Abstract

Twitter is widely used by companies to reach various stakeholders, but how they use this social media platform is still unclear. To investigate how companies use Twitter, this study analyzes the content of the Twitter accounts of four large information technology companies, focusing on the arrangement of different Twitter accounts and on message characteristics (content, message elements, and communication strategies). The results show that companies used architectures of different Twitter accounts to serve various stakeholder groups. The companies’ tweets covered diverse topics within the corporate, marketing, and technical communication domains. The tweets focused more on providing information and promoting action than on facilitating dialogue.

Journal
Journal of Business and Technical Communication
Published
2020-10-01
DOI
10.1177/1050651920932191
CompPile
Open Access
OA PDF Hybrid
Topics
Export

Citation context

Cited by in this index (5)

  1. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  2. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  3. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  4. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  5. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication

References (59) · 5 in this index

  1. 10.1108/IntR-04-2017-0172
     ↗
  2. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  3. 10.1057/bm.2016.3
     ↗
  4. Technical Communication
  5. 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x
     ↗
Show all 59 →
  1. 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.01.003
     ↗
  2. 10.1080/1553118X.2017.1298114
     ↗
  3. MIS Quarterly Executive
  4. The semiotics of emoji: The rise of visual language in the age of the Internet
  5. 10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.11.012
     ↗
  6. eMarketer. (2017). eMarketer updates worldwide social network user figures. https://www.emarketer.com/Article…
  7. 10.1016/j.pubrev.2016.07.001
     ↗
  8. 10.1016/j.chb.2016.06.022
     ↗
  9. 10.1108/S2043-052320160000009009
     ↗
  10. 10.1080/1062726X.2013.795866
     ↗
  11. 10.1177/0899764012471585
     ↗
  12. Iankova S., Davies I., Archer-Brown C., Marder B., Yau A. (2019). A comparison of social media marketing betw…
     ↗
  13. 10.1002/asi.21149
     ↗
  14. 10.1016/j.elerap.2017.05.002
     ↗
  15. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  16. 10.1016/j.bushor.2011.10.009
     ↗
  17. 10.1016/j.bushor.2009.09.003
     ↗
  18. 10.1016/j.chb.2014.04.020
     ↗
  19. 10.1002/smj.2678
     ↗
  20. 10.1080/15252019.2011.10722187
     ↗
  21. Communication Design Quarterly
  22. 10.2753/JEC1086-4415180204
     ↗
  23. 10.1080/15252019.2014.935536
     ↗
  24. 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01576.x
     ↗
  25. 10.1016/j.pubrev.2012.01.005
     ↗
  26. 10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.04.008
     ↗
  27. 10.2501/IJMR-2013-070
     ↗
  28. Technical Communication
  29. 10.2501/IJA-30-1-013-046
     ↗
  30. 10.1016/j.pragma.2013.12.003
     ↗
  31. 10.1080/10810730.2012.727956
     ↗
  32. 10.1080/00909889909365539
     ↗
  33. 10.2308/isys-50994
     ↗
  34. Technical Communication
  35. 10.1016/j.pubrev.2010.08.004
     ↗
  36. 10.1016/j.pubrev.2013.02.005
     ↗
  37. 10.1080/1062726X.2014.908721
     ↗
  38. 10.1177/1750635218810912
     ↗
  39. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  40. 10.3390/su10082617
     ↗
  41. International Journal of Integrated Marketing Communications
  42. 10.1108/JCOM-01-2013-0004
     ↗
  43. 10.2501/JAR-51-1-258-275
     ↗
  44. 10.1177/2329488415572785
     ↗
  45. 10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.08.015
     ↗
  46. 10.1177/2329488414525400
     ↗
  47. Technical Communication Quarterly
  48. 10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.03.002
     ↗
  49. 10.1016/j.pubrev.2016.07.002
     ↗
  50. 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2017-054188
     ↗
  51. 10.1080/09537325.2019.1587161
     ↗
  52. 10.1080/09537325.2017.1385759
     ↗
  53. 10.1108/CCIJ-03-2019-0031
     ↗
  54. 10.1177/0266666915602522
     ↗