Sensing a WNBA marketing scheme afloat on social media. Ethical? Effective?

[sturt]

Now maybe I just hadn't been paying attention, but goodness gracious, there sure does seem to be a whole lot more chatter on social media... twitter in particular... about WNBA games among those who I've previously followed only for their NBA comments. This seems to be a new phenomenon.

The conspiracy theorist in me has responded that it would make a lot of sense for WNBA to be paying these people with extensive followings to be pushing their version of the game.

Curiosity question number one........

Would that be unethical, in your opinion? That's not a statement wrapped in a question... rather, a legit question... to the point, if someone who otherwise is paid as a sports journalist (but not to cover WNBA) were to be offered some extra income for paying attention in social media posts to WNBA games for the home market... let's just throw a number out there and say "$50 per tweet"... would that raise any red flags for you?

Curiosity question number two.......

If you already are a WNBA fan, is it plausible that seeing extra new social media chatter could increase your interest in some ways that could be measured in dollars?

And... if you are not one, is it plausible that seeing extra new social media chatter could prod you into taking some interest after all?

 

[Gray Mule]

Atlanta's WNBA team, the Dream, play at the home of the Hawks G League team, the Skyhawks.  The capacity is much less than the Hawks home.  They have already sold out the majority of their home games.   

I don't know about the idea of spending that extra few $$$ to sports writers.  After all, they are paid already because this is what they do, cover sports.

Most WNBA players don't dunk the ball.  Dream have no tall players with four of them being 6' 4".  One team, at least, has a 6' 9" center and she can and does dunk the ball.

Should they be required to pay extra just to get their message out to the public?  Whatever works...

[Diesel]

Girl Sports...  I'm a fan. 

The WNBA has a large hill to climb.   They have to sell their brand of Basketball to people who may not like Women's basketball.   I don't think you start at the Pro level for that.   There has to be a groundswell that begins at the college level.   The problem is that the NCAA bailed on Women's basketball a long time ago.   You don't get televised games from NCAAW basketball.   No money seems to be spent on it.   

So if only the colleges are watching the women play... and not a lot.. then there's no following when they get to the pros. 

This thing that just happened in the tourney (Catlin Clark and Angel Reese) could be be Women's Basketball Magic and Bird Moment.   It's up to the NCAA and WNBA to capitalize. 

 

 

[TheNorthCydeRises]

20 hours ago, sturt said:

Now maybe I just hadn't been paying attention, but goodness gracious, there sure does seem to be a whole lot more chatter on social media... twitter in particular... about WNBA games among those who I've previously followed only for their NBA comments. This seems to be a new phenomenon.

The conspiracy theorist in me has responded that it would make a lot of sense for WNBA to be paying these people with extensive followings to be pushing their version of the game.

Curiosity question number one........

Would that be unethical, in your opinion? That's not a statement wrapped in a question... rather, a legit question... to the point, if someone who otherwise is paid as a sports journalist (but not to cover WNBA) were to be offered some extra income for paying attention in social media posts to WNBA games for the home market... let's just throw a number out there and say "$50 per tweet"... would that raise any red flags for you?

Curiosity question number two.......

If you already are a WNBA fan, is it plausible that seeing extra new social media chatter could increase your interest in some ways that could be measured in dollars?

And... if you are not one, is it plausible that seeing extra new social media chatter could prod you into taking some interest after all?

 

 

I'm a fan of the league.  Arguably a big fan of the league.  I'm personally fine with any way they want to market themselves. If they want to pay or give special perks to a journalist, or to an athlete in another sport, or a celebrity, I see no problem in that.

Social media is the true key to growing the league.  You want your product to go viral and use the personalities around the league to hype the league up.  What's happening in the women's NCAA college game is the blueprint for the WNBA to really grow. 

The thing about the WNBA, is that they need a dynamic face of the league that hardcore and casual fans like. And it wouldn't hurt one bit if she were either extremely attractive, or had a personality that everyone loves.  Or both.

You have very good basketball players in that league.  A'ja Wilson ( league MVP last year ) is the closest thing to being the dynamic personality in the league that is marketable.  She has commercials.  She does great interviews.  She just hasn't taken off as the face of the league that casual fans latch onto.  She is trying though.

 

 

This was her post game interview yesterday. I've never seen her come into a post game interview in shades and a strapless top.  The pic below shows off her championship ring they got yesterday.

 

 

 

But as Diesel pointed out, the increased chatter about the WNBA this year, came from these two women in college. 

Caitlin Clark, because she plays a style of game that we've only seen Steph Curry play. And even she does it to an extreme that even he doesn't do at times.  Her shooting the past 2 seasons has been ridiculous.  Caitlin is actually a lot more like Trae, seeing that she's also a high assist player.  The distance she's shooting the 3 from has never been seen in Women's basketball on any level.

 

 

And Angel Reese, not only because she has a high level game on the court, but also because she's the MASTER of social media.  She plays hard on both ends of the court. She trash talks to the extreme. And because of her good looks, she's a social media "thirst trap" with anything she posts, which is mainly playful and fun dance clips.  This makes Angel EXTREMELY marketable for herself, and any league she's attached to.

 

 

From a marketing standpoint, SHE is the ONE. The WNBA, unfairly, is a league that is perceived to have a lot of unattractive lesbians that populate the league. This is a supposed turn-off for some mens basketball fans. Angel shatters that, with her playful nature off the court, while also showing her femininity at all levels.

The kicker is this though about Angel:

 

 

She's not in the NBA.  She's technically a college Junior ( by eligibility ), and she's only 20 years old.

This type of NIL money is 6x the salary of the top WNBA players, who at the top end make from $225K - $250K.  Angel is the one that can absolutely bring in more corporate money and a lot more eyes to the WNBA.  They don't have an Angel Reese in the WNBA right now.  They NEED her in that league.

 

Finally, the last thing the league needs to do, is expand.  The WNBA only has 12 teams and 144 roster spots at the max. Some teams don't even carry the full 12 players, to save extra payroll cash.  But the league is very hard to make for a rookie.

In my opinion, the league needs 4 teams minimum to get some more young players in the league.  Young players that know how to use social media to their, and the league's advantage.  Corporate sponsors seem to be a little more on board with supporting the league, as well as an increased number of games on TV.

Expand the league, keep some of the younger players that know how to market themselves, get a high profile owner( preferably a NBA former player ), and continue to increase the salary of players, and the league will grow.