For my teasers, my focus was to bring the main points of my argument along with some images that correspond to the topic. For Twitter and Facebook, the text focused on what Prop 22 does for drivers and the longterm effects on public policy. For LinkedIn, I followed that trend along with a call to arms to professionals to make it clear why they should care about this issue.
For Twitter, I added two hashtags that were recommended after the critique. These hashtags expand the reach of the piece, but not overload it with a dozen hashtags.
In regards to images, I wanted to try making my own to have the teasers more appealing for Twitter and Facebook. My focus was to make them crisp and clean, but still have some character.
For Twitter, I incorporated the Yes and No on Prop 22 campaign logos on a road background. For Facebook, I used the logos for gig-economy apps as clouds raining down cash on the California legislature. I tweaked it from before as I felt that the previous graphic was lacking with the apps arcing around legislature. I enjoy making graphics like these and wanted to try making something by myself for this.
Given LinkedIn is primarily used by professionals, I decided to go with an image of a driver holding up a No on 22 sign. From what I have seen on LinkedIn, that image style is primarily used by people posting content on there.
Following the tips outlined in Gary Vaynerchuk’s Jab, Jab, Jab, Right Hook, I tried to keep my text to a minimum with an engaging visual. The posts also have an emotional core of advocating for workers that are taken advantage of by these major companies.
In regards to effectiveness, I find the Facebook post the perfect balance. There’s enough room to describe what the article is about, and the image formatting fits better versus Twitter. Given the casual nature of Facebook, it also allows for more experimental posting. LinkedIn, with its professional following, seems more button-up in terms of the content posted.