read them.
Of course, nothing guarantees that people have read all of a post, and nothing guarantees that people agree with them. Hiwver, we know that on YouTube around 70% of people listen to a whole video. It is lower on TikTok, which is why we do the short videos for that audience that has a lower attention span. But that reach is still worth having, and the growth for videos is very encouraging and is rapid now, especially on TikTok, after a relatively slow start.
I admit to being pleased with that data, and I hope it answers the question raised about 'reach'.
To put this in context, the Guardian only sells about 130,000 newspapers a day. It does, of course, do much more on line.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Would you describe yourself as an “influencer”…the guido fawkes of the left?
No
Just curious Richard, for the blog figures, do you include those people who subscribe to the daily newsletter?
I do not….
That would add around 1,300. About 50% of those who receive the mails read them, on aveage, which is high.
“About 50% of those who receive the mails read them…”
Quite honestly I am astounded at the number of people who use email services that leak this information back to the sender for there own personal email. Do you really want spammers and scammers to know whether or not you have read your email? I can see why an organization might want such a system for its own internal email system, but I can’t see why anyone would want this for their own personal email.
I have no idea who opens a mail
I know the percentage who do on this system
I also have no clue who is subscribed and do not want to know
FYI I share your blog and videos to my Facebook and LinkedIn profiles. I repost your Mastodon posts. I wonder what proportion of your readers do this? I can’t be the only one…
Many do – as I see – so thank you
Publicity.
I realised only a few months ago that you had a Facebook presence. I now “follow” your page, but it does seem that you don’t accept Friends requests (mine is outstanding), which means your posts are more likely to be “throttled” by FB’s algorithms.
My sole social media platform is Facebook. I will try to remember to daily look at your page as well as your blog and share from there instead of “here”. Perhaps all your blog followers on FB could do the same?
Apologies Anna
I use Facebook for some social purposes and found my timeline was really confusing with too many friend requests
Perhaps I need two accounts…
Thank you for doing all this, Richard. I don’t Twitter or do social media but perhaps I should if I can disseminate more of your thinking!
Thanks
It’s the way for me to explain that there are different ways to say things