Tweeting the 2016 Grammys 2016 Grammy Nominees network Analysis - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

tweeting the 2016 grammys
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Tweeting the 2016 Grammys 2016 Grammy Nominees network Analysis - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Tweeting the 2016 Grammys 2016 Grammy Nominees network Analysis Nominees and general publics tweeting preferences on Grammys Words, hashtags, retweets over time and locations How nominees differ from previous grammy


slide-1
SLIDE 1

Tweeting the 2016 Grammys

Yueqi Feng, Chenzhi Li, Zhuangdi Li, Hao Lyu, Tianyi Zhang, Ye Zhi

  • 2016 Grammy Nominees’ network Analysis
  • Nominees and general public’s tweeting preferences on Grammys

○ Words, hashtags, retweets over time and locations ○ How nominees differ from previous grammy winners ○ factors of popularity

  • Comparison of the Grammys topic on different sites
slide-2
SLIDE 2

Nominees’ overall peer following network is sparse A white dot represents ith row follows jth column

7.1% dotted 3.8% dotted 1.01% dotted 2.4% dotted 24.5% dotted between Top

most public followed nominees least public followed nominees

slide-3
SLIDE 3

The following network is dense among top followed nominees

Friend Pairs among top 30 nominees

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Public popularity implies peer popularity, and past winners have more public and peer followers than regular nominees

correlation=0.65

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Top hashtags used together with #Grammys in general public are nominees, sponsors, and other big events

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Winners are more active in terms of tweets counts

Averages of Tweets Counts: Nominees: 6819 Winners: 8119

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Winners have more followers and are more listed, but have less friends and favorites

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Positive Correlation of Favorite Counts and Retweet Counts

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Winners tends to tweet more photos and the relationship with tweet length is close to convex; Nominee tweet fewer photos and 5-10 tweet length achieves the peak

Percentage: Number of tweets with photos / total number of tweets; Tweet_length: Average number of words in each tweet for all nominees and winners

slide-10
SLIDE 10

More positive words do not always indicate more followers

slide-11
SLIDE 11

AM 6:00 - 12:00 PM 12:00 - 18:00

Frequent words in tweets at different times

AM 0:00 - 6:00 PM 18:00 - 24:00

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Nominees tweeted more about #Grammys than previous Winners

Hashtag Cloud for Nominees ↓ Hashtag Cloud for Winners ↓

slide-13
SLIDE 13

In general, winners tend to have more hashtags than nominees

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Nominees and Winners tweeted more frequently in Noon

Twitter Counts vs Hours Average Twitter Counts Trend ↑ Winners ↓ Nominees

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Nominees retweet more

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Individual retweeting network examples

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Nominees and Winners tweeted more in LA, NYC,and Nashville

slide-18
SLIDE 18

new, album, official, twitter, grammy, music, available, nominated, band, artist, award, songwriter, winning, winner, world, itunes, composer, musician, time, producer, rock, info, download, debut, pianist, day, jazz, recording, husband, us, instagram,

  • rchestra, soul, country, vocalist...

Part of Frequent Words List

Nominees mention new albums info, music types, and grammy nominations in account descriptions

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Google Search Index positively correlates to Twitter popularity for Top 50 Nominees

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Search Trend involving “Grammys”: Twitter v.s. Google Search Index