And just, for one moment going back to Jackie Weaver. The same Jackie Weaver (who everyone is very fond of) who gave a semi defence/justification on Talk TV yesterday - something has been troubling me about that link (showing she had done work for the Essex facebook page - and therefore likely knew Simon and Kirsty - but didn't mention it when interviewed).
Here's the link again
90 likes but 80K+ reach. There's something in here isn't there about "ratios" isn't there?
I am not facebook expert at all.... but an idle google suggests that a good "ratio" would be as follows:
.On a Facebook page, what ratio is good for the number of post reaches to likes?
Answer (1 of 4): As an admin of 5 Facebook pages with more than 25k likes (all organic likes) I can tell you that it’s a data driven metric and it depends on a lot of factors, including time of your post, local / national / global events etc. But realistically, if I were to be measuring quality ...www.quora.com
There are plenty of examples of "influencers" having been found to have amassed followers by, for example, buying them. I don't think for one minute that this is what has happened with the Essex pages - but I do wonder how the followers were acquired. And even if they were engaged (they obviously were not - based on this post) - some kind of geospatial analyisis of where the followers and engagements were from?
The comms team at Essex County Council would have known about all of these analysis techniques but the two functions seem to have been kept apart and I have seen no reports published that describe the geographic reach or the broader effectiveness of "engagement" leave aside the economic evaluation detailing the 500K spent on Simon - and more on others (yes, as LG hints - if you trawl through the spreadsheets you see evidence of others too). The evidence of capmpaign effectiveness seems entirely to be about physical mobilisation - "about 450" for example, but moblisation of people and volunteers was something the wider public sector was doing anyway - NHS, local councils, voluntary sector. Was O'Callaghan, in some way, trying to credit facebook, and in turn herself and Harris for all of this? It's notable that nothing like as many followers have been created in Suffolk - or is that just becuase of fewer "activations"...?
---
Of course!
Why are they all so bleeping enormous?
Here's something interesting - may be taken down at some point:
From about 1:18 onwards in particular
Talking about their suicide prevention work
O'Callaghan talks about rolling out training - first of all in Woodham Ferrers (Morter's area) and says they trained "about 450" (voice goes up) people and then goes on to say they have "to date trained about 45,000" (eyes to the side) people in Essex. There are a lot of "abouts" with O'Callaghan. The coverage then shifts to coverage of guess who, someone who has done the training. And who might that be you ask? It is our friend Simon. And where is he you might ask - at the Monkey Bizness nursery in Hockley. And which social media and comms specialist in the Hockley area has done promotional work and fundraisers for them you might ask? Simon Harris. Absolutely nothing wrong with that at all. But, if there are "about" 45,000 grateful recepients of suicide awareness training in Essex was this the only person you could get to speak so highly of it - or was that just for "expediency"
Happy for this to be shared
Just a little more on the suicide awareness training. I will say, that this is an an entirely laudible aim and a good thing to do. I am just interested into how the claims of 45,000 people came from. I wonder if, in face, it was "click throughs" or even impressions of something like the attached. Others have speculated that this training was the mental health resilience training they put on at the same point - but I think that is entirely different.
If the provider was able, from their own tracking data (the link on the facebook page has a tracking token) to show 45,000 sign ups as eminating from the Essex is United or related web pages, I would be persuaded - but the engagement levels eminating from posts - even something as simple as a like or repost, on other topics atleast, are much lower and we know that 10 - 20% engagement to post view/impression is considered "good" in social media. And if the data came from click throughs or tracking data that the training organisation was able to review - why be so imprecise?
The training, by the way, is here
Essex - Let's Talk About Suicide
Suicide Prevention Essex - #TalkSuicide is a suicide prevention campaign. We offer Suicide Prevention training available from the Zero Suicide Alliance.letstalkaboutsuicide.co.uk
As I said, a good thing to do, but I questions about the claims being made....
is he actually still operating that facebook page?
Just went for a mosey and I think that comment has now been hidden as I can't see it even when I click through all the 'all comments' 'newest comments' 'most relevant' bla. Can see there's been two comments on the post, but can only actually 'see' one.