Twitter/X axes headlines from link posts – this is what you can do
After the recent changes to Twitter/X and Facebook, LinkedIn is probably the only social platform left where you can easily post external links – but even then it doesn’t mean lots of views of your article!
It’s all about a gradual shift in how social media firms want publishers, companies and other users to use their platforms.
These changes had been expected
Last night’s changes by Twitter to remove headlines from Twitter cards had been coming since Elon Musk posted in August about doing so.
He wants followers to stay on the channel, rather than go to read or watch something on a browser or an app ( the “esthetics” claim seems dubious.)
What I think people are overlooking is that he claims the algorithmic-based For You tab “tries to” prioritise posts that don’t – but whether they are able to do so is not so clear. If a post which includes a link is generating lots of engagement, I generally think it will be more likely seen in that tab than a less interesting post.
So what should we do?
Again after a change by Musk, it’s provoked frustration, slight outrage and vows to quit Twitter – but they reflect moves by all platforms to wanting to keep users where they are.
But it is also helpful to put yourself in the shoes (or hands) of the user – we generally prefer to read everything where we already are as we lazily scroll, rather than be redirected elsewhere, close the page, go back etc. And unless something really resonates with us, or captures our attention, we’ll keep on scrolling.
So we need to adapt the way we communicate on those platforms – or seek alternatives.
Like it or not, Twitter is still the place where live news and hot takes happen – the Liverpool VAR decision to the Conservative Party conference this week alone.
If we want to engage our followers, we need put more effort into thinking what our posts will look to them – and why someone would share, comment or like it, or tap on the link.
For example, do we need to rethink how we use lead images on sites and adding captions, so that the picture pulled through is more appealing and tappable?
I’ve seen some publishers manually adding an image to a post, with the link in the copy, but I’m not sure how much more appealing that is to users.
Another way is posting a headline or teaser post, with the link in the reply – but I don’t think that is any more effective; there’s little incentive to share or like a post that says ‘read more’. All the detail you need to know tends to be in the top post.
Interestingly, LADbible, who are at the forefront of social publishing, have appeared to stop doing that and gone back to link posts.
Another option to share information is in a short thread – three posts mean that all are seen in the feed and not hidden (Twitter displays the first and last two in a thread). Treat each one as a standalone post that still work if individually retweeted, with details, images/video and then possibly a link in the final one. More often than not, the first post gets the most engagement. you could space out the thread to try to get repeated hits of the top post during the day.)
The other option, is to pay – either to be verified, or use promoted posts for carousels and other features.
Having a blue tick allows you to post much longer posts – but have you tried to read one of those? It’s hard work…
For my wrestling history account, being verified allows me to post longer videos and be more visible in mentions (and possibly the For You feed, but it’s not clear.) Monthly payouts have dramatically reduced in the last couple of months, but for me it still covers the cost of the fee.
But for many big publishers, Twitter referral traffic has been poor for a long time. Sky News’ head of digital, Nick Sutton said recently:
What about other platforms?
You may have seen how Facebook is cutting its efforts and support to news publishers – according to Axios, major news companies have suffered huge losses in traffic in the past six months.
And the much-heralded Threads still doesn’t have the ability to post links. Besides, engagement numbers appear to have fallen off a cliff (Just checked my phone and I used the app so infrequently I had to redownload it.)
Look also at Instagram and TikTok, who don’t allow links in posts (unless you pay) – I rarely feel motivated enough to ‘check the link in our bio’.
WhatsApp offers exciting opportunities – I wrote about the potential of Channels last month and Reach have been talking about the success of interest-based Communities(but I would not want 15 messages a day from a news provider clogging up my chats!)
Slowly, many have realised that they can’t rely on third party platforms to reach their audiences – and for publishers, make money.
We’ve seen a refocus on owned platforms: apps, email and memberships, which is a good thing.
So…
Experiment! Try things out, see what works and analyse the data. You can still have great success on social media, but you can’t just post a link and hope it will drive great interest anymore.
