Skip to content

Twitter Profile: @US_Air_Force

25 July 2009

Picture 16

(1)WHY this site?
This week I’m comparing @usarmy & @us_air_force for my vertical/chapter on military twitter handles.

(2) Screen shot

(3) “Fill In The Blank” stats
Date data downloaded: 7-24-09
Industry sector: Military

Twitter ID: @us_air_force
Followers: 4181
Following: 10
Ratio followers/following: 418.1

Number posts: 583
Account created: 2009-01-05
First post: 2009-01-05

Picture 17
Bio:
Official U.S. Air Force Twitter: news, images, video from http://www.af.mil about our Airmen around the world. (Following does not=endorsement.)

URLS:
Twitter: http://twitter.com/us_air_force
Bio link: http://www.af.mil/
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/US-Air-Force/134276840326
MySpace: taken down (read)
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/companies/united-states-air-force
Blog: http://airforcelive.dodlive.mil/

About:

In terms of gov. Twitter handles I’ve been somewhat impressed with @us_air_force. While they don’t use a lot of hashtags or RT, they seem to have a more conversational tone than @usarmy. For the most part they still use Twitter as a news-feed like many of the other gov. handles. In March this handle was extremely active and since has dwindled down to 4-5 tweets per day.

Using Tweetstats.com I found some interesting statitists about @us_air_force:

  • Hootsuite is used for most updates. The Web and Brightkit are also used.
  • Most tweets are done around 6pm.
  • Thursday is the most popular day for tweeting.
  • 9.59% of tweets are retweets.
  • 10.27% of tweets are replies.
  • Avg. 4.4 tweets per day!

Twittercounter.com also revealed a fascinating piece of information:

  • @us_air_force is expected to have 6,610 followers in 30 days if they keep up at the rate they’re going .

(4) Analysis
A. General

(A.1) Background: F

Background includes logo and motto but needs improvements. Only a small amount of the background is used. There is no mention of who tweets for the Army.

(A.2) Avatar: D

Cool logo but its cut off. Looks like a mistake?

(A.3) Bio: A

Well written and all needed information is provided. “(Following does not=endorsement.)” Good use of keywords and Web address.

(A.4) Transparency: F

Not Used

(A.5) Bio Link: A

Great job! Link to main page.

B. Tweets

(B.1) Replies: 27/100
(B.2) ReTweets: 3/100
(B.3) DM requests: 0/100
(B.4) Hashtags: 1/100
(B.5) Favorite tweet: -AF @stratsoc “Sorry Russia, All Your Base Are Belong to US” http://bit.ly/wqA6u – Russian propaganda against US & NATO in Afghanistan”
(B.6) Summary: Tweets provide interesting links but little else. Hashtags need to be used more.

C. Questions/Suggestions
(C.1) Why not more RTs?
(C.2) Use more hashtags, disclose who tweets, and use a background with transparency.

D. Analytic Services (to come next week)

E. Conclusion

(E.1)Whats done well: More @ replies than a lot of other gov./dod agencies. Bio is well written.

Whats missing: Twitter not well advertised on Web site. No author or contact information on the left side of Twitter background. Only 10 people are followed.

(E.2) Scorecard Summary

Background F Terrible. What were you thinking?
Avatar D Pretty bad.
Bio A Great! Wouldn’t change a thing.
Transparency F Terrible. What were you thinking?
Bio Link A Great! Wouldn’t change a thing.

No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: