Cargando…

Brands with personalities – good for businesses, but bad for public health? A content analysis of how food and beverage brands personify themselves on Twitter

OBJECTIVE: To examine the extent to which food and beverage brands exhibit personalities on Twitter, quantify Twitter users’ engagement with posts displaying personality features and determine advertising spending across these brands on Twitter. DESIGN: We identified 100 tweets from 10 food and beve...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Greene, Tenay, Seet, Carla, Rodríguez Barrio, Andrea, McIntyre, Dana, Kelly, Bridget, Bragg, Marie A
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cambridge University Press 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8825980/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33820575
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1368980021001439
_version_ 1784647338876207104
author Greene, Tenay
Seet, Carla
Rodríguez Barrio, Andrea
McIntyre, Dana
Kelly, Bridget
Bragg, Marie A
author_facet Greene, Tenay
Seet, Carla
Rodríguez Barrio, Andrea
McIntyre, Dana
Kelly, Bridget
Bragg, Marie A
author_sort Greene, Tenay
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To examine the extent to which food and beverage brands exhibit personalities on Twitter, quantify Twitter users’ engagement with posts displaying personality features and determine advertising spending across these brands on Twitter. DESIGN: We identified 100 tweets from 10 food and beverage brands that displayed a ‘personality’, and 100 ‘control’ tweets (i.e. a post by that brand on the same day). Our codebook quantified the following personification strategies: (1) humour; (2) trendy language and (3) absence of food product mentions. We used media articles to quantify other personification strategies: (4) referencing trending topics; (5) referencing current events; (6) referencing internet memes and (7) targeting niche audiences. We calculated brands’ number of tweets, re-tweets, ‘likes’, and comments and report the relationship between advertising spending and retweets per follower. SETTING: Twitter posts. PARTICIPANTS: Ten food and beverage brands that were described in media articles (e.g. Forbes) as having distinct personalities. RESULTS: Personality tweets earned 123 013 retweets, 732 076 ‘likes’ and 14 806 comments, whereas control tweets earned 61 044 retweets, 256 105 ‘likes’ and 14 572 comments. The strategies used most included humour (n 81), trendy language (n 80) and trending topics (n 47). The three brands that spent the most on advertising had similar or fewer retweets per follower than the four that spent relatively little on advertising. CONCLUSIONS: Some food and beverage brands have distinct ‘personalities’ on Twitter that generate millions of ‘likes’ and retweets. Some retweets have an inverse relationship with advertising spending, suggesting ‘personalities’ may be a uniquely powerful advertising tool for targeting young adults.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8825980
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Cambridge University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88259802022-02-23 Brands with personalities – good for businesses, but bad for public health? A content analysis of how food and beverage brands personify themselves on Twitter Greene, Tenay Seet, Carla Rodríguez Barrio, Andrea McIntyre, Dana Kelly, Bridget Bragg, Marie A Public Health Nutr Research Paper OBJECTIVE: To examine the extent to which food and beverage brands exhibit personalities on Twitter, quantify Twitter users’ engagement with posts displaying personality features and determine advertising spending across these brands on Twitter. DESIGN: We identified 100 tweets from 10 food and beverage brands that displayed a ‘personality’, and 100 ‘control’ tweets (i.e. a post by that brand on the same day). Our codebook quantified the following personification strategies: (1) humour; (2) trendy language and (3) absence of food product mentions. We used media articles to quantify other personification strategies: (4) referencing trending topics; (5) referencing current events; (6) referencing internet memes and (7) targeting niche audiences. We calculated brands’ number of tweets, re-tweets, ‘likes’, and comments and report the relationship between advertising spending and retweets per follower. SETTING: Twitter posts. PARTICIPANTS: Ten food and beverage brands that were described in media articles (e.g. Forbes) as having distinct personalities. RESULTS: Personality tweets earned 123 013 retweets, 732 076 ‘likes’ and 14 806 comments, whereas control tweets earned 61 044 retweets, 256 105 ‘likes’ and 14 572 comments. The strategies used most included humour (n 81), trendy language (n 80) and trending topics (n 47). The three brands that spent the most on advertising had similar or fewer retweets per follower than the four that spent relatively little on advertising. CONCLUSIONS: Some food and beverage brands have distinct ‘personalities’ on Twitter that generate millions of ‘likes’ and retweets. Some retweets have an inverse relationship with advertising spending, suggesting ‘personalities’ may be a uniquely powerful advertising tool for targeting young adults. Cambridge University Press 2022-01 2021-04-06 /pmc/articles/PMC8825980/ /pubmed/33820575 http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1368980021001439 Text en © The Authors 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Paper
Greene, Tenay
Seet, Carla
Rodríguez Barrio, Andrea
McIntyre, Dana
Kelly, Bridget
Bragg, Marie A
Brands with personalities – good for businesses, but bad for public health? A content analysis of how food and beverage brands personify themselves on Twitter
title Brands with personalities – good for businesses, but bad for public health? A content analysis of how food and beverage brands personify themselves on Twitter
title_full Brands with personalities – good for businesses, but bad for public health? A content analysis of how food and beverage brands personify themselves on Twitter
title_fullStr Brands with personalities – good for businesses, but bad for public health? A content analysis of how food and beverage brands personify themselves on Twitter
title_full_unstemmed Brands with personalities – good for businesses, but bad for public health? A content analysis of how food and beverage brands personify themselves on Twitter
title_short Brands with personalities – good for businesses, but bad for public health? A content analysis of how food and beverage brands personify themselves on Twitter
title_sort brands with personalities – good for businesses, but bad for public health? a content analysis of how food and beverage brands personify themselves on twitter
topic Research Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8825980/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33820575
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1368980021001439
work_keys_str_mv AT greenetenay brandswithpersonalitiesgoodforbusinessesbutbadforpublichealthacontentanalysisofhowfoodandbeveragebrandspersonifythemselvesontwitter
AT seetcarla brandswithpersonalitiesgoodforbusinessesbutbadforpublichealthacontentanalysisofhowfoodandbeveragebrandspersonifythemselvesontwitter
AT rodriguezbarrioandrea brandswithpersonalitiesgoodforbusinessesbutbadforpublichealthacontentanalysisofhowfoodandbeveragebrandspersonifythemselvesontwitter
AT mcintyredana brandswithpersonalitiesgoodforbusinessesbutbadforpublichealthacontentanalysisofhowfoodandbeveragebrandspersonifythemselvesontwitter
AT kellybridget brandswithpersonalitiesgoodforbusinessesbutbadforpublichealthacontentanalysisofhowfoodandbeveragebrandspersonifythemselvesontwitter
AT braggmariea brandswithpersonalitiesgoodforbusinessesbutbadforpublichealthacontentanalysisofhowfoodandbeveragebrandspersonifythemselvesontwitter