The WORST church social media presence

I wish to discuss what makes a good or a bad church presence on social media, what is good, what is bad and what can be done to improve things.

On top of this, examples of bad and good practice would be appreciated.

I'll kick this off with the worst Facebook handle I have ever come across, unless you know differently, which is @christianityinthemethodistchurchesllandudno. Nice snappy title don't you think?
«1

Comments

  • Perhaps providentially, that link doesn't work.
    :grimace:

    IJ
  • balaambalaam Shipmate
    It's a facebook name, open Facebook and paste the long name in. The Facebook page is actually well kept up to date with what is on, but how do they expect people to find it with a name like that?
  • Bishops FingerBishops Finger Shipmate
    edited August 25
    O, I see.

    I don't do Book Of Face, so I'll get me coat.

    IJ
  • Amanda B ReckondwythAmanda B Reckondwyth Mystery Worship Editor
    Please give Miss Amanda your arm, there's a sweet lamb. She'd rather eat cancer than do Facebook.
  • Bishops FingerBishops Finger Shipmate
    edited August 26
    Well, I wouldn't go quite as far as Miss Amanda, but I really get p***ed off when I find that a church's only web presence is Book of Face or that Birdsong thing.

    Not everyone in the whole Multiverse uses social media, and it's not hard these days to set up a simple, easily updated website for one's church. Why, the C of E's 'A Church Near You' facility is a free facility, though only available in England itself at the moment AFAIK.

    As balaam remarks, not a snappy title in the OP at all, at all!

    IJ (aka The Luddite)
  • I won't tell the very rude joke my Gran had about the fella who had 'Ludo' tattooed on his todger.

    The North Wales holiday resort of Llandudno may give you a clue.
  • Amanda B ReckondwythAmanda B Reckondwyth Mystery Worship Editor
    Why, the C of E's 'A Church Near You' facility is a free facility, though only available in England itself at the moment .

    No, I can access it here in the USA. It's an invaluable resource for editing MW reports.
  • AlbertusAlbertus Shipmate
    I won't tell the very rude joke my Gran had about the fella who had 'Ludo' tattooed on his todger.

    The North Wales holiday resort of Llandudno may give you a clue.

    Mrs A extended (forgive the term) that one to Lost /Llandudno Jewel Of The North Wales Coast...
  • EnochEnoch Shipmate
    Why, the C of E's 'A Church Near You' facility is a free facility, though only available in England itself at the moment .

    No, I can access it here in the USA. It's an invaluable resource for editing MW reports.
    I think the point @Bishop's Finger may be making is that only churches in England can put their details on it, rather than that it's blocked if you try to access it from somewhere else.

    Some of the Welsh diocese seem to want all their churches to have Facebook pages. I'm fairly sure you can see them without being on Facebook. You just can't post on them. Though I agree that I think each church having a proper website of its own is a much better idea.

    Apart from the very valid point in the OP that the example doesn't seem to tell you where either church is, I've seen worse, and they were proper websites. There's one for a Scottish denominations that observes the Sabbath by shutting down completely ever Sunday. If you're stuck in a strange town on the Lord's Day and want to find a church, hard luck.
  • edited August 27
    The church quoted has a pretty terrible handle. But is it really any less competent than the Diocese of Southwell and Nottingham's quasi-pornographic claim to be going "Wider, Younger, Deeper" ?

    The worst thing is that, whilst the poor Methodists in the OP may have been simply been foolish in allowing an elderly Methodist layperson (is there any other kind?) to design their social media, the Diocese of Southwell and Nottingham presumably paid someone for their monstrosity.
  • And at least the Llandudno FB page, although unexciting, is up-to-date. There are far too many which have a flurry of entries from 2016 and then nothing.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    Albertus wrote: »
    I won't tell the very rude joke my Gran had about the fella who had 'Ludo' tattooed on his todger.

    The North Wales holiday resort of Llandudno may give you a clue.

    Mrs A extended (forgive the term) that one to Lost /Llandudno Jewel Of The North Wales Coast...

    Croeso i Landudno, mwynheuwch eich dydd*?

    *welcome to Llandudno, enjoy your day.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    And at least the Llandudno FB page, although unexciting, is up-to-date. There are far too many which have a flurry of entries from 2016 and then nothing.

    This. Whilst I appreciate not everyone does FB, the fact remains it's much easier to keep an FB page up to date than a regular Web page. We all love "forthcoming events" sections telling us when the 2003 Christingle was.
  • ‘Cept you can get software that links twitter Facebook and webpage and then you only update the one you find easiest, and people can access in whichever modality they find easiest.
  • We have been having a Holiday Bible Club this week and the leaders have been posting galleries of photos within, at most, 2 hours of the end of each day's activities (and, yes, we have the parents' permission for this). They only flagged yesterday after our Celebration Service, lunch and general tidy-up - nothing has appeared since a picture of the church interior set up, ready to receive the multitude!
  • Enoch wrote: »
    Why, the C of E's 'A Church Near You' facility is a free facility, though only available in England itself at the moment .

    No, I can access it here in the USA. It's an invaluable resource for editing MW reports.
    I think the point @Bishop's Finger may be making is that only churches in England can put their details on it, rather than that it's blocked if you try to access it from somewhere else.


    Yes, that's what I meant.

    As regards FB, I would add that the PCC would quite like to start a new group/page/whatever you call it at Our Place, but so far no willing volunteers(s) has/have appeared...
    :frowning:

    IJ

  • AlbertusAlbertus Shipmate
    KarlLB wrote: »
    Albertus wrote: »
    I won't tell the very rude joke my Gran had about the fella who had 'Ludo' tattooed on his todger.

    The North Wales holiday resort of Llandudno may give you a clue.

    Mrs A extended (forgive the term) that one to Lost /Llandudno Jewel Of The North Wales Coast...

    Croeso i Landudno, mwynheuwch eich dydd*?

    *welcome to Llandudno, enjoy your day.

    Ceisio meddwl beth fyddai't tatw sy'n crynhoi hwn (trying to thing what'd be the tattoo that abbreviates that...) :smiley:
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    Ludo. Fel yn y post mwy gynnar (as in the earlier post)
  • yohan300yohan300 Shipmate
    I notice Norwich Cathedral nabbed the cathedral.org.uk domain before anyone else back in 1997. Seems to have helped their search results (second for "cathedral" after wikipedia on non-location-based searches). They also have more twitter followers than Canterbury.

    On the other hand some cathedrals can't even publish their service schedules before the services take place.
  • stetsonstetson Shipmate
    The church quoted has a pretty terrible handle. But is it really any less competent than the Diocese of Southwell and Nottingham's quasi-pornographic claim to be going "Wider, Younger, Deeper" ?

    WTF?! And I thought the folk-mass was an awkward attempt at appealing to contemporary sensibilities.



  • yohan300 wrote: »
    On the other hand some cathedrals can't even publish their service schedules before the services take place.
    Or you will only find them detailed under "music list", which isn't where the average punter would look ...

  • stetson wrote: »
    The church quoted has a pretty terrible handle. But is it really any less competent than the Diocese of Southwell and Nottingham's quasi-pornographic claim to be going "Wider, Younger, Deeper" ?

    WTF?! And I thought the folk-mass was an awkward attempt at appealing to contemporary sensibilities.



    I'm glad I'm not the only person to notice and cringe at this most cringeworthy handle. What on earth were they thinking of?

    :fearful:

    No - don't answer that...

    :flushed:

    IJ
  • stetsonstetson Shipmate
    stetson wrote: »
    The church quoted has a pretty terrible handle. But is it really any less competent than the Diocese of Southwell and Nottingham's quasi-pornographic claim to be going "Wider, Younger, Deeper" ?

    WTF?! And I thought the folk-mass was an awkward attempt at appealing to contemporary sensibilities.



    I'm glad I'm not the only person to notice and cringe at this most cringeworthy handle. What on earth were they thinking of?

    :fearful:

    No - don't answer that...

    :flushed:

    IJ

    Ah, I think I'll answer.

    They were thinking that anyone square enough to be offended by the innuendo wouldn't understand it, and anyone hip enough to understand it wouldn't be offended.

    But it would be really uncomfortable if you ended up having to discuss the group with a "worst of both world's" audience, ie. they get the joke, but don't approve.

  • And we simple folk of Sherwood Forest see it as an aid to focusing our missional activities.
  • stetsonstetson Shipmate
    And we simple folk of Sherwood Forest see it as an aid to focusing our missional activities.

    Hey, I like porn-flavoured innuendo as much as the next guy, even meandering into the hardcore territory, as that slogan definitely does.

    But, you know, time and place. If a male corporate manager were to say to a new female hiree during orientation "Our marketing strategy right now is to go wider, younger, and deeper, heh heh heh, get it?", well, I think that would probably end up with a complaint lodged to Human Resources. If not a lawsuit.

    That said, if it works for you guys, and no one's complaining, and you don't squirm when having to recite the name in front of the blue-rinse brigade, knock yourselves out.
  • Yes, if it works, well and good, but alas for us Sin-Sick Souls, and Hell-Bound Hereticks, for whom it doesn't.....

    Another diocese (can't recall which) uses the phrase 'Going Deeper Into God', or words to that effect, which makes God sound rather like a quagmire or a jungle. OTOH, maybe that's not so far off the truth...

    IJ

  • ZacchaeusZacchaeus Shipmate
    stetson wrote: »
    stetson wrote: »
    The church quoted has a pretty terrible handle. But is it really any less competent than the Diocese of Southwell and Nottingham's quasi-pornographic claim to be going "Wider, Younger, Deeper" ?

    WTF?! And I thought the folk-mass was an awkward attempt at appealing to contemporary sensibilities.



    I'm glad I'm not the only person to notice and cringe at this most cringeworthy handle. What on earth were they thinking of?

    :fearful:

    No - don't answer that...

    :flushed:

    IJ

    Ah, I think I'll answer.

    They were thinking that anyone square enough to be offended by the innuendo wouldn't understand it, and anyone hip enough to understand it wouldn't be offended.

    But it would be really uncomfortable if you ended up having to discuss the group with a "worst of both world's" audience, ie. they get the joke, but don't approve.

    Or it was written by somebody so stupid/inocent they didn't even realise the innuendo

  • Baptist TrainfanBaptist Trainfan Shipmate
    edited August 30
    I'll be honest: I never saw any innuendo.

    And, at our Holiday Bible Club last week, we sang "Wide and long and high and deep (is the love of Jesus)" every day and not even the teenage helpers nudged or winked. When I couple of us discussed it we took it as a reference to Ephesians 3:18.
  • stetsonstetson Shipmate
    Zacchaeus wrote: »
    stetson wrote: »
    stetson wrote: »
    The church quoted has a pretty terrible handle. But is it really any less competent than the Diocese of Southwell and Nottingham's quasi-pornographic claim to be going "Wider, Younger, Deeper" ?

    WTF?! And I thought the folk-mass was an awkward attempt at appealing to contemporary sensibilities.



    I'm glad I'm not the only person to notice and cringe at this most cringeworthy handle. What on earth were they thinking of?

    :fearful:

    No - don't answer that...

    :flushed:

    IJ

    Ah, I think I'll answer.

    They were thinking that anyone square enough to be offended by the innuendo wouldn't understand it, and anyone hip enough to understand it wouldn't be offended.

    But it would be really uncomfortable if you ended up having to discuss the group with a "worst of both world's" audience, ie. they get the joke, but don't approve.

    Or it was written by somebody so stupid/inocent they didn't even realise the innuendo

    That would be a PRETTY big coincidence. Like Metallica not realizing that their album title "Cunning Stunts" can allude to something other than clever tricks.

    And from Captain Chrism himself, we hear that it was designed as "an aid to foucsing our missional activities", which, in this case, are to youth. Given the affinity of post-internet youth for porn-inflected humour(is there anyone younger than 50 who hasn't heard some barstool comedian doing the "boom chicka wa wa" music?), I think I would just put two and two together on this one.

  • sionisaissionisais Shipmate
    stetson wrote: »
    And from Captain Chrism himself, we hear that it was designed as "an aid to foucsing our missional activities", which, in this case, are to youth. Given the affinity of post-internet youth for porn-inflected humour(is there anyone younger than 50 who hasn't heard some barstool comedian doing the "boom chicka wa wa" music?), I think I would just put two and two together on this one.

    (my italics) Who, or what, wrote that? I would have got "F - see me" at the age of 12 for writing anything as clumsy and discordant as that.

    I know many like to get away from formal prayer as it is too ritualised and formulaic, but that is no excuse for replacing it with modern business management speak. We''ll be leveraging our spiritual assets next.
  • From further up the thread:
    And we simple folk of Sherwood Forest see it as an aid to focusing our missional activities.

  • stetsonstetson Shipmate
    I'll be honest: I never saw any innuendo.

    And, at our Holiday Bible Club last week, we sang "Wide and long and high and deep (is the love of Jesus)" every day and not even the teenage helpers nudged or winked. When I couple of us discussed it we took it as a reference to Ephesians 3:18.

    Well, I guess everyone's mind works a little differently. To test whether or not my interpretation was inordinately influenced by Columba's prior post describing the name as "quasi-pornographic", I just did a duckduckgo search on the words "wider younger deeper".

    When I clicked on Images, in addition to the logo of the church group, and some other, fairly neutral stuff, there were also a number of photos that I would describe as NSFW, a few of them VERY MUCH SO.

    Captain Chrism, I'm wondering if you guys have done a search on your group's name since adopting the term. Not that I think your target demographic is going to be much harmed by the images("kids today, etc etc"), though the aforementioned blue-rinse brigade might be in for a bit of a shock should they enter those words.

  • O well. I shall just have to carry on being a Hell-bound Heretick, with a Sin-Sick Soul, all complete, and got up regardless.

    I followed stetson's example, and duckduckgo does indeed come up with some NSFW images, Google rather less so.

    With all due respect to the churches/dioceses concerned, these attempts at producing snappy handles (or whatever) seem just a bit, well, amateurish...

    ...and no, I'm afraid I'm not professional enough to come up with anything better, so I'll get me coat.

    FWIW, we describe Our Place sometimes, rather wryly, as St. Faithful-in-the-Backstreets, which at least is factually true!

    IJ
  • Baptist TrainfanBaptist Trainfan Shipmate
    edited August 30
    I like that. It's better than St. Boring-by-the-Gasworks, at any rate.

    And much better than St. Vibrant the Cool. (I'm showing my age, aren't i?)
  • Can I propose an ecclesiastical ban on the term 'vibrant'?

    Mind you, however we cut it anything we say about churchy things online or in print is going to sound somewhat strange these days.

    I was struck by a comment on our local paper about the induction of a part-time curate at a village church after a 12 month interregnum.

    A parishioner was reported as saying that it was 'quite a formal service but conducted in a pleasant way.'

    As opposed an unpleasant one?

    How would that run?

    'I hereby induct you as curate-in-charge at St Swithering-in-the-Mire ... Better mind you do it properly, you miserable git!'

    Or

    'Oi! Pillock. I'm talking to you ...'
  • stetsonstetson Shipmate
    edited August 30
    Can I propose an ecclesiastical ban on the term 'vibrant'?

    Mind you, however we cut it anything we say about churchy things online or in print is going to sound somewhat strange these days.

    I was struck by a comment on our local paper about the induction of a part-time curate at a village church after a 12 month interregnum.

    A parishioner was reported as saying that it was 'quite a formal service but conducted in a pleasant way.'

    As opposed an unpleasant one?

    How would that run?

    'I hereby induct you as curate-in-charge at St Swithering-in-the-Mire ... Better mind you do it properly, you miserable git!'

    Or

    'Oi! Pillock. I'm talking to you ...'

    Well, the fact that we have the word "unpleasant" indicates that things are NOT always conducted in a pleasant way, so perhaps the parishoner thought it noteworthy to mention that this particular event was.

    I think it's ridiculous to use words like pleasant in imperative statements, eg. a boss telling his receptionist "You need to be pleasant in dealing with customers", because the mere fact that he wants her to do something should indicate that he wants it done in a pleasant fashion.

    However, if someone later asks a customer "What was the receptionist at that office like?", it makes sense for him to say "She was quite pleasant", since there is always the possibility that she would have failed to live up to that particular requirment, so the customer wants you to know that she didn't.

    Back to the induction, a lot of people today might assume that a formal event would be stiff, boring etc so perhaps the parishoner thought he should clarify that it wasn't?

  • stetson wrote: »
    Like Metallica not realizing that their album title "Cunning Stunts" can allude to something other than clever tricks.
    Caravan's lawyer called, and would like a word.

    (And for more innuendo than you ever need to hear, sample their albums (or even just their titles). Pye Hastings confessed long afterwards that they were basically just trolling the censors of the day. But I love the music).
  • ZacchaeusZacchaeus Shipmate
    stetson wrote: »
    Can I propose an ecclesiastical ban on the term 'vibrant'?

    Mind you, however we cut it anything we say about churchy things online or in print is going to sound somewhat strange these days.

    I was struck by a comment on our local paper about the induction of a part-time curate at a village church after a 12 month interregnum.

    A parishioner was reported as saying that it was 'quite a formal service but conducted in a pleasant way.'

    As opposed an unpleasant one?

    How would that run?

    'I hereby induct you as curate-in-charge at St Swithering-in-the-Mire ... Better mind you do it properly, you miserable git!'

    Or

    'Oi! Pillock. I'm talking to you ...'

    Well, the fact that we have the word "unpleasant" indicates that things are NOT always conducted in a pleasant way, so perhaps the parishoner thought it noteworthy to mention that this particular event was.

    I think it's ridiculous to use words like pleasant in imperative statements, eg. a boss telling his receptionist "You need to be pleasant in dealing with customers", because the mere fact that he wants her to do something should indicate that he wants it done in a pleasant fashion.

    However, if someone later asks a customer "What was the receptionist at that office like?", it makes sense for him to say "She was quite pleasant", since there is always the possibility that she would have failed to live up to that particular requirment, so the customer wants you to know that she didn't.

    Back to the induction, a lot of people today might assume that a formal event would be stiff, boring etc so perhaps the parishoner thought he should clarify that it wasn't?

    I have been to many induction services that were very long dry boring and unleasant
  • Ones in ecumenical churches can be deadly, if they use the full liturgies of both/all denominations.
  • AlbertusAlbertus Shipmate
    Can I propose an ecclesiastical ban on the term 'vibrant'?

    Vibrant, Deep, Earth-moving....
  • EnochEnoch Shipmate
    Back before I retired, some of us had formulated a principle that if anyone tries to sell you something as 'an exciting opportunity' get as far away from it as you can.
  • @Stetson etc al.

    Yes, of course I could imagine what the parishioner was getting at - it was formal but not stuffy.

    I was just amused at the turn of phrase.

    @Zacchaeus, if you've been to boring, dry and unpleasant inductions, have you ever been to a 'vibrant' one?
  • stetsonstetson Shipmate
    Eutychus wrote: »
    stetson wrote: »
    Like Metallica not realizing that their album title "Cunning Stunts" can allude to something other than clever tricks.
    Caravan's lawyer called, and would like a word.

    (And for more innuendo than you ever need to hear, sample their albums (or even just their titles). Pye Hastings confessed long afterwards that they were basically just trolling the censors of the day. But I love the music).

    Damn, I knew I should have gone with one of the classics for my example.
  • stetsonstetson Shipmate
    Hmm. That didn't work. This is what was supposed to come up.
  • It was only very very recently and after it having been explicitly pointed out to me that I ever got the innuendo in that one :blush:
  • anoesisanoesis Shipmate
    stetson wrote: »
    Hmm. That didn't work. This is what was supposed to come up.
    Damn. All the interesting stuff happened before I was born, apparently...
    Zacchaeus wrote: »
    Or it was written by somebody so stupid/inocent they didn't even realise the innuendo
    Believe it or not, this is possible. My sainted mother (who probably qualifies as an honorary member of the blue-rinse brigade), will leave the room if I'm watching a stand-up comic on TV who's making use of 'curse words' - but she adores Graham Norton - watches him every week, without fail. I have sat beside her, on the couch, on multiple occasions, as the most cringeworthy innuendo is batted around from guest to guest, thinking, 'Is this actually just passing you by?' - and have concluded, yes - yes it is...
  • SipechSipech Shipmate
    My own church (not the over-arching body; the individual congregation account) blocked me on Twitter. After about 3 months, they unblocked me and someone muttered something about not knowing how that had come about.

    Trouble is, the ownership of the account was left to someone who, to put it mildly, is not all that tech-savvy. For example, on that person's own account, they will tweet something and them immediately retweet it themselves.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    anoesis wrote: »
    stetson wrote: »
    Hmm. That didn't work. This is what was supposed to come up.
    Damn. All the interesting stuff happened before I was born, apparently...
    Zacchaeus wrote: »
    Or it was written by somebody so stupid/inocent they didn't even realise the innuendo
    Believe it or not, this is possible. My sainted mother (who probably qualifies as an honorary member of the blue-rinse brigade), will leave the room if I'm watching a stand-up comic on TV who's making use of 'curse words' - but she adores Graham Norton - watches him every week, without fail. I have sat beside her, on the couch, on multiple occasions, as the most cringeworthy innuendo is batted around from guest to guest, thinking, 'Is this actually just passing you by?' - and have concluded, yes - yes it is...

    Yes, I've come across this. What I don't understand though is the appeal - Norton is only funny because of the double entendres. If you're genuinely missing those what's there actually left?
  • Bishops FingerBishops Finger Shipmate
    edited August 31
    Well, quite - what does Sainted Mother think people are laughing at ?
    :blush:

    IJ
  • stetsonstetson Shipmate
    Well, quite - what does Sainted Mother think people are laughing at ?
    :blush:

    IJ

    My mother gets very offended at outright portrayals of sex, and curse words. But she also taught me a drinking-game tongue twister that goes "I'm not a fig-plucker nor a fig plucker's son, but I'll pluck figs 'till the fig plucker comes." When I dared her to explain what was being implied, she feigned innocence. (Though she almost certainly knew.)

    But I'm sure that if I were to tell her a joke directly about the activity implied by the tongue-twister, she'd be extremely disgusted. I think for a lot of people, roughly those who came of age before the 1960s, innuendo is okay, but explicit portrayal crosses the line.
Sign In or Register to comment.