I know social media isn’t normally my subject here. But did you see the Grammys?
If you don’t follow social media much it may have seemed like LL Cool J knew something about Twitter. He sure dropped the word “hashtag” a lot and told people to interact with him. However, if you’ve ever used Twitter, it kind of seemed like “what on earth?”
By now, most people know the hashtag for the Grammys is #grammys. It helps to flash the hashtag on the screen — that’s important. But what’s really helpful is to have the host explaining it like he knows what he’s talking about.
So I thought, well, maybe LL Cool J was awesome at interacting with fans, as he said he was doing. Um, nope. He only tweeted four times during the show, and one of those looks like a mistake. Only one was an interaction with a fan.
Dude. That’s absolutely. no. effort.
I usually hate blog posts like this. Heaven knows someone from the outside could write one on how to do my job better. But then, I would almost appreciate the criticism. I’m sure they would suggest things that aren’t logistically possibly right now — but that doesn’t mean it would not make me try to be more innovative.
So. Here’s five ways that second screen could have gone better for the Grammys:
- Just show a hashtag prominently and leave it alone. It’s 2013. People will talk about the Grammys on social media without you telling them to.
- The next level up from that is to have your LL Cool J-type or social host read some of the tweets live in his on-air hit. Sure this is over done, but this is more entertaining than having someone saying “everyone is tweeting with #CarrieUnderwood and #Rihanna!” while showing #grammys in the corner of the screen. Hashtag confusion is no bueno my friend. (and I’d still think it was cool to see my tweet on the Grammys. It is the Grammys)
- Let’s be more adventurous. I like creativity. Why not have the new artists be the ones that handle the live tweeting and social? Many people are curious about who they are. I like how they’ve started introducing them throughout the night — why not say “OK, this group is going to be answering your questions, tweet them @Grammys.
- Have a social host in the winners lounge — one of the starts of Two Broke Girls, perhaps? — and do live chats there for a second. Let the winners talk to their fans and post pictures via the Grammys Instagram/Vine platform.
- On Facebook, they posted the winners — live for the East Coast and effectively spoiling it for anyone who hadn’t watched it yet. They could have easily avoided the annoyance of the tape delay by posting location-specific updates. Post the winners as they are announced — for each time zone. Since time zones are divided by state, and Facebook pages let you restrict who sees your posts by geography, it is easy. And no, Grammy people, you don’t have to work later. You can schedule those posts and still make it to the after party.
- Spin off MTV a bit and show off some analytics on what people were talking about. Get it sponsored and make some money. Bing promoted the hashtag #BingitOn on Twitter Sunday. That’s no coincidence. Of course you might have to show it live across the country for that, but it would still work.
Random, but I love what Dana White is doing with the UFC on social media. He spoke at New Media Expo in Las Vegas. They do crazy (awesome) things like give the fighters cell phones and then tweet out the phone number — and the players will talk to people that call. And it’s all sponsored by Boost Mobile, which means added revenue — and helps answer the conundrum “but how does social media make money?”
What do I know though? LL Cool J will always have more followers on Twitter than I will. Maybe he was doing it right.
UPDATE: Another great post on this topic that I found today was How the Grammys Strategically Integrated Live TV and Social Media
