Weekly Round-Up #1

This week, The Voice emphasized Shakira and Usher's return as judges for the upcoming season premiering this February. The tweet tagged both celebrities, and hash-tagged "#ThrowbackThursday," a term made famous by Instagram. The intended audience was definitely loyal viewers of the show, as the tweet called for fans to quote their favorite Shakira or Usher moments from the past season.

This type of advertising seems to be very effective. The image depicted shows both Shakira and Usher sitting in their infamous red chairs, laughing and smiling. This promotes the show in a positive light, and utilizes pathos by implying a happy and fun experience. The red chairs have also become a well-known symbol of the show, and any image advertising them will catch fans' attention. Additionally, another type of pathos employed is the nostalgic tone created by the "ThrowbackThursday" hashtag. This reminds fans of their favorite memories from past seasons, and encourages them to look forward to the upcoming one. Almost all of the responses to the tweet were positive, as fans replied saying they've missed "The Voice family," and "can't wait to see [the judges] back."

However, by only focusing on the two returning judges, The Voice potentially narrowed its audience. Someone reading this tweet would have to previously know that Shakira and Usher swap roles as judges with Christina Aguilera and Cee Lo Green every other season. This could be problematic because not all viewers watch every season of the show, and could be confused by the prompt.

Despite this minor drawback, I was actually surprised to see that there were no negative comments in response to this post. I would have assumed that people would have strong preferences as to the Usher/Shakira or Christina/Cee Lo pairing. The fact that there was no backlash to these returning judges shows that The Voice effectively framed this swap in a positive, and even exciting way.

On the other hand, Starbucks approached their tweet very differently this week. Starbucks' Twitter spoke to its fan base of coffee lovers by enticing them with free gifts in exchange for registering their Starbucks card by February 7th. By encouraging consumers to register their pre-existing cards, the company implied that those who don't already have a Starbucks card should also purchase one.

This tweet employs two of the rhetorical appeals that we discussed in class. Firstly, Starbucks asserts its credibility, or ethos, by having the power to give away free items. Because Starbucks is such a well-known brand, consumers trust that the company will adhere to its promise of "bonus rewards". This creates a huge incentive for customers to actually do what the tweet asks. Secondly, by creating a sense of inclusiveness for those who register their cards, customers who do not have a Starbucks card will feel like they are missing out on the give-aways. This fear of exclusion exemplifies the emotional appeal, or pathos, that Starbucks utilizes in this tweet.

The only problem with incentivized tweets, like this one, is that it's hard to determine whether or not the offer is legitimate and will be carried out or not. Although we can assume that Starbucks is an honorable company, it seems unlikely that every customer who registers their card will receive a free gift in return. Many people are also too lazy to actually take go through the process of receiving these "rewards." But perhaps this is part of Starbucks' strategy. Maybe the company realizes that most people will not, in fact, register their cards, so the number of free give-aways will be less than expected. I find this method of branding to be effective in the sense that Starbucks engages its consumer audience, and provides clear instructions for its call to action. However, this type of marketing has been vastly over-used, and is not always the most reliable.

Maroon 5's tweet this week also differs in strategy than that of The Voice and Starbucks. While the band does not directly ask its fans to donate money to a cause, it uses more passive language by asserting that "$10 from each one of our followers will change the world for #Women in #Haiti..." By hash-tagging such broad terms, the band is creating a universal sense of unity. Not only will Maroon 5's followers and fans see this tweet, but anyone who clicks on those two hashtags will as well. This vastly expands Maroon 5's audience, broadening the scope for donation opportunities, and attention to the cause. This tweet uses pathos really effectively, by evoking a sense of sympathy, urgency, and even obligation from its viewers. Anyone who donates will feel like they are making a positive impact on someone's life, and anyone who does not may feel guilty, in turn. 

This tweet could be problematic in the sense that it does not give a direct command. But although the call to action is not as direct as previously seen, I still find it to be extremely effective. The band is not ordering anyone to do anything, but simply giving information, or employing logos, about a cause that it finds important. The tweet also links the website for the cause at the end, which makes it very easy to access and explore. So easy, that if someone doesn't click on it, they may seem unsympathetic or just lazy. 

The fact that Maroon 5 is creating awareness for a cause also reaffirms the band's ethos within the community. Since the band is so well known and respected, loyal fans will recognize its credibility, encouraging them to further explore the cause. The fact that celebrities are endorsing such an important charity/organization will make fans want to do the same, since many of them look up to members of the band as mentors. Based on the fact that Maroon 5 successfully utilized all three of the rhetorical appeals discussed in class, this tweet definitely accomplishes its goal.