I hadn’t planned on using today's Lightbulb deconstructing a silly April Fool’s email, but you might find it interesting that I got two completely different reactions to yesterday’s faux “Lights Out” announcement.

From folks on this list, I got a bunch of replies like:

• “I panicked!”
• “You scared me for a second.”
• “Thank god it’s April 1!”

All in all, you got the joke.

Later in the day, I cross-posted it to LinkedIn, where 10x as many people saw it, easily my best performing post this year.

But…the first several comments were along the lines of compassion, condolence, or even concern:

• “Wishing you the best!”
• “Do what’s best for you”
• One former classmate reached out privately to express deep concern that a “fan” would violate my physical space

Until I explicitly clarified in the comments that it was, in fact, a joke, I’d say most people didn’t get it.

Now, I won’t read too much into it.

The post, after all, was written in jest with the intent to deceive.

And the format restrictions on LinkedIn posts limit narrative/comedic tension.

And of course, most people probably skimmed the first couple lines, and gave it a like or support emoji based on a passing glance — I do that myself probably more than I realize.

But I think it’s worth calling out the difference.

From the email list, a relatively small, low-tech, owned channel, Lightbulbers like you took the time to read the whole thing, and had the benefit of shared context built over time that helped the message land.

From LinkedIn, a high-reach, full bells-and-whistles, social media & marketing platform, followers saw the exact same piece of content, interacted with it in a distant way, and the message crumbled.

Is anyone else noticing the parallel here…?

Smaller audience, deeper connection, higher resonance…

Yup, selecting a marketing channel is like niching.

Narrow your aim, and you’re set up well to nail your message.

Spray wide, and your message will struggle to resonate.

It might even mislead.

💡

-Wes