Brands with personalities – good for businesses, but bad for public health? A content analysis of how food and beverage brands personify themselves on Twitter
Dados Bibliográficos
| ID | 15097151 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Tenay Greene (0000-0002-2962-498X), Carla Seet, Andrea Rodríguez Barrio, Dana McIntyre, Bridget Kelly (0000-0003-3111-6279), Marie A Bragg (0000-0002-6858-7173, New York University, autor correspondente) |
| Ano | 2022 |
| Volume | 25 |
| Fascículo | 1 |
| Páginas | 51-60 |
| Data de publicação | 2022-01-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sim |
| Open Access | Sim |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Periódico | Public Health Nutrition (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores do periódico | ISSN: 1368-9800 • E-ISSN: 1475-2727 |
| Editora | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1017/s1368980021001439 |
| PMID | 33820575 |
| OpenAlex | W3143873055 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citações recebidas | 6 |
| Referências citadas | 23 |
Objective: To examine the extent to which food and beverage brands exhibit personalities on Twitter, quantify Twitter users’ engagement with posts displaying personality features and determine advertising spending across these brands on Twitter. Design: We identified 100 tweets from 10 food and beverage brands that displayed a ‘personality’, and 100 ‘control’ tweets (i.e. a post by that brand on the same day). Our codebook quantified the following personification strategies: (1) humour; (2) trendy language and (3) absence of food product mentions. We used media articles to quantify other personification strategies: (4) referencing trending topics; (5) referencing current events; (6) referencing internet memes and (7) targeting niche audiences. We calculated brands’ number of tweets, re-tweets, ‘likes’, and comments and report the relationship between advertising spending and retweets per follower. Setting: Twitter posts. Participants: Ten food and beverage brands that were described in media articles (e.g. Forbes) as having distinct personalities. Results: Personality tweets earned 123 013 retweets, 732 076 ‘likes’ and 14 806 comments, whereas control tweets earned 61 044 retweets, 256 105 ‘likes’ and 14 572 comments. The strategies used most included humour ( n 81), trendy language ( n 80) and trending topics ( n 47). The three brands that spent the most on advertising had similar or fewer retweets per follower than the four that spent relatively little on advertising. Conclusions: Some food and beverage brands have distinct ‘personalities’ on Twitter that generate millions of ‘likes’ and retweets. Some retweets have an inverse relationship with advertising spending, suggesting ‘personalities’ may be a uniquely powerful advertising tool for targeting young adults
Consumer behaviour · Content analysis · Fear appeal · Food labeling · Food marketing · Personality psychology · Social media · Unhealthy food · Digital Marketing and Social Media · Misinformation and Its Impacts · Social Media in Health Education
Regional insights on tobacco-related tweets
Analysing content strategies of healthy vs. unhealthy food brands on social media using machine learning
Storytelling, humour, and promotions
A Content Analysis of Persuasive Appeals Used in Media Campaigns to Encourage and Discourage Sugary Beverages and Water in the United States
When Brands Become Stans
Social media
Children and adolescents' exposure to food and beverage marketing in social media apps
Rediscovering the Later Version of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs
Governmental policies to reduce unhealthy food marketing to children
They liked and shared
Social Cognitive Theory in Cultural Context
Content Analysis in Mass Communication
Examining the Relationship between Youth-Targeted Food Marketing Expenditures and the Demographics of Social Media Followers
The Food Marketing Defense Model
Beyond Homophily
Effect of television advertisements for foods on food consumption in children
Endangered childhoods
Digital Junk
Social integration in friendship networks
| Obras citantes distintas | 6 |
|---|---|
| Citações por ano | 1,5 |
| Intervalo de citações | 2022 - 2026 (5) |
| Velocidade de citação | current |
| Altamente citado | Não |
| Tipos de citação | Neutras: 6 |