Mapping the Great Beyond: Identifying Meaningful Networks in

MAPPING THE GREAT BEYOND 63
America.gov and Dipnote can be considered within the negative
and more colloquial use of periphery: largely unengaged with these
discussions between Twitter users.
Simply micro-broadcasting to a small group of followers is not
enough. To be fully engaged in a conversation, an organization must
consider the way others engage in discussions of particular themes
and identify ways to interact with them. Ultimately, these discussions
will occur whether or not PD organizations engage in them; at the
moment it is clear neither organization is going to have much impact
on those conversations using their current approach.
Conclusion from Case Study 2
The benefit of mapping #tags is that it engages with the themes
which people are talking about. It seeks to understand the relationship
between the organization and individuals discussing certain key
topics: whether they are taking part in the same discussions; whether
they are engaged in more than one discussion; what topics users
recognize as related; and whether organizations are hitting some
key conversations and not others. While success relating to behavior
change may be difficult at this stage of analysis (although identifying
RT/Mentions may be one possibility, along with extensive analysis of
tone), the first step in any initiative must be to engage a community.
Mapping #tags clearly demonstrates what is going on from a thematic
perspective—similar methodology could be used for assessing
clusters for geographic location, within constraints of the data.
If Public Diplomacy is to fully engage with social media and
Twitter in particular, a shift in operational mindset from broadcast to
engagement with networks clustering around themes and ideas will
be central to delivering successful initiatives.