The Role of Museums in the Process of Creating a Brand City: The Case of Ankara

Öz

It is crucial to evaluate the usage practices of social networks in sustaining the urban brand. In this study, we discussed how museums as social memory spaces are subject to social media posts. The study is noteworthy because it gives an opinion about social media posts of museum visitors and determines the approach to museums in the formation of an urban brand. Accordingly, we examined the Instagram posts of social media users related to museums in Ankara via content analysis. We found that the posts shared were mainly photos. Museums were the greatest data source for the corporate Instagram accounts according to sharing frequency and they were all foundation and private museums. Examining the purposes of sharing, we determined a multidirectional social media use in the dimensions of communication via announcement, publicity and informing. Analysing the use of hashtags related to museums in the process of creating a brand city revealed that museums highlighted themselves, their activities and the city where they are located. The experience of visiting the museum creates the opinion that there is an impression of the brand value of the city where the museum is located. As a result of the study, we found that it is necessary to organize a campaign based on a specific motto to be shared by corporate accounts of museums, personal accounts of visitors, and Instagram content creators to strengthen the positioning of Ankara museums related to the city.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Brand City
• Instagram
• Ankara
• Museum
• Hashtag

Marka Şehir Yaratma Sürecinde Müzelerin Rolü: Ankara Örneği

Öz

Bu çalışma kapsamında toplumsal bellek mekânları olarak müzelerin sosyal ağ paylaşımlarına konu olma durumu ele alınmıştır. Çalışma, müze ziyaretçilerinin sosyal ağ paylaşımları hakkında fikir vermesi kent markasının oluşmasında müzelere yönelik yaklaşımı tespit etmesi ve bu sosyal, kültürel varlıkların marka kent yaratmasına katkı sağlaması noktasında önemlidir. Bu doğrultuda sosyal ağ kullanıcılarının Ankara’da yer alan müzeler ile ilgili Instagram paylaşımları içerik analizi tekniği ile incelenmiştir. Araştırma sonucunda paylaşım görsellerinin fotoğraf ağırlıklı olduğu; müzelerin kurumsal Instagram hesaplarının paylaşım sıklığına göre toplanan verinin en büyük kaynağı olduğu; bu müzelerin tümünün vakıf ve özel müze statüsünde olduğu anlaşılmıştır. Paylaşılan postlara bakıldığında hem tanıtım hem de bilgi vermek amacıyla çok yönlü bir sosyal medya kullanımı tespit edilmiştir. Marka kent yaratma sürecinde müzelerle ilgili olarak hashtag kullanımlarının incelenmesi ise müzelerin kendilerini, etkinliklerini ve müzenin bulunduğu kenti ön plana çıkardığını ortaya koymuştur. Müze gezme deneyimi, aynı zamanda müzenin bulunduğu kentin marka değerine yönelik de bir izlenim yaratmaktadır. Çalışma sonucunda, Ankara müzelerinin kent ile ilişkili bir şekilde konumlandırılmasını güçlendirmek amacıyla, müzelerin kurumsal hesapları, ziyaretçilerin kişisel hesapları ve Instagram içerik üreticilerinin Instagram hesaplarından paylaşılacak belirli bir motto odaklı kampanya yapılmasının gerektiği anlaşılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Marka kent
• Instagram
• Ankara
• Müze
• Hashtag

Kaynakça

1. Baltacı, A. (2017). Nitel veri analizinde Miles-Huberman modeli. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 3(1), 1-14.
2. Brand Finance. (2019). Turkey metropol 30. Brandirectory. Retrieved November 22, 2021 from https:// brandirectory.com/download-report/Turkish%20Cities%2030.pdf
3. Bruce, C. (2006). Spectacle and democracy: Experience music project as a post‐museum. New Museum Theory and Practice: An Introduction, 8(2), 129-151. https://doi.org/10.30519/ahtr.693400
4. Budge, K. (2018). Encountering people and place: Museums through the lens of Instagram. Australasian Journal of Popular Culture, 7(1), 107–121. https://doi.org/10.1386/ajpc.7.1.107_1
5. Budge, K., & Burness, A. (2018). Museum objects and Instagram: Agency and communication in digital engagement. Continuum, 32(2), 137-150. https://doi.org/10.1080/10304.312.2017.1337079
6. Capriotti, P., & Kuklinski, H. P. (2012). Assessing dialogic communication through the internet in Spanish museums. Public Relations Review, 38(4), 619–626. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2012.05.005
7. Carah, N. (2014). Curators of databases: Circulating images, managing attention and making value on social media. Media International Australia, 150, 137–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/1329878X141.500.0125
8. Demographia. (2021). Demographia world urban areas. Retrieved November 24, 2021 from http://www. demographia.com/db-worldua.pdf

9. Di Pietro, L., Guglielmetti Mugion, R., Renzi, M. F., & Toni, M. (2014). An audience-centric approach for museums sustainability. Sustainability, 6(9), 5745-5762. https://doi.org/10.3390/su6095745
10. Evans, G. (2003). Hard‐branding the cultural city–from Prado to Prada. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 27(2), 417-440. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.00455
11. Facebook (2022). Instagram Data Policy. Retrieved January 2, 2022 from https://www.facebook.com/help/ instagram/155.833.707900388
12. Fernandez-Lores, S., Crespo-Tejero, N., & Fernández-Hernández, R. (2022). Driving traffic to the museum: The role of the digital communication tools. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 174(1), 1-8. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121273
13. Florek, M., & Kavaratzis, M. (2014). From brand equity to place brand equity and from there to the place brand. Place Brand Public Diplomacy, 10, 103–107. https://doi.org/10.1057/pb.2014.9
14. Gelles, A. (2017). Putting the social in social media: Interactive new media for museums. The museum review. Retrieved September 16, 2021 from http://articles.themuseumreview.org/tmr_vol2no1_gelles.
15. Giritlioğlu, D. (2021). Zorlu dönemde yüzde 32 azaldı. Hürriyet. Retrieved November 20, 2021 from https:// www.hurriyet.com.tr/yerel-haberler/ankara/zorlu-donemde-yuzde-32-azaldi-41754363
16. Govers, R. (2015). Rethinking virtual and online place branding. In Kavaratzis M., Warnaby G., & Ashworth G. (Eds.), Rethinking place branding (pp. 73-83). Springer, Cham.
17. Hanna, S. A., & Rowley, J. (2015). Rethinking strategic place branding in the digital age. In M. Kavaratzis, G. Warnaby, & G. J. Ashworth (Eds.), Rethinking place branding (pp. 85-100). Springer, Cham.
18. Henninger, C. E., Foster, C., Alevizou, P. J., & Frohlich, C. (2016). Stakeholder engagement in the city branding process. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 12, 285-298. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41254.016.0002-1
19. Holdgaard, N., & Klastrup, L. (2014). Between control and creativity: Challenging co-creation and social media use in a museum context. Digital Creativity, 25(3), 190–202. https://doi.org/10.1080/14626.268.2014.9 04364
20. Huang, C., Oh, K., Zhang, Q., & Cho, Y.-J. (2013). Understanding the city brand in the regional tourism market among college students. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 30(7), 662-671. https://doi.org/10.1080 /10548.408.2013.827544
21. ICOM (2019, 25 July). ICOM announces the alternative museum definition that will be subject to a vote. Retrieved October 25, 2021 from https://icom.museum/en/news/icom-announcesthealternative-museum- definition-that-will-be-subject-to-a-vote/.
22. Jarreau, P. B., Dahmen, N. S., & Jones, E. (2019). Instagram and the science museum: A missed opportunity for public engagement. Journal of Science Communication, 18(2), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.22323/2.18020206
23. Jun, J. W. (2019). Impacts of novelty of North Korean cheerleaders and olympic engagement on olympic and pyeongchang attitudes: A focus on perspectives from Korean college students. Information Society and Media, (20), 175–195. https://doi.org/10.52558/ISM.2019.08.20.2.175
24. Karadeniz, C. (2017). Müze ve toplum: Müzeyle topluma ulaşmak. Itobiad: Journal of The Human & Social Science Researches, 6(8), 19-37.
25. Kavaratzis, M. (2004). From city marketing to city branding: Towards a theoretical framework for developing city brands. Place Branding, 1(1), 58-73. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.pb.5990005
26. Kavaratzis, M., & Ashworth, G. J. (2006). Changing the tide: The campaign to re-brand Amsterdam. Core. Retrieved March 5, 2023 from https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/7040122.pdf
27. Kelly, L. (2009). Proceedings of the impact of social media on museum practice. The National Palace Museum. https://media.australian.museum/media/dd/Uploads/Documents/9307/impact+of+social+media+on+museum+practice.8b9c706.pdf
28. Koke, J., & Ryan, K. (2017). From consultation to collaboration. In P. Villeneuve, & A. R. Love (Eds.), Visitorcentered exhibitions and edu-curation in art museums (pp. 47–55). Rowman & Littlefield.
29. Köker, N. E., Maden, D., & Göztaş, A. (2013). Contribution of international fairs in city branding: The case of Izmir, Turkey. European Journal of Tourism, Hospitality and Recreation, 4(2), 49-69.
30. Manna, R., & Palumbo, R. (2018). What makes a museum attractive to young people? Evidence from Italy. International Journal of Tourism Research, 20(4), 508-517. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.2200
31. Lazaridou, K., Vrana, V., & Paschaloudis, D. (2017). Museums ve Instagram. In V. Katsoni, A. Upadhya, & A. Stratigea (Eds.), Tourism, culture and heritage in a smart economy (pp. 73–84). Springer.
32. Lee, J., & Xu, W. W. (2018). The more attacks, the more retweets: Trump’s and Clinton’s agenda setting on Twitter. Public Relations Review, 44(2), 201-213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2017.10.002
33. Merrilees, B., Miller, D., & Herington, C. (2012). Multiple stakeholders and multiple city brand meanings. European Journal of Marketing, 46(7/8), 1032-1047. http://doi.org/10.1108/030.905.61211230188 Museuminstaswap. (2021). Retrieved March 5, 2023 from https://www.museuminstaswap.org/
34. Newman, M. Z. (2014). Video revolutions. Columbia University Press.
35. Peker, A. E. (2006). Kentin markalaşma sürecinde çağdaş sanat müzelerinin rolü: Kent markalaşması ve küresel landmark [Unpublished master’s thesis]. İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
36. Phan, K. & Melissa, M. (2018). How Instagram is changing the art world. Sccur. Retrieved January 4, 2022 from https://www.sccur.org/sccur/FALL_ 2018_CONFERENCE/SOC_SCI_POSTERS/82/
37. Rauschnabel, P.A., Sheldon, P., & Herzfeldt, E. (2019). What motivates users to hashtag on social media? Psychology & Marketing, 36(5), 473–488. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21191
38. Rhee, B. A., Pianzola, F., & Choi, G. T. (2021). Analyzing the museum experience through the lens of Instagram posts. Curator: The Museum Journal, 64(3), 529-547. https://doi.org/10.1111/cura.12414
39. Russo, A., Watkins, J., & Groundwater-Smith, S. (2009). The impact of social media on informal learning in museums. Educational Media International, 46(2), 153–166. https://doi.org/10.1080/095.239.80902933532
40. Sokolowsky, J. (2017) Art in the Instagram age: How social media is shaping art and how you experience it. The Seattle times. Retrieved November 29, 2021 from https://www.seattletimes.com/entertainment/visual-arts/art-in-the-instagram-age-how-social-media-is-shaping-art-and-how-you-experience-it/
41. Sousa, B. B., & Magalhães, F. C. (2019). An approach on attachment in public marketing and higher education management contexts. In C. Machado & J. Davim (Eds.), Higher education and the evolution of management, applied sciences, and engineering curricula (pp. 151–171). IGI Global.
42. Soydaş, N., & Üstünbaş, B. (2020). Kent kimliğinin yansıtılmasında müzelerin kentsel iletişim bağlamında değerlendirilmesi. Akdeniz Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Dergisi, 34, 377-398. https://doi.org/10.31123/akil.780956
43. Stylianou-Lambert, T. (2017). Photographing in the art museum: Visitor attitudes and motivations. Visitor Studies, 20(2), 114–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/10645.578.2017.1404345
44. Suess, A. (2014). Art gallery visitors and Instagram. Academia. Retrieved October 28, 2021 from https://www. academia.edu/12086365/Art_Gallery_Visitors_and_Instagram
45. Sütçü, C. S., & Aytekin, Ç. (2013, June). Sosyal medyada twitter konuşma diline ilişkin bir araştırma: Ortak hashtag kullanımı ile kullanıcı profili arasındaki ilişki. International Symposium on Language and Communication: Exploring Novelties Proceeding Book, 17(19), 1863-1876.
46. Uşaklı, A., & Ş. Baloğlu (2011). Brand personality of tourism destinations: An application of self-congruity theory. Tourism Management, 32(1), 114-127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2010.06.006
47. Villaespesa, E. (2013). Diving into the museum’s social media stream. Analysis of the visitor experience in 140 characters. Museums and the web 2013. Retrieved from 19 October, 2021 from https://mw2013. museumsandtheweb.com/paper/diving-into-themuseums-social-media-stream/
48. Villaespesa, E., & Wowkowych, S. (2020). Ephemeral storytelling with social media: Snapchat and Instagram stories at the Brooklyn Museum. Social Media+Society, 6(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1177/205.630.5119898776
49. Yaşar, B. E. (2013). Kent ve bölge markalaşması. Kuzeydoğu Anadolu Kalkınma Ajansı. https://kudaka.ka.gov.tr/ assets/upload/dosyalar/c6b76-kent_ve_bolge_markalasmasi.pdf
50. Zenker, S. (2011). How to catch a city? The concept and measurement of place brands. Journal of Place Management and Development, 4(1), 40–52. https://doi.org/10.1108/175.383.31111117151
51. Zhao, F., Zhu, Y., Jin, H., & Yang, L. T. (2016). A personalized hashtag recommendation approach using LDA- based topic model in microblog environment. Future Generation Computer Systems, 65, 196-206. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2015.10.012
52. Zingone, M. (2019). Instagram as digital communication tool for the museums: A reflection on prospectives and opportunities through the analysis of the profiles of louvre museum and metropolitan museum of New York. European Journal of Social Science Education and Research, 6(3), 53–63. https://doi.org/10.26417