Alexander Whittle - 837305

Dr. Scott Wright – MECM30016

BRAND
COMPARISON
REPORT
Comparing the Twitter accounts of the AFL and
AFLW
Introduction

Social media is no longer considered “optional” and its proliferation into brands’ marketing

strategies is no exception to this (Ibrahim, et al., 2016). Having a conversation or interacting

with another online agent is now a daily practise worldwide, which is facilitated especially by

Twitter’s two-way communication venue (Parganas, et al., 2015). It is subsequently integral

to brand reputation and development due to its capacity to assemble consumer perceptions

and attitudes in an increasingly everyday advertisement format (Keller, 2009). Narrowing to

the example of professional sports, Gill (2015) notes the substantial contribution of media

generally in brand reputation and development because of its influence over the commentary

agenda. The previously transmedia nature of sporting media during the broadcast era is now

converged, where reporting on aspects of gameplay, administration, social and grassroots

aspects appears on Twitter in the same stream (Vann, 2018; Jenkins, 2006; Hutchins &

Rowe, 2012). Hornikx and Hendricks (2015) note the negative reception of top-down,

conventional business models on Twitter; The top-down approach to sport content during the

broadcast era is inevitably a victim of this, and Twitter now allows two-way dialogue between

the content creators and consumers where once they were restricted to “silent interpretation”

(Van, 2015, 56). Allowing fans greater customisation of their sports media engagement has

changed their experience to more of an autonomous ‘information pull’ instead of the former

gatekeeping ‘product push’ (Vann, 2018). The increasingly customisable nature of sports

media engagement on Twitter is also making engagement more measurable and for new

and emerging brands this presents an opportunity to understand the development on social

media.

The professional sporting industry is a gendered one, characterised by “masculinist

hegemony” (Schell & Rodriguez, 2000, p.15). The permeation of hegemonic masculinity

inevitably shapes organisation administration and practices (Dashper, 2012; Messner, 2012;
Whiteside & Hardin, 2010). The primary aim of this research is to observe the female and

feminist lenses the AFLW operates with, and how the new and emerging brand’s success

differentiates from the AFL’s because of them. This sport poses a significant avenue for

research because its two leagues - AFL and AFLW - are owned by the same parent

corporation. This means that subtle differences will still be of significance because they may

indicate a split in marketing strategy from a hypothesised shared brand equity.

Women’s leagues’ replication of male leagues’ successful business models has generally

historically resulted in establishment struggles and their demise (McDonogh, 2011; Ring,

2015; Micelotta, 2018). Lobpries (2014) notes these sporting brands face additional barriers

specific to women’s leagues, including negative perceptions of bossy athletes, lack of

consistent visibility, lack of strong brand associations in women’s sports and lack of

assistance or guidance in managing a female athlete’s brand. Nevertheless, AFLW has

proven resilience. Premiering 4 years earlier than expected, AFLW’s inaugural 2017 season

was the result of a commissioned report into the state of the women’s game’s popularity

(AFL). The 2019 AFLW Grand Final reached 53,034 spectators and a television audience of

400,000 on March 31. This is an achievement, considering the AFL has operated since 1896

and its spectatorship at the MCG is capped at 100,000 (AFL).

The AFL employs women in its Female Football Marketing Manager, Head of Audience

Growth, and Head of Women’s Football roles, indicating the presence of these female and

feminist lenses through which AFLW growth has been achieved (AFLW). Essentially, this is

evidence that the AFLW is pursuing a different social media strategy to AFL and it is

important to find the difference in the result in its engagement with users. Jemma Wong,

Head of Audience Growth spoke to this in 2017:

“It was looking at the game through an authentic female lens for the very

first time. Perspective and perception was where we had to start. How do

we start to rewrite a narrative around women in our game and women in

 sport? And if we did that right the rest would follow… For the first time,

women actually needed to have authority and ownership of the game in

a way that they hadn’t had before” (Jemma Wong in MarketingMag,

2017).

The inherent social and feminist activism of the AFLW highlights the significance of its

grassroots entrepreneurship, community outreach and activism: while the AFL strives for this

too, AFLW does so for the historic goal of women’s recognition in sport.

Considering this, the following study aims to contribute an understanding of how sport

organisations communicate and engage with consumers on social media. It will examine

what differences may exist between women’s and men’s sporting leagues by comparing the

components of the brand equity of the AFLW and AFL on Twitter. It is necessary to note that

the AFL no longer tweets women’s material, leaving product autonomy to the AFLW sites

and accounts. The emergence and popularity of the AFLW is arguably due somewhat to the

compulsory nature of social media, and the aforementioned ‘information pull’ and increasing

measurability of consumer engagement means this study may reveal a difference in social

media strategy, and therefore business model, which contributes to the AFLW’s success.

Research Questions:

1. How do sporting leagues communicate on social media platforms and what

are their different uses?

2. What patterns of engagement between the leagues and consumers do their

social network maps reveal and how do they compare?

This research posits broader hypotheses: that AFLW will have a greater leaning toward

activism-based activity on Twitter, and argues this is because of the female and feminist

lenses of its operation, and the reality that it operates within a contested space characterised
by gender discrimination and underrepresentation; that both organisations, though

particularly the AFLW, use Twitter to engage with users to garner popularity.

Methodology

The Research Questions were addressed through analysis of @AFLW and @AFL tweets to

reveal differences in content as well as the brands’ social network maps. This section will

look closely at the methodology used to examine these.

1. Content Analysis

The AFLW Twitter page (@AFLW) was selected and content was scraped from the page

using NodeXL in order to use content analysis. Content analysis is defined as “any

technique for making inferences by objectively and systematically identifying specified

characteristics of messages” (Holsti, 1969, p. 14).

Scraping is defined as “the construction of an agent to download, parse, and organise data

from the web in an automated manner” (vanden Broucke, Baesens, 2018, p.3). 500 tweets

were scraped, which is why automation through NodeXL was preferable to manual selection.

The scraping formula was designed to scrape tweet author, tweet content, and date posted,

and was limited to the author @AFLW only using the Twitter Users Network function.

The collected tweets were then randomised in Microsoft Excel, extracting a manageable

sample size of 100. From this point, a coding framework was developed based on the

subject matter of the tweets.

The coding framework was designed to separate and categorise tweets by their use, so the

general uses that the AFL and AFLW accounts have for their tweets could be understood

and their amounts of use quantified. These categories were presumed initially, then added to

with closer analysis so that each tweet fit an identifiable use.

Coding Framework

Message 5. Original Tweet (tweets composed by the brand itself)

type 5. Reply (Tweets that reply to other users)

5. Re-tweet (External tweets that are retweeted by the brand)

5. Mention (Tweets that mention another user)

Message 6. Gameplay (Tweets that pertain primarily to on-field gameplay for

topic matches)

6. Advertisement (Tweets that primarily contain promotional material

from sponsors)

6. Public relations (Tweets which primarily aim to manage reputation)

6. Grassroots/Community outreach (Tweets that primarily pertai to

grassroots football: no-professional, Auskick, children’s, AFLX, for

example)

6. Activism  (Tweets that primarily pertain to an activist cause i.e.

representation of women/gender equality, LGBTI+ issues, mental

health, disease and illness)

The same method was then used to scrape tweets from the @AFL account, again limiting

the author to @AFL. Lai (2015) notes this method is particularly useful for obtaining latent

information as well as manifest through information filtering and topic-based clustering. This

was important for AFL and AFLW tweets because while grassroots-, gameplay- and activist-

related content were largely manifest information, advertisement and public relations were

revealed in more latent information.

Coding was then repeated a week after initial coding to ensure reliability and replicability.

2. Social Network Analysis

NodeXL was employed once more to conduct Social Network Analysis, this time on tweets

that mentioned, were replies to or quotes of the @AFL and @AFLW accounts. The method

employed adheres to the egocentric network approach over the sociometric approach

(Himelboim, 2017). The reason for this is because, although the tweets were about a topic -

AFL and AFLW - for the purpose of this study they were foremost directed to an individual

account - @AFL and @AFLW. Therefore, instead of studying the interactions within an

interest group, this Social Network Analysis studied the interactions with an individual

account. Understanding the relationships the two accounts have with others revealed the

strength and frequency of this relationship, but also showed information integral to

understanding the two accounts’ brand equity on social media. As Antunovic (2015, p.158)

writes that “the power of social media messages lies not in the number of followers and/or

retweets, but in the number of media gatekeepers (traditional and new) embracing it in some

ancillary format and making it a point of discussion to millions of viewers and readers.”

Research Findings and Discussion

1. Tweet Composition findings – Content Analysis

Social media tools like Twitter “enable the creation of customer and partner communities that

offer new opportunities for coordination, marketing, advertising, and customer support”

(Hansen, Scheiderman, & Smith, 2010, p. 4). It is evident from simple inspection of both the

AFL and AFLW’s Twitter accounts that many tweets have an agenda, and this research’s
content analyses confirmed these uses, but also that the uses were broadly common to both

accounts.

AFLW Twitterfeed Composition by AFL Twitterfeed Composition by

Tweet Type Tweet Type

Original Reply Retweet Mention Original Reply Retweet Mention

It was found that, during a similar period of the playing season, both the @AFLW and @AFL

accounts mostly tweeted original content at 68% and 79% respectively, with mentions the

second-most tweeted content at 26% and 19% respectively. This suggests that both brands

had very low user engagement. This completely confounds the hypothesis that brand-

consumer engagement on Twitter has a role in the popularity of either sport. Taking a closer

look at each account’s likes, it is even more clear that neither account replies to, or mentions

general consumers or their content on Twitter at all. All replies and mentions and retweets

are limited to players, other clubs, other sports, and official accounts, such as those related

to the organisations’ activism or government organisations.

The AFL account had no replies, however this is an insignificant result in comparison to the

AFLW account which, as discussed, only replied to AFLW players’ accounts.

This necessitated an examination of the organisations’ accounts’ likes, to see if there was

any user engagement in that regard. Similarly inspecting only the tweets in the sample, the

accounts only liked tweets by general consumers when they were in response to @AFL or

@AFLW tweets that specifically noted “please reply to this tweet.”

This suggests that while popularity may be drawn from the increased coverage that each

accounts’ Twitter provides and occasional engagement in the form of likes, popularity is

largely drawn from external avenues. Given the over 120-year existence of the sport, this is

not surprising.

Categorising the tweets instead by topic delves deeper into the AFLW and AFL’s uses for

account ownership. Coding refinement was the first analysis undertaken, which revealed that

the five uses for the accounts’ tweets were gameplay, advertisement, public relations,

grassroots/community outreach, and activism.

 AFLW Twitterfeed Composition by AFL Twitterfeed Composition by
Tweet Topic Tweet Topic

Gameplay Gameplay
Advertisement Advertisement
Public Relations Public Relations
Grassroots/Community Outreach Grassroots/Community Outreach
Activism Activism

Both accounts mostly tweeted for gameplay reasons, with @AFLW at 74% and @AFL at

80%. This resembled play-by-play content which, evidenced in the relationship graph, was

regularly the most popular content. Gameplay content, which wholly lacked any kind of

advertisement, community outreach and activism uses, revealed a significant use of both

accounts as a media source, replicating broadcast era commentary. Public relations was the

next most popular for both, though for the men’s team, public relations content

predominantly regarded players’ suspensions and management of similarly negative

concerns. For the women’s account, public relations including content that was authored by

players dictating their excitement to be a part of the competition.

It was hypothesised that the AFLW would have greater grassroots/community outreach- and

activism-related content than the AFL, and this was attributed to the relative closeness and

real recency of the AFLW to its professional establishment and its inception history as a

grassroots and activist movement for women’s representation. This was found to be true for

grassroots/community outreach content, as this largely regarded young women and girls in

AFLW feeder competitions – the grassroots AFLW movement. However, the hypothesis that
the AFLW would have greater tweet content related to activism was found to be

inconclusive. No connection was able to be made between the activist content and the

origins of the competition. However, one conclusive reason why there were more activist

tweets by the AFL account was found to be because it retweeted AFLW activist tweets. This

was the case for a retweeted controversial photograph of AFLW player Tayla Harris mid-

kick. Both accounts responded to sexist criticism by consumers targeted at the photograph

by turning it into a symbol for women’s football and women’s empowerment (Goode, 2019).
Figure 1 Social Network Visualisation of @AFL Figure 2 Social Network Analysis Visual of @AFLW

Figures 1 and 2 are visual depictions of the

social networks existing between the sample @AFL and @AFLW tweets and other users

who engaged with them. The visualisations do not obviously fit a single archetypal network,

rather, they seem to fit both the Community Cluster and Broadcast Network archetypes.

Typical of the Broadcast Network, people are clustered around outlets and pundits,

retweeting and mentioning what those sources are tweeting (Pew, 2014). However, typical of

the Community Cluster, there are multiple medium-sized groups having different

conversations. Evidently, and typical of neither structure, neither @AFL nor @AFLW have

many isolates, suggesting that most content produced by both accounts is engaged with by

many other accounts.

The most significant conclusion from these visualisations can be made from the greater

number of groups in the @AFL visualisation. This increased number reveals more topics of

conversation. @AFL’s lack of grassroots/community outreach content would reasonably

inform a hypothesis that @AFLW would have more groups, however the reality shows the

network has found more topics of conversation in one of the other.

Upon closer inspection of the @AFLW visual, there is a lot of engagement with AFLW player

Tayla Harris’ account. The conversations in that cluster do not relate to her involvement in

the aforementioned controversial photograph, rather allude to everyday chatter about seeing

her in public and excitement about watching one of her upcoming games. While the

connection isn’t surprising, the lack of content on the photo in question is.

Conclusion

This research is an introductory, though necessary step into the under researched area of

women’s professional sport. Understanding brand equity differences between successful

men’s and women’s professional leagues is one aspect of exploring what defines the

success of those women’s leagues, and potentially how that can be replicated in other

markets, for other sports. However, the studied revealed that AFL and AFLW predominantly

rely on aspects of their brand equity external to Twitter to engage consumers beyond a seat

at the game. While the AFLW’s employment of an all-woman marketing, engagement and

growth team as well as the decision to “rewrite a narrative around women,” might be

indicative of a difference in brand strategy, it did not result in a social media strategy

outcome too dissimilar from the AFL’s (Jemma Wong, 2017). It is suggested that though

their outcome may continue to be similar, the different strategies and lenses that the AFLW’s

marketing and engagement team have employed would be better analysed using more

qualitative approaches.

Critical Reflection

There is limited research on the AFL and professional sporting leagues’ social media

generally. Further, there is even less research available on women’s professional sports;

there is no common understanding for establishing a successful women’s professional

sporting league because unfortunately there are so few. While this made researching the

topic fascinating and fulfilling, it revealed how difficult it is to study the understudied. It also

showed how pressing and integral it is that further research is undertaken into women’s

professional sports, considering the barriers that women face to representation and the

difficulty that women’s professional leagues have across the world in staying financially

viable (Lobpries, 2014; McDonogh, 2011; Ring, 2015; Micelotta, 2018).

There was an initial hypothesis that women employed in marketing and leadership roles

would result in marketing strategies and outcomes defined by a female and feminist lens.

This research was not able to indicate if this was so, but it did demonstrate that the Twitter

social media marketing strategy being undertaken for AFLW was producing similar results to

the AFL’s. This was unfortunately outside the scope of this research and a more qualitative

research methodology – i.e. interviews, focus groups – is necessary to properly form an

understanding of the processes and outcomes of a feminist and female lens in sport

marketing strategy.

This research hypothesised that ownership by the same parent company would mean the

social media outcomes would show a shared brand equity. This, alongside a shared logo,

history and audience, as well as other intangible factors, contribute to form the shared brand

equity (Keller, 2009). Comparison of men’s and women’s leagues of the same sport that

aren’t owned by the same parent company could possibly be more revealing of the inequities

in women’s leagues management that cause them to be financially unviable. Studies

suggest that women’s leagues offer a promising balance between conformity and

distinctiveness, and research beyond this current study could offer more insight in this area

(Deephouse, 1999; Zhao, Fisher, Lounsbury, & Miller, 2017). One questionable hypothesis

argues women function to provide novelty to the audiences of their leagues, while defending

those leagues from male competition (Micelotta, et al., 2018). Further research into these
areas would be more useful than the current study in identifying the business models and

establishment environments of successful women’s professional sport enterprises.