Abstract
Twitter as a socio-technical platform provides organizations with new ways to reach their stakeholders. In this paper, we compare the use of Twitter specific affordances – such as hashtags, mentions of usernames and sharing of URLs along the tweets in a sample of 1520 tweets sent by 16 profit organizations, and 1042 tweets sent by 18 non-profit organizations in the context of climate change debate. We also compare the use of Twitter for information sharing, engaging in the community and calls-for-action (Lovejoy & Saxton 2012) between the organizations. Our results show that nonprofit organizations used Twitter more for engaging in community than profit organizations whose tweets were almost completely (96%) about information sharing. Non-profit organizations shared more hashtags than profit-organizations, in particular hashtags related to campaigns and events. We can conclude that the two types of organizations used Twitter specific affordances differently to reach their targeted audiences.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Auger, G.A. (2013): Fostering democracy through social media: Evaluating diametrically opposed nonprofit advocacy organizations’ use of Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. In: Public Relations Review, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 369–376. DOI: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2013.07.013
Davidson, R. & Keup, M. (2014): The use of Web 2.0 as a marketing toll by European Convention Bureaux. In: Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 234–254.
Fischer, E. & Reuber, R. A. (2014): Online entrepreneurial communication: Mitigating uncertainty and increasing differentiation via Twitter. In: Journal of Busienss Vneturing 29: 565–583.
Foot, A.K., & Schneider, S.M. (2006). Web Campaigning. Cambridge, Massachusetts and London, England: The MIT Press.
Gretzel, U. & Yoo, K.H. (2014): Premises and promises of social media marketing in tourism. In: Routledge Handbook of Tourism Marketing, pp. 491–504. Routledge, 11 New Fetter Lane, London, England.
Guo, C. & Saxton, G.D. (2014): Tweeting social change: How social media are changing nonprofit advocacy. In: Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 57–79. DOI: 10.1177/0899764012471585
Inauen, S. & Schoeneborn, D. (2014): Twitter and its usage for dialogical stakeholder communication by MNCs and NGOs. In: Communicating Corporate Social Responsibility: Perspectives and Practice. Critical Studies on Corporate Responsibility, Governance and Sustainability 6: 283–210.
Lovejoy, K. & Saxton, G.D. (2012): Information, community, and action: How nonprofit organizations use social media. In: Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, vol. 17, pp. 337–353.
Lovejoy, K., Waters, R. D. & Saxton, G. D. (2012): Engaging stakeholders through Twitter: How nonprofit organizations are getting more out of 140 characters or less. In: Public Relations Review 38: 313–318.
Lyon, T. P. & Montgomery, A. W. (2013): Tweetjacked: The impact of social media on corporate greenwash. In: Journal Business Ethics 118: 747–757.
Neuendorf, K.A. (2002): The Content Analysis Guidebook. Thousand Oaks (California): Sage Publications, cop. 2002.
Pearce, W., Holmberg, K., Hellsten, I. & Nerlich, B. (2014): Climate change on Twitter: topics, communities and conversations about the 2013 IPCC report. In: PLoS ONE, vol. 9, no. 4: e94785. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0094785.
Reilly, A. H. & Hynan, K. A. (2014): Corporate communication, sustainability, and social media: It’s not easy (really) being green. In: Business Horizons 57: 747–758.
Saffer, A. J., Sommerfeldt, E. J. & Taylor, M. (2013): The effects of organizational Twitter interactivity on organization-public relationships. In: Public Relations Review 39: 213–215.
Segerberg, A. & Bennett, W. L. (2011): Social media and the organization of collective action: Using Twitter to explore the ecologies of two climate change protests. In: The Communication Review 14: 197–215.
Vromen, A. (2015): Campaign entrepreneurs in online collective action: GetUp! In: In Australia. Social Movements Studies 14(2): 195–213
Waters, R.D. & Yamal, J.Y. (2011): Tweet, tweet, tweet: A content analysis of non-profit organizations’ Twitter updates. In: Public Relations Review 37: 321–324.
Werder, K., Helms, R. W. & Singer, J. (2014): Social media for success: A strategic framework. In: PACIS (Association for Information Systems, Pacific Asia conference on Information Systems Proceedings, paper 92 (http://aisel.aisnet.org/pacis2014/92.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Holmberg, K., Hellsten, I. (2016). Organizational Communication on Twitter: Differences Between Non-Profit and For-Profit Organizations in the Context of Climate Change. In: Schmidt, C. (eds) Crossmedia-Kommunikation in kulturbedingten Handlungsräumen. Europäische Kulturen in der Wirtschaftskommunikation. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-11076-5_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-11076-5_16
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden
Print ISBN: 978-3-658-11075-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-658-11076-5
eBook Packages: Social Science and Law (German Language)