Twitter is utilized by many libraries to broadcast information to their stakeholders, as well as communicate and engage with their communities. Research has been conducted on the effectiveness of Twitter in outreach and gaining public interest, such as Al-Daihani et al.’s analysis that concluded regular updating and maintaining of Twitter feeds attracts more users (Al-Daihani et al., 2015). Although these is no concrete rule book in how to use Twitter effectively, there are certain ‘how-to’ criteria that formalizes best practice and should be taken into consideration by libraries (Humphreys, 2019. p. 3). This criterion includes approaches such as activity, utilizing tools fully and correctly, considering the audience, strategies, as well as tact and style (Humphreys, 2019. p. 3). Let’s examine and compare two separate Twitter feeds to see how they best utilize social media: American Library Association (@ALALibrary), and Australian Library and Information Association (@ALIANational).

A notable difference between the two feeds is their account name. American Library Association (ALA) makes the ‘library’ word clear in their Twitter handle, enabling any search results containing the term ‘library’ to easily direct users to their page. Australian Library and Information Association (ALIA) do not include the word ‘library’ in their handle, which could lead to their profile being a little ambiguous to users. ALIA does elaborate in their description to make discoverability easier, however it is not completely clear from the outset and may be a barrier to reaching more followers. Both Twitter accounts were created in 2009, which is when the surge of library registrations with Twitter originally occurred and has remained steady since (Humphreys, 2019. p. 7). This is important to note as research has “suggested that the number of followers is dependent on the date on which an account has been created (Humphreys, 2019. p. 16)”. There is a significant contrast in how many followers each page has, with 218,000 following ALA and 11,300 following ALIA as of December 2020.

Comparing the two Twitter feeds, both accounts tweet (and retweet) similar content such as events, new resources, promotions, recent news, and community. Both feeds are very active, with ALA posting at a minimum of 1-2 times daily, while ALIA posts more frequently with 22 tweets on 11^th December alone! Studies have revealed that tweeting at least once a day is a powerful way to keep the library’s audience (both users and non-users) engaged (Alsuhaibani, R. A. 2020. p. 197). The main difference in the content is that ALA posts a lot of original material that they have created, whereas ALIA mainly utilizes the tool of retweeting. Both Associations take full advantage of using imagery to draw attention to their tweets, as well as using hashtags and tagging as a method to attract non-users. The opportunity to improve communication with users has proven to be effective within the presence of both Twitter feeds, therefore bringing about new ways for libraries to remain present and connect with the social media world.

Photo by Chris J. Davis on Unsplash

References

Al-Daihani, S.M. & Alawadhi, S.A. (2015). Exploring academic libraries’ use of Twitter: A

content analysis, The Electronic Library, 33(6), 1002-1015.

https://doi-org.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/10.1108/EL-05-2014-0084

Alsuhaibani, R. A. (2020). One hundred tweets from library land: A case study of RMIT

University Library (Academic library) and State Library of Victoria (public state library) in

Australia. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 52(1), 197-207.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0961000618792367

Humphreys, S. (2019). Tweeting into the void? Creating a UK library Twitter list and analysing

best practice – successes and myths, Insights, 32(1), 1-23.

https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.471