Twitter followers: 105,000

Facebook fans:  1,470,641

Whether or not you like Sarah Palin or agree with her political stances, it’s hard to argue that Palin isn’t doing something right. Seemingly plucked out of nowhere by John McCain to be his running mate in the 2008 presidential election, Palin is just as popular and prevalent in mainstream media almost 16 months later (more so than McCain himself) – as well as just as supported by her followers. Here are some takeaways from the core conversation chat we had on Palin and why she might actually have something to teach us:

·         She’s relatable

o   Whether you’re a rightwing middle-class woman or a leftwing working male with a child with “special needs,” Palin makes you feel like she’s one of you. People like her because they can relate to the life she leads and the topics she discusses.

o   People can see themselves in Sarah Palin through her charisma and identifiability.

·         She takes a stance

o   Palin is anything but wishy-washy. You know what she believes, and she takes a very clear stance on the issues. She’s unapologetic and doesn’t care if people love or hate her, which makes it very hard for you to ignore her.

·         Good at “playing the victim”

o   She can be quick to say how she’s treated unfairly by the media (think Katie Couric interview that cast Palin in a pretty unfavorable light – or how her kids are in the media so much more than Obama’s kids), and people want to sympathize with her

Some other points of discussion on Palin and (social) media, not necessarily in any particular order, also included:

·         Who really should be receiving the credit or validation for Palin’s social media successes? Is SHE actually posting her own Tweets or Facebook updates? Probably not. But who’s to say that Barack Obama isn’t doing the exact same thing, which he likely is. And is this eventually going to create a consumer backlash where people like Palin or Obama are seen as being inauthentic because they’re not creating their own content?

o   But how is that different than the general premise of advertising? Brands/companies pay strategists, agencies, etc to communicate on their behalf all the time – in the voice and tone of the brand. Does that make these brands inauthentic too? Because they’re getting help from an outside source?

·         Palin is a brand – but it would be very difficult for a consumer brand or household name like Apple, Nike, or Pepsi to emulate the tactics that have made her successful as a brand

o   She takes an extremely bold stance and doesn’t care if people love her or hate her. That can’t really be said for Apple, FedEx, Microsoft, or any other brand that wants your business and support. Or, if these brands did take the same type of stance, they would run the risk of alienating their customers and creating a huge backlash and pissing people off. Not good.

·         Why is it that we only “follow” people on Twitter or become “fans” of people on Facebook who we agree with? If I was to follow Palin on Twitter, people would naturally assume that I agree with her and want to hear the latest insights and thoughts from Palin. When in actuality, it would make more sense for me to “follow” her BECAUSE I disagree with her – to keep up on what her arguments are and better explain why I feel a certain way about her or her beliefs. It’s hard to know the opposite side of the story unless you actively seek it out.

o   In this way, both Facebook and Twitter can be very much one-way streets – where the dialogue and conversation paths these types of social/information network sites take is one-sided

o   Are we dangerously close to being an empty vacuum in social media where everyone is simply agreeing with one another?