Due to its relatively nonexistent barrier to entry, social media has been the default answer to almost every communications challenge.
Need to raise awareness? Launch a social campaign. Need engagement? Post more content. Need people to notice an initiative? Put it on LinkedIn, Facebook or Instagram.
But as platforms become increasingly crowded and organic reach becomes harder to achieve, many communication professionals are asking whether social media is still delivering the value it once did.
I think that’s the wrong question.
The more important question is whether we’ve become too reliant on social media to solve communications challenges it was never designed to solve in the first place.
Social media became dominant because it offers something every communications team wants: visibility.
It’s fast, measurable and relatively easy to execute. Every post generates a stream of metrics, from impressions and clicks through to likes, comments and shares.
The problem is that visibility and communication are not the same thing.
A message can be seen without being understood. A campaign can generate impressions without changing awareness, understanding or behaviour.
Our own research into communications professionals specifically in the public sector revealed an interesting contradiction. Social media was the most widely used communications channel, yet it ranked behind channels such as video, email newsletters and community events when practitioners were asked which channels were most effective.
That suggests many organisations continue to invest heavily in a channel they do not necessarily believe delivers the strongest outcomes.
One reason this disconnection persists is because social media produces an abundance of data that’s easy to access and interpret.
Engagement metrics remain among the most common ways organisations measure success. Yet likes, shares and impressions tell us very little about whether a message was understood, trusted or acted upon.
This creates a risk. When communicators optimise for what is easiest to measure, they can lose sight of what matters most.
A post receiving thousands of impressions may look successful in a monthly report. But if the audience cannot recall the message, explain it to someone else or make a better decision because of it, what has actually been achieved?
Awareness matters. But awareness alone is rarely the end goal.
This becomes particularly important for organisations communicating with communities.
A local council explaining a planning change isn’t trying to maximise engagement for its own sake. A health organisation encouraging preventative screening isn’t chasing impressions. A government department communicating a policy change isn’t simply looking for clicks.
These organisations are trying to help people understand something, trust something or act on something.
That requires more than visibility. It requires context, explanation and clarity.
The channels practitioners consistently rate as most effective tend to create opportunities for deeper engagement. Whether it’s a webinar, community event, newsletter or explainer video, these formats give communicators the space to explain complexity rather than simply broadcast information.
This isn’t an argument against social media.
Social remains one of the most powerful distribution channels available. But distribution and communication are not the same thing.
As communicato…