The Traditional Approach to Social Media is Over

Discover the measurement shift that changes everything.

You spend four weeks posting.

Then you spend hours producing a report that, let’s be honest, basically tells you nothing.

However, it looks good, the percentage changes are mostly green, you shared it internally, and someone dropped a “nice work” in the chat.

But then, in the reporting call, the client asks:

“Why did the content this month outperform last month?”

And for a second, the room goes quiet.

Then, someone jumps in to intuitively explain the context behind the top-performing posts and why the “algorithm” pushed them over others.

Nobody can explain what technically caused one post to outperform another.

Because the traditional approach to social media is outdated.

Most social teams follow the same default practice:

1. Write a monthly content calendar.

2. Schedule posts throughout the month.

3. Pull up the reporting tool at the month’s end.

4. Report whether likes, impressions, and followers went up or down.

5. Highlight the “top posts.”

6. Recommend “do more of what worked.”

7. If results are worse, blame the “algorithm.”

8. Repeat.

   
   

And that used to be good enough.

But the digital landscape has changed:

• Over 90% of businesses now use social media

• Over 70% of B2B companies use at least one platform

• Canva grew from 60 to 220 million monthly active users between 2021 and 2024

• 96% of social media professionals now use AI for content tasks

• Marketers using AI publish 42% more content per month than those who do not

That is why a more technical approach to social media is needed.

This isn’t a new problem.

David Ogilvy once said:

“What is the reason for this failure to codify experience? Is it that any kind of scientific method is beyond the grasp of ‘creative’ people? Are they afraid that knowledge would impose some discipline on their work?”

Replace “advertising” with “social media”, and the questions are still valid.

Social media has produced:

• Billions of posts

• Over a decade’s worth of data

• Millions of reporting cycles

  
  

And yet…

Most teams still rely on:

• Intuition

• Chasing trends

• Copying competitors

• Hoping for the best

  
  

Now, to be clear…

None of this is your fault.

Most reporting tools only show you:

• What happened

• Whether the numbers went up or down

• A handful of top-performing posts

  
  

They don’t explain why the results happened.

So very few people measure the impact of:

• The topic of each post

• The number of characters in the caption

• All the visual elements within an image

• The posting gap since the last post

• The sequence of posts leading up to it

• Whether their audience even cognitively noticed the post in the first place

In this gap between what is measured and what is not, so much value is lost.

That’s why if you compare your results year on year, stabilising for page growth, and there is no difference in performance, then the quality of your content has not improved.

You’ve just gotten bigger.

That is the illusion of progress.

So how do you break free from this illusion?

Strategically label your content across three overarching dimensions:

• Content = What it looks like and what it is about.

• Text = How the caption is written and structured.

• Time = When it was posted and what came before it.

  
  

That will take a traditional report from:

“Thursday’s post got 300 likes.”

To something more technical and specific:

“Our post got 300 likes because:

• We posted at 14:30 on a Thursday (your optimum time)

• It was a Thought Leadership piece (your top-performing content pillar)

• Focusing on a photo of a specific team member (content with people performs better)

• With a question-led headline under 80 words (strong hook, optimal reading length)

• Posted two days after a supporting Case Study (your optimal posting sequence)”

  
  

The traditional report gives you a number with no substance.

A technical approach provides a combination of variables you can reliably test against.

Why be lucky when you can be consistent?

Ogilvy also said:

“A blind pig can sometimes find truffles, but it helps to know that they are found in oak forests.”

That is the difference between a traditional and a technical approach.

A traditional intuition-led post will occasionally go viral.

But without labelling, you have no idea why it happened, no way to make it happen again, and you have to start from scratch again next month

Labelling tells you where the oak forests are.

So, what if you could take another path?

Over the next few months, I’m going to break down how to label intelligent content and deeply understand how your individual audience actually behaves.

The goal is to identify the variables unique to your audience that will compound results over time.

Here is what we will cover:

• The Real Reason People Don’t See Your Social Media Posts (And the one cognitive insight that gets you seen).

• The Two Main Types of Attention (And why you’re designing for the wrong one).

• The Vanity Trap (And why short-term thinking kills organic growth).

• The Ripple Effect (How every post impacts the next).

• The Three Dimensions Framework (The core foundations of organic social being a predictive science).

• The Power of Moving Beyond the Dashboard (And the magic labelled data).

  
  

Labelling your content is only part of the puzzle.

Because even when you think you’ve labelled all the variables right, the human on the other end of their phone viewing your content might look directly at it and never consciously see it.

Understanding the psychology behind why that happens changes everything about how you design, label and engineer your content.

If we are not deliberately designing for human behaviour, then we are not strategists.

- Mike

---

PS. In the next article, I’ll share:

The Real Reason People Don’t See Your Social Media Posts (And the one cognitive insight that gets you seen).