Social Media and Televangelists: Examining Facebook and Twitter Content

in Journal of Religion, Media and Digital Culture
No Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?



Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.



Help

Have Institutional Access?



Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



Connect

A content analysis was conducted of televangelists’ Facebook and Twitter pages. Tweets and Facebook posts were coded for a period of two weeks. The posts/tweets were coded for a variety of categories including: dialogic features, content of the post, and theme. Televangelists tweet more often than they post to Facebook. Findings indicate most televangelists included links to their websites, an email address, links to other forms of social media, phone numbers, and additional content about their organizations. Only a third of the posts/tweets included a reference to the Lord/Jesus/Holy Spirit, and less than 90 percent of posts included specific scripture or Bible verses. Televangelists post different types of content on Facebook compared to Twitter. For example, it is more common for Christian leaders to include the terms Lord/God/Jesus in a tweet than a Facebook post. Tweets are more likely to contain an uplifting or inspirational message, promote an offer for a book/dvd produced by the televangelist, and include a stock photo with a message than Facebook posts.

Social Media and Televangelists: Examining Facebook and Twitter Content

in Journal of Religion, Media and Digital Culture

Sections

References

  • Baab L.M. (2008). Portraits of the Future Church: A Rhetorical Analysis of Congregational Websites. Journal of Communication and Religion 31(2) pp. 143181.

  • Bekkering D.J. (2011). From “Televangelist” to “Intervangelist”: The Emergence of the Streaming Video Preacher. The Journal of Religion and Popular Culture 23(2) pp. 101117.

  • Bellar W. Campbell H.A. Cho J.K. Terry A. Tsuria R. Yadlin-Segal A. & Ziemer J. (2013). Reading Religion in Internet Memes. Journal of Religion Media and Digital Culture 2(2) pp. 139.

  • Bortree D. & Seltzer T. (2009). Dialogic Strategies and Outcomes: An Analysis of Environmental Advocacy Groups’ Facebook Profiles. Public Relations Review 35(3) pp. 317319.

  • boyd d . (2011). Social Network Sites as Networked Publics: Affordances, Dynamics and Implications. In Papacharissi Z. ed. A Networked Self: Identity Community and Culture on Social Network Sites . New York ny: Routledge pp. 3958.

  • Boyle K. (2012). Latter-day Tweets: The Mormon Times’s Use of Twitter as a Reporting Tool. Journal of Media and Religion 11(4) pp. 189199.

  • Breen L.D. (2015). Newsmax’s Top 100 Christian leaders in America. Newsmax [online] April  20.  Available  at: http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/newsmax-top-100-Christian/2015/ 04/20/id/639492 [Retrieved 01 January 2018].

  • Broom G. Casey S. & Ritchey J. (2000). Toward a Concept and Theory of Organization-public Relationships: An Update. In Ledingham J.A. & Bruning S.D. eds. Public Relations as Relationship Management: A Relational Approach to the Study and Practice of Public Relations . Hillsdale nj: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates pp. 321.

  • Brubaker P. & Haigh M.M. (2017). The Religious Facebook Experience: Uses and Gratifications of Faith-based Content. Social Media & Society 3(2). Unpaginated.

  • Byrd S. (2012). Hi Fans! Tell Us Your Story!: Incorporating a Stewardship-based Social Media Strategy to Maintain Brand Reputation During a Crisis. Corporate Communications: An International Journal 17(3) pp. 241254.

  • Campbell H.A. (2010). Religious Authority and the Blogosphere. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 15(2) pp. 251276.

  • Cheong P.H. (2011). Religion and Social Media: Got Web? Media Development 58(1) p. 23.

  • Diekema D. (1991). Televangelism and the Mediated Charismatic Relationship. The Social Science Journal 28(2) pp. 143162.

  • Ehling W.P. (1992). Estimating the Value of Public Relations and Communication to an Organization. In Grunig J.E. Dozier D.M. Ehling W.P. Grunig L.A. Repper F.C. & White J. eds. Excellence in Public Relations and Communication Management Hillsdale nj: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. pp. 617638.

  • Farrell J. (2011). The Divine Online: Civic Organizing, Identity Building, and Internet Fluency Among Different Religious Groups. Journal of Media and Religion 10(2) pp. 7390.

  • Fischer-Nielsen P. (2012). Pastors on the Internet: Online Responses to Secularization. In Cheong P.H. Fischer-Nielsen P. Gelfgren S. & Ess C. eds. Digital Religion Social Media and Culture: Perspectives Practices and Futures . New York ny: Peter Lang Publishing Group pp. 115130.

  • Greenwood S. Perrin A. & Duggan M. (2016 November 11). Social Media Update 2016: Facebook Usage and Engagement is on the Rise, While Adoption of Other Platforms Holds Steady. [online] Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org/2016/11/11/social-media-update-2016/ [Accessed 01 January 2018].

  • Helland C. (2002). Surfing for Salvation. Religion 32(4) pp. 293302.

  • Helland C. (2012). Scholar’s Top 5: Christopher Helland on Online Religion and Religion Online. Network for New Media Religion and Digital Culture Studies [online] May 14. Available at: http://digitalreligion.tamu.edu/blog/mon-051420121132/scholar%E2%80%99s-top-5-christopher-helland-online-religion-and-religion online [Accessed 01 January 2018].

  • Holmberg K. Bastubacka J. & Thelwall M. (2016). @God Please Open Your Fridge! Twitter Messages to @God in Content Analysis: Hopes, Humor, Spirituality, and Profanities. Journal of Religion Media and Digital Culture 5(2) pp. 339355.

  • Kent M.L. & Taylor M. (1998). Building Dialogic Relationships through the World Wide Web. Public Relations Review 24(3) pp. 321334.

  • Kent M.L. & Taylor M. (2002). Toward a Dialogic Theory of Public Relations. Public Relations Review 28(1) pp. 2137.

  • Ledingham J.A. & Bruning S.D. (1998). Relationship Management in Public Relations: Dimensions of an Organization-public Relationship. Public Relations Review 24(1) pp. 5565.

  • Men L.R. & Tsai W.H.S. (2012). How Companies Cultivate Relationships with Publics on Social Network Sites: Evidence from China and the United States. Public Relations Review 38(5) pp. 723730.

  • Miller B.J. Mundey P. & Hill J.P. (2013). Faith in the Age of Facebook: Exploring the Links Between Religion and Social Network Site Membership and Use. Sociology of Religion 74(2) pp. 227253.

  • Owens S. (2012). Why Religious Facebook Pages See More Engagement Than Bieber, Gaga, Obama: Six of the 20 Most-engaged Pages are Religiously Affiliated? Why?u.s. News & World Report [online] December 19. Available at: https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/12/19/why-religious-facebook-pages-see-more-engagement-than-bieber-gaga-and-obama. [Accessed 01 January 2018].

  • Pew Research Center: Religion & Public Life. (2015). America’s Changing Religious Landscape. Pew Research Center [online] May 12. Available at: http://www.pewforum.org/2015/05/12/americas-changing-religious-landscape/. [Accessed 01 January 2018].

  • Rybalko S. & Seltzer T. (2010). Dialogic Communication in 140 Characters or Less: How Fortune 500 Companies Engage Stakeholders Using Twitter. Public Relations Review 36(4) pp. 336341.

  • Smith M.M. (2007). Nonprofit Religious Organization Web Sites: Underutilized Avenue of Communicating with Group Members. Journal of Media and Religion 6(4) pp. 273290.

  • Taylor M. Kent M. (2014). Dialogic Engagement: Clarifying Foundational Concepts. Journal of Public Relations Research 26(5) pp. 384398.

  • Taylor M. Kent M. & White W. (2001). How Activist Organizations are Using the Internet to Build Relationships. Public Relations Review 27(3) pp. 263284.

  • Treem J.W. & Leonardi P.M. (2012). Social Media Use in Organizations: Exploring the Affordances of Visibility, Editability, Persistence, and Association. Communication Yearbook 36(1) pp. 143189.

  • Warren H. (2001). Televangelism. In Smelser N. & Baltes P. eds. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. Amsterdam: Elsevier pp. 1556515568. Available at: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/referenceworks/9780080430768 [Accessed 01 January 2018].

  • Waters R.D. Burnett E. Lamm A. & Lucas J. (2009). Engaging Stakeholders Through Social Networking: How Nonprofit Organizations are Using Facebook. Public Relations Review 35(2) pp. 102106.

  • Wirtz J.G. Ngondo P.S. & Poe P. (2013). Talking With Us or At Us: How u.s. Religious Denominations Use Organizational Web Sites to Communicate With Their Constituents. Journal of Media and Religion 12(4) pp. 165180.

Information

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 153 153 33
Full Text Views 95 95 29
PDF Downloads 12 12 3
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0