Social Media: Voice and Tone

An Analysis of SFMOMA and MoMA on Twitter October 8, 2012October 15, 2012

Jenna Simard

Introduction
Modern art museums today are using social media as a means to further engage their publics, appeal to new audiences, bring awareness to their programs and activities and share relevant news and information. Among those actively utilizing social media are the Museum of Modern Art in New York City, and the San Francisco Museum of Modern Arttwo of the most celebrated modern art museums in America. Both institutions engage on a variety of platforms, including Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, flickr, Foursquare and tumblr. The following analysis serves to study how the MoMA and SFMOMA utilize Twitter. The analysis regards the methods in which each museum exerts its voice on the platform, the overall tone that each achieves and the way in which voice and tone impact the engagement of their followers. Each of the organizations tweets were observed during an 8-day time frame, between October 8 and October 15, 2012.

San Francisco Museum of Modern Art (@SFMOMA)

San Francisco Museum of Modern Art was established in 1935 as the first modern art museum on the West Coast. It houses a collection of more than 27,000 artworks, photographs and sculptures. On Twitter, SFMOMA has more than 350,000 followers and has issued more than 5,400 tweets to date.

Voice
During the selected time frame, the museum tweeted 28 times and retweeted other users tweets 7 times. Content included both internal and external-related material, ranging from promotion of upcoming events at the museum to support of the San Francisco Giants. The general style of SFMOMAs voice across its messaging is conversational. The museum assumes a casual approach to communicating with its followers, as evidenced by its use of exclamation points, emoticons, and random hashtags (See p. 14, example 7 ). It refers to itself as we to express itself as a body of people to whom followers can relate, rather than strictly as an institution (See p. 20, example 19). While it uses Twitter to inform followers, it also uses the platform to entertain people with quirky content. A prime example is the museums tweet about a pig that was parading outside the building one day (See p. 15, example 8). The voice, though overall conversational, is at some times more casual and at other times more educational. On October 11, the museum tweeted: @ArtistsReport aims to speak truth to
3

power + upend traditional takes on critical issues. What can news media learn from artists? #CTRL. Three hours later it tweeted: Way to pull through with the big win, @SFGiants! Looks like all that spring training is paying off :) http://sfmoma.me/WXqH5U. Though clearly SFMOMA was attempting to appeal to a broad mass of people by messaging about both educational and sports-related material, these two different types of messages represent two different voices. Consequently, the museums voice appears to lack consistency. Although, overall, SFMOMA tweets about relevant material, sometimes its attempts to seem relatable by infusing humor into its messaging are ineffective. On October 12, the museum tweeted a picture of two visitors wearing similar outfits with the following message: Have our visitors adopted a modern art-viewing uniform? :) RT @Mikey_Nicholson: Hey @sfmoma, who wore it better? pic.twitter.com/cyDvfrKe (See p. 25, example 29). The tweet had the possibility to showcase the museums community-oriented character by showing the two visitors posing together for the camera, but the picture was taken from behind the women as they browsed the galleries, presumably without their permission. As a result, the post seems out of place and irrelevant.

Engagement
The museum remains engaged with its followers by retweeting other users messages. However, the museums tweets do not garner a significant amount of response. Over the 8-day period, the average number of times followers retweeted SFMOMAs messages was 6. The average number of times they chose to favorite the messages was approximately 2.2. Typically, the museum received more positive response when they utilized a voice which was neither too casual nor too didactic. An ideal message which represents the museums voice is found on page 28, in
4

example 35: Here's a peek at what you'll soon be seeing around town: http://instagr.am/p/Q0DLKGqda3/ Jasper Johns opens at @SFMOMA on Nov 3! http://sfmoma.me/QJkN4W. The message informs followers about an upcoming exhibition while remaining conversational. In 24 hours, the tweet was retweeted 11 times and favorited 4 times. When using a clever yet professional voice, the museum has the opportunity to relate to its laid-back audience on the West Coast as well as a broader public, therefore creating more possibilities for engagement.

Tone
Through its laid-back yet informational voice, SFMOMA achieves the tone of a friendly, community-oriented museum. Its tweetsinfused with expressionrender the museum as approachable and desiring of two-way communication with the public.

Museum of Modern Art (@MuseumModernArt)

The Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) was established in 1935 in New York City. Today its collection consists of over 36,000 works. In its mission statement, the museum proclaims its dedication to being the foremost museum of modern art in the world. On Twitter, the museum has over 1,160,000 followers and has issued over 3,300 tweets to date.

Voice
During the reported time frame, MoMA tweeted 12 times. The museum did not send any retweets. Content consisted entirely of internally-related material, ranging from promotion of a live streaming at a gallery event to a reminder for prospective interns to submit their applications. The voice behind the museums messages is institutional. In keeping its followers updated with news about its activities and the arts community, MoMA maintains clarity and direction in its tweets. Nearly every tweet contains a brief description of the news and a link directing followers to further information (See examples, pp. 2836). MoMAs voice is consistently simple, informative and easy to read. Rarely does the museum utilize any exclamation points or emoticons, unlike SFMOMA.

Engagement
MoMA maintains engagement with followers by tweeting about content that is relevant to its community. In contrary to SFMOMA, the museum did not retweet followers messages during the 8-day period, but it continued to post about information which its audience finds valuable. The average number of times that users retweeted was 39.75 times, and the average number of times that users favorited tweets was 14.66 times. During the time frame, one of its messages which prompted the most engagement from followers reads: Yayoi Kusamas Accumulation No. 1 returns to MoMA later this month: bit.ly/R4JOGV (See p. 28, example 2). The message represents an ideal tweet for the museum because it is clear and informative, and directs followers to a site where they can learn more about the topic.

Tone
The overall tone achieved is that of a global institution with the purpose of educating people about art. By avoiding casual, friendly messaging, it maintains its reputation as a world-renown museum of modern art. It engages people not by utilizing a personable, informal voice, but by disseminating information which calls followers to respond.

Conclusions
While both SFMOMA and MoMA are well-known, widely-respected museums of modern art, each serves a different communityboth in size and in personality. SFMOMA speaks to a smaller community who, due to the museums west coast location, is more laid-back than that of MoMA. On the other hand, the former speaks to an east coast community with a fast-paced lifestyle, and to a broader public far beyond New York City. The varying voices that the two museums assert on Twitter are contingent upon these differing communities. SFMOMA appeals to its audience by utilizing a more personable voice and, thus, extends its brand image as a community-oriented institution. Meanwhile, MoMA asserts itself as a prominent educational establishment by speaking in a more institutional manner. Each museum tweets with a voice that expresses its personality and relates to its audience. During the recorded time frame, MoMA, whose community of followers on Twitter is twice as large as that of SFMOMA, sent less than half as many tweets as the latter. Yet MoMA still engaged more people; the percentage of retweets per total number of followers was larger for MoMA than for SFMOMA. It could then be determined by Twitter alone that MoMA has more social influence than does SFMOMA. However, this inference may not necessarily be the result of MoMAs institutional voice on Twitter, but rather likely the effect of its preexisting reputation as one of the best museums of modern art in the world. Therefore, the disparity in size and reputation of the two museums renders difficulty in analyzing which type of communication is more effective. However, the analysis may conclude

that MoMAs employment of a consistent style of voice contributes to its greater ability to engage followers.

Appendix
SFMOMA
1.

10

2.

11

3.

4.

12

5.

6.

13

7.

14

8.

15

9.

10.

11.

16

12.

13.

17

14.

15.

18

16.

17.

19

18.

19.

20

20.

21.

21

22.

23.

22

24.

25.

23

26.

27.

28.

24

29.

25

30.

31.

32.

26

33.

34.

27

35.

28

MOMA
1.

2.

29

3.

4.

30

5.

6.

31

7.

8.

32

9.

33

10.

34

11.

35

12.

36