Jason Falls
- Image by LU5H.bunny via Flickr
Advertising agencies around the country are trying to figure out social media. How do we do it? How do we sell it? Do we have to?
The answer is probably yes, you do have to if you want to continue to offer a full range of marketing services to your clients, and bill appropriately. Some agencies are doing a good job adjusting, hiring smart social media thinkers and getting smart about social media quickly. Others are still cocking their head sideways like a puppy trying to figure out a vacuum cleaner.
Sadly, many ad agencies never figured out Interactive, let’s call it Web 1.0. Now you add a layer of Web 2.0 or social media on top of that and many agencies and their respective creatives (art directors, copywriters, designers) and clients services folks are rendered dumb struck at the thought of all things digital.
Their problem is that there exists a culture clash between ad agencies and social media marketing. The difficulty is the result of both philosophical and tactical problems. The good news is problems can be solved. But it will take some work.
The Philosophical Problems
Social media is, in many ways, the antithesis of advertising. Advertising is one-way communications aimed at large groups of consumers. Social media is two-way communications that requires listening as well as speaking. It can also be said that social media is a multiple-way communications method as brands can speak and listen, but also watch other consumers talk to each other. An agency’s creatives and strategic planners suddenly having to factor in listening and observing to their communications process after decades of just shouting from the roof tops presents a seismic culture shift.
Social media is also about building relationships. Advertising is about driving people to a buying decision. In fact, I would propose that in most cases, advertising has nothing to do with a relationship. It’s all about persuading someone to take action, not discussing the decision-making process and becoming a trusted resource for the person choosing. As Chris Heuer says, good marketing today doesn’t try to sell the customer on something. It tries to help them buy it.
Similarly, it can be said that the essence of social media, in many ways, is good customer service. I would propose that, with exceptions certainly, advertising agencies have never cared about serving the customer. They care about making the sale. Advertising is most often used to drive customers to purchase, not care for them after the fact.
So, philosophically, advertising and social media are very different. Creatives, client services folks, account planners and the like are being asked to undertake a new method of communications that runs counter to everything they’ve ever been taught.
The Tactical Problems
Peel off a layer or two in the social media and advertising comparison and you start to see some of the real reasons ad agencies struggle with social media. Please note that I offer these opinions as generalizations but not as blanket statements. There are lots of creatives, planners and the like out there who understand the social and digital worlds. While I’m sure I may furl a brow or two with this, I’m applying general truths I’ve seen through experience working for and with and asking questions about several advertising agencies over the last few years.
First, advertising creatives are taught and still primarily focus on TV, print and outdoor advertising. Despite the media trends, art schools either aren’t pushing students hard enough toward web-centric, or even web-inclusive, work; or many of today’s creatives are lost in filling their “book,” not realizing digital is the type of compelling art agencies are in desperate need of.
Also, art directors and designers are often focused on the art, not the experience. User experience, whether tactile and off-line or virtual and on-, creates compelling engagement with consumers. Art often times is just pretty.
Interactive or digital (website and application development and programming) professionals typically come from technology backgrounds driven by code and algorithms. They’ve got the function down pat but lack the creative side, or form, to produce effective work.
To make matters worse, creative teams of art directors and copywriters are sent to brainstorm and create campaign elements but Interactive folks aren’t invited to the creative process. The creatives don’t come up with compelling interactive because the web is an afterthought. The interactive folks don’t come up with compelling interactive because they aren’t trained as creatives or they were excluded from the conceptual development process altogether.
Client services and account planning isn’t taught to think web first and often just assumes someone in the interactive department will handle guiding those decisions. The creatives think someone in the interactive department will do it, too. The interactive department is under the impression the creatives are developing the concepts and wait to be told what to build. The ball gets dropped and interactive ideas are added to the concept at the last minute with little to know strategic tie to the overall concept.
Don’t you find it strangely ironic that while most people in the typical advertising agency these days know little about digital and interactive, not to mention social media, that every advertising execution contains one consistent feature besides the logo: The website address?
Another tactical problem is that social media revolves around content creation. Not only are ad agencies not capable or prepared to create the volume and type of content required to populate blogs, Facebook pages, Twitter, YouTube and more, but social media content must be nimble, quick, conversational and responsive. What little advertising content is produced has to be run through proofing 47 times before it sees the light of day.
Providing content for clients is also antithetical to the philosophical tenants of social media. If I’m engaging in a conversation about a product as a consumer, who is a more trustworthy person to engage with, the brand manager for the product or some account guy at the ad agency that represents the product? The client is always more qualified to be the person or persons engaging with consumers about the brand.
Content creation also doesn’t scale well and is problematic for billing. Let’s say you have 20 brands producing social media content and you hire two people to produce that content. Depending upon the brand, audience and strategy, if they’re doing a good job, they’re producing an average of a blog post, Facebook content, several Tweets and perhaps video, images or some other type of content for each client every day. Can you write 10 blog posts in a day?
And how about this billing scenario: Let’s say a full-time agency employee producing content for a client is working 10 hours per week on that client’s social media efforts. They’re billed out at roughly $75 per hour. At that rate, which is conservative in price and volume, you’re billing $36,000 per year for their services as an agency. At the same time, you can go out and pay free-lance bloggers $25 per post (and that’s on the high end in most circumstances) and produce a similar volume of content for $6,500 per year (a blog post per day, five days per week, which is an aggressive clip for many agencies). How will you answer your client when they call you with a big, “WTF?”
These are the major challenges that face advertising agencies as they transition to owning and embracing social media. There are others.
Solutions
Solving the problems does take time and resources. Education is going to play a major role. In order to expedite the list and open the comments for building blocks to add to these ideas, here is a brief list of what agencies can do to integrate social media into their service offerings and disciplines:
- Embrace client websites as an opportunity to engage and build relationships with customers
- Make content portable so customers can consume it where they choose, even on mobile platforms
- Prioritize search engine optimization. People start their web interactions with search the vast majority of the time.
- Learn that well-done search advertising and email marketing campaigns have conversion rates that dwarf those of your ROI numbers on billboards and TV spots.
- Use social media tools internally to collaborate on projects.
- Use those same tools to collaborate with your clients, extending the educational experience to them.
- Read industry blogs.
- Bring in social media consultants and educators to teach everyone, not just your interactive department, how social media can improve their productivity and outputs.
- Incorporate social and interactive experience into the hiring requirements for client services and creatives.
- Watch what other brands are doing on the social web.
- Embrace the enthusiasm of your resident social media advocates by having them teach you social while you teach them strategic thinking.
- Understand that mass media still has better reach but use that reach to build communities around your brands, driving consumers to brand engagement points through social media.
Now it’s your turn. What else can advertising agencies do to turn the corner on social media expertise? The comments are yours.
Related articles by Zemanta
- The Dangers of Social Media for Ad Agencies? (socialmediatoday.com)
- Social Media for the advertising set (anishvshah.com)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=9bb43dba-d2c1-4abc-8725-b9cd5288fd89)
Leave Comment Below | Subscribe To This Blog | Sign Up For Our Newsletter |
{ 28 trackbacks }
{ 137 comments… read them below or add one }
← Previous Comments
Well said, Michael. Thank you for that, particularly for the Cone quote. Hadn't heard that one before.
Nice creativity one of the best thinking of mine so this is very nice one,Its one of the great post which having lots of information,I like the clarity of presentation no doubt its easy to understand for the newbies.Thanks for the great post,keep up post continue…………………………:)
First time I have seen your blog and what a great post that was!Remember the saying “Genius is 99% perspiration and 1% inspirationâ€So once you have a great idea you have to work hard to turn it into a viable product that doesn’t just exist in your head.
Great post one of the nice information which is one social media ripoff,it helps me a lot.I like the nice presentation.Keep up the innovative one and post cont……:)
Hi! nice post and its one of the creative and informative which I really appreciate,so keep post cont…and thanks.
Hi! Very efficient one and one of the likable blog which helps me a lot.Keep up the nice one and social media takes a major role for business,really nice thinking and one of the great post.Keep blogging.
Hi! Internet makes the business simple its true and I just want to tell you that this blog helps to make my business easier one so keep up post continue and stay tune with us.Thanks a lot.
Great, thought-provoking post, Jason. One point is missing however and it gets to what Mark was saying – the “agency” landscape has truly changed if you look further down than simply the mega-conglomerate agencies. Most small to medium-sized firms fall into two camps – specialized (e.g. interactive, design, PR, etc.) or are integrated (not simply advertising). And more and more, to really serve clients, agencies must be more integrated and not simply focus on communications, but focus on their client's business.
The point about brand managers vs agencies is compelling, but in the end, true brand leaders don't hand over the reigns of their brand to their agency or anyone else for that matter. Brand leaders manage their brand throughout the entire organization, throughout all functional areas and involve employees at all levels. And, if they don't, then they will fail to deliver on their brand.
You say in your post that social media is two-way communication and that's what the premise of PR is all about. While social media is the hot, sexy thing on the block today, the reality is that it's another set of tools in the communications tool box. Are all agencies prepared to use these tools effectively and charge clients appropriately? Probably not…today. But they will have to in order to survive. It's definitely a shift in business strategy and operations and has significant implications on staffing, billing and measuring to be sure.
Thanks for the great post and conversation.
@KimBrater
Even though the two are extremely different I too can see a correlation. One important strategy as well as those you have mentioned for establishing effective billing for social media may be to first calculate customer profitability through methods such as activity based costing and activity based management. Once each customers needs are determined, social media costs can be allocated appropriately including any SEO charges or design and development charges. In order to implement these costing methods, teams should be formed that include members from each department that way every aspect of the services offered can be analyzed accurately and justified.
-Greg Mesaros, CEO eWinWin
A mere online presence won’t serve the purpose of reaching out and impressing your target audience, to beat the competition you need a well designed website with a good search rank and for that you need help of companies which provide complete solutions in http://www.vsworld.com/?loadSwf=swf/webDevelopm... website designing and development and http://www.vsworld.com/?loadSwf=swf/seo_sem.swf search engine optimization.
Now_a_days social media construct the business and this is one of the excellent post which is very informative as well as effective one which having useful business tips for the marketers for the newbies its very benefited one.So keep up blogging continue and stay tune with us.Thanks a lot.:)
I am very much impressed by the way u have mentioned about problems and solutions.Its really fantastic….Thanks.Looking forward to reading more from you!
Great post, very thought provoking. You made some valid points. But, while social media has taken our marketing world by storm, I do not think that traditional marketing should be overlooked. I think that social media is just another avenue companies can use to “create the buzz” and about their brand or business. Like you said, social media facilitates conversation whereas traditional marketing calls people to action and helps to build the brand and get recognized. Both are vital to an effective marketing campaign.
No argument here. Thanks for the thoughts.
This post is well written.I am interested very much in the subject matter of your blog.It's very well written.It's my first visit.And I really like this post.thanks for the information sharing with us.Keep blogging.
Jason,
I promised I would comment…and although about 30 days later than I wanted, I finally am here.
As you might recall, I said I disagreed with this post and said I'd stop by to explain why. I find it bothersome and a bit worrisome when bloggers like you and me (and I am certainly guilty of doing it a time or two as well) make sweeping commentary about an entire group of people or industry. This post implies that you find it hard to imagine that agencies could ever “get” social media. And yet…that's exactly where you were when you cut your social media teeth. At an agency.
I can't imagine there is an agency alive today that isn't trying to wrap their arms around social media. They may still be clumsy about it or trying to figure out how to modify their business model so that they can do what their clients need and get paid for it…but they aren't ignoring the truth. Social media is here to stay.
I think there are plenty of agencies, especially those small enough to be nimble — like Spike Jones' Brains on Fire that are all over it. And doing a helluva job.
Smart agencies recognize that doing all the work inside has never been the right strategy for most clients. Whether it is teaching the clients how to fish (do it themselves), managing a squad of freelancers who help with content creation, or finding some other hybrid solution — this is hardly new to most agencies. My agency hasn't had a video camera guy, a video editor, a photographer, a printer, etc, etc. on staff since we started 14 years ago. We are used to strategic partnerships being part of how we get things done for clients.
Overall…I guess I disagree with the post because it condemns the whole, rather than recognizing that all of us, agencies, consultants, clients, companies and individuals — have plenty to figure out when it comes to social media…and here are some tactics to doing just that.
After all — you are proof positive that agency folks can and do get it. You did and do.
Thanks Drew. Certainly generalizations are dangerous but I think the
point I had hoped to get across was missed a bit. The post wasn't
meant to condemn agencies but to point out the reasons many are
struggling with social media understanding in hopes it can help them
get better.
It certainly seems to have struck a cord. For each peron who thinks I
was taking shots at agencies there are 10 who thank me for the roadmap
to the sore spots.
Thanks for the comment.
It is really a great way to look at it from a big media company perspective, all media services offering companies get benefits from posting like it, so don't be delay just keep it up and enjoy the each moments…
This post is well written.I am interested very much in the subject matter of your blog, it’s my first visit.First time I have seen your blog and what a great post that was!Remember the saying “Genius is 99% perspiration and 1% inspirationâ€So once you have a great idea you have to work hard to turn it into a viable product that doesn’t just exist in your head.I Like your site very well and continue to do so.
I think that after reading some of the things I have that advertisements are for the good and the bad. Although people may see advertisements as a way to get a good deal, many do not look into how much thought was put into making the buyer think they are getting a good deal. I just read an article about the ads that come out on Thanksgiving all about Black Friday.
This day is known all around the world and it is a way for the producers to make as much money as they can. They mark things down as far as they possibly can and hope that the buyers will give in and purchase them. Producers put a lot of consideration in what they want to mark down and when they want to mark it down. If it weren't for advertisements people would not cause as big of deals about sales as they do. They see the advertisements as a way to take advantage of a good deal.
In another I read it was stated that advertising is key for a business to work. The economy is not as stable as it once was and one of the articles dealt with advertising companies and staying close to the people they produce for. If they stop offering good deals and don’t make advertisements they will begin to lose their buyers. After the economy has dropped so much I think it is good for the companies to stay close to their people.
Although in these articles they do not give advertising a bad name all together they do suggest that people would save money if it were for advertisements. People see a few dollars off as a steal rather than it staying the normal price and buying it for that. I think advertisement is out to get the buyer, but we will never stop buying or looking for the deals.
Thanks for the input, Lisa. Interesting thoughts.
We are professional brand shoes, Gucci Handbags, Gucci Shoes and satisfied customers always come first. We have huge quantity of Gucci Purses, Gucci Belts, Gucci Loafers and Gucci Sneakers for sale! You can find the exact gucci whether Gucci Men's Shoes or Gucci Women's Shoes you want at a price that's right for you.Moreover,we have the best quality Louis Vuitton Shoes on sale including Men's Shoes,
We are professional brand shoes, Gucci Handbags, Gucci Shoes and satisfied customers always come first. We have huge quantity of Gucci Purses, Gucci Belts, Gucci Loafers and Gucci Sneakers for sale! You can find the exact gucci whether Gucci Men's Shoes or Gucci Women's Shoes you want at a price that's right for you.Moreover,We provide the best service and fast shipping to customers all over the world.
High distinctive and exquisite quality Gucci Products like Gucci Handbags, Gucci Shoes and satisfied customers always come first. We have huge quantity of Gucci Purses, Gucci Belts, Gucci Loafers and Gucci Sneakers for sale! You can find the exact gucci whether Gucci Men's Shoes or Gucci Women's Shoes you want at a price that's right for you.Moreover,We are professional brand shoes.
Gucci shop
Gucci shop
Gucci bags
Gucci shoes,Gucci ON sale, <a
href=”http://www.gucci-shoes-bags.com/11-gucci-belts-show-all”>Gucci Belts, <a href=”http://www.gucci-shoes-bags.com/13-gucci-small-
accessories”>Gucci small accessories Gucci hats & scarves <a
href=”http://www.gucci-shoes-bags.com/9-gucci-wallets”>Gucci wallets <a href=”http://www.gucci-shoes-bags.com/8-gucci-handbags-show-
all”>Gucci HandbagsGucci Women's Shoes <a
href=”http://www.gucci-shoes-bags.com/5-gucci-men-s-shoes-show-all>Gucci Men's shoes
Gucci shop
ugg boots
Ugg Boots Show All
Ugg Boots 2009 Hot Bailey Button
Ugg Boots Cassic Mini
Ugg Boots Classic Cardy
Ugg Boots Classic Leopard
Ugg Boots Classic Metallic
Ugg Boots Classic Paisley
Ugg Boots Classic short
Ugg Boots Classic tall
Ugg Boots Nightfall
Ugg Boots Sundance II
Ugg Boots Ultra Short
Ugg Boots Ultra Tall
Consignor after we will give you buy jordan shoes with comprehensive numbers.shoes confirm your order [url=http://www.vkicks.com]buy jordan shoes[/url]Consignor after we will give you with comprehensive numbers.and payment of the total amount requested. All prices include freight. I Companies have received your payment. buy runescape money,[url=http://www.runescapemoneyvip.com]buy runescape money[/url]Company is going to the sender immediately. [url=http://www.vkicks.com]buy jordan shoes[/url]Consignor after we will give you with comprehensive numbers.buy jordan shoes We can provide [url=http://www.jerseyok.com]nfl jerseys[/url] Nike Jordan series, gucci shoesair max, air shox series, AF1, james, Kobe, dunk, rift, and more apparel, handbags, nfl jerseyselectronics and so on. How do you in our company? You can through the global Internet, using your MSN or your E-m Send mail annexed to cooperate with us. Company is going to the sender immediately. [url=http://www.vkicks.com]buy jordan shoes[/url]I AAA quality of the company's products. If you post orders.buy jordan shoes Send your own way site. Postal code and telephone number.[url=http://www.ajkey.com]gucci shoes[/url] We will confirm your order and payment of the total amount requested. All prices include freight. I Companies have received your payment.
Social Media Marketing is highly dangerous to brands and must NOT be embraced at all. Too many cooks spoil the broth! If you are 'engaging' in customers who mix business speak along with playful banter and perhaps rude comments, you are making your brand common as muck. Even seeing your brand logo along with potentially harmful comments on a twitter feed, blog, facebook page can tarnish a brand. Seeing customer complaints being posted on twitter is not good. Customer services depts speak to customers one on one without the world watching. Social media, just like the .COM bubble will burst with a catastrophic bang. People who have jumped onto the band wagon and are embracing social media are dancing with danger and damaging their brands. A brand is NOT about engaging with people on twitter. If you inteligently analyse what the MAJORITY of twitter feeds are about – it is merely internet 'GURUS' promoting some dodgy eBook via an equally dodgy looking one page sales-letter website. If you then look at twitter inteligently, you will find that millions of people are all talking millions of different things all at the same time – this causes a catastrophic information overload and achieves nothing. Social media does NOT improve productivity or sales at all. If you really look beneath the covers you will find that employee man/ woman hours are utterly wasted on facebook and twitter. Furthermore the ROI of twitter is no where near as high as the ROI of a traditional advertising campaign. This is because in the LONG -TERM (what really matters) – the brand will be damaged beyond repair. Engaging in social media is like making every one of your clients/ customers a brand manager – and when this happens it is a case of too many cooks spoil the broth or in this case – the brand!
Well, Aaron, I think it's safe to say I not only disagree, but can verify that the last four years of my career prove otherwise. Forget me, though. Dell has driven $3MM in sales through Twitter. Marriott credits a blog with $5MM in reservations. And I'm pretty sure Comcast can verify that engaging those who speak negatively about your brand is very much a good idea. Would love to see some case studies to the contrary. You're welcome to post them here or submit them to me as a guest post. Happy to have an opposing viewpoint.
Aaron, that sounds an awful lot like absolutism.
As much as I agree with some of your points about dodgy e-books and opportunists being very active in this space, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. There are plenty of people working in and with social media who are seeing real results for their businesses (and personally as well). Not hype, mind you. Not “make believe.” Real results.
For some, those results are measured in revenue. For others, cost savings/budget efficiencies. Giving a voice to customers, helping information spread across markets, connecting people with each other is absolutely changing the way we live our lives, make purchasing decisions and communicate with each other.
Social Media is now helping the CDC track outbreaks in real time. Police departments are using Social Media to warn communities about potential dangers, and in some cases quickly capture dangerous suspects. Students are using Social Media to form virtual study groups. Charities from around the world are using social media to bring awareness about their causes to the world faster and more cost-effectively than ever before. I could go on for paragraphs, but you get the point.
Are there hacks in this space? You bet. Are there people just here to make a quick buck while they can? Yep. But they're the exception rather than the rule.
This isn't a question of traditional vs. social. Neither wins. Traditional marketing alone isn't really all that effective anymore. Too many channels. Too many filters. Too much noise. Likewise, social alone is limited. It's opt-in. It hasn't scaled yet. It's very difficult to make it work quickly. However, the smart business combines the two as needed. This is about integration, not exclusion. Though they are very different, operationally, traditional and social need to come together. Anyone who doesn't see that (and rejects that notion) is doomed to fail as a marketing professional.
Dear Oliver and Jason, (firstly thank you Jason for your email and allowing my controversial comments–as I mentioned I am researching and writing a book that completely opposes the views of the masses–according to pre-publication research, the book will sell because of its controversial nature—but the proof will be in the pudding!)…
Oliver–I completely agree with your positive comments about the benefits SMM can have on spreading news FAST in terms of say, a change of exam location for students or a police warning or charitable drives or networking. However, please note I am writing these comments with respect to LONG TERM brand reputation and not short-term news. NEWS (NORTH EAST WEST SOUTH) moves fast and is forgotten rapidly – social media marketing does not help brands build long-term solid reputation bases, it disintegrates a brands message across multiple platforms mainly because of multiple external and internal input—the loss of control of the message is not a blessing, it is a curse. Then there are the issues of MISINFORMATION – competitors can easily poach, steal, misinform and destroy brands by merely following and getting in touch with people who follow you. Corporations can set up 'FAKE' accounts or they can set up individual accounts and then start vindictive campaigns with your user lists in full view. Litigation is of little use if they can shut down their accounts in seconds and hire people in China to keep setting up FAKE accounts and destroying brands—the same vindictive libel behaviours CANNOT occur in traditional media as the perpetrator would be sued for libel.
Now Jason, I absolutely agree with you, and I too have heard about the revenue generated by SMM for Dell, Comcast, et al., however, these amounts are TINY! $3 million US is a drop in the ocean and may impress a work at home mom/ soccer mom, or an individual starting a home business, but please note I am writing about BRANDS and corporations—not individuals. The ROI of even $5 million US for the amount of time, effort, energy, and potential risk to a brand is very poor indeed. If the revenue from SMM was $100m then I would perhaps alter my views.
I know I am being very controversial about not agreeing with the masses of people that are embracing social media–however, during the .com boom, the wise sage Warren Buffet disagreed with the masses of investment professionals around the world who were jumping on the bandwagon regarding the dot com boom – Warren Buffet never invested even one dime in the tech stocks of the dot com boom and he predicted the crash and it happened. Now, to give you a bit about my background, I have an elite MBA in Finance & Strategy with International Marketing and have worked for numerous Fortune 500 Co., as well as run an advertising agency. This does NOT make me an expert of any sort, but I do have a deep understanding of business and branding and corporate functions. It appears EVERYONE is trying to get something from nothing—this attitude in society caused the .com BUST—where investment bankers and MBAs and private equity firms were throwing money at any .com startup even if they had NO IDEA of HOW or WHEN they would generate revenue. The same attitude caused the current credit crunch crisis—trying to generate money out of nothing—thin air by living on CREDIT and not knowing HOW to pay it back. Similarly, SMM is free and people are trying to make it generate millions—there is a fundamental flaw in this business model that people cannot see. The main problem with the SMM model is the very nature of the fact that it allows everyone to comment on anything and everything—there is no longer any strategy or coherence in the message as you cannot coherently control millions of individuals with millions of opposing views.
SMM can:
1) Disintegrate a strong internal corporate culture by giving individuals too much power. Governments are elected by people to RUN the people and country to prevent ANARCHY! If you give PEOPLE all the power to have a referendum on EVERYTHING then you ruin the country and cause CHAOS. Similarly, if you give CUSTOMERS all the power to dictate what a brand should be, the multiple opposing views will cause brand anarchy and OPENLY annoy and anger people around the world at a rapid pace. Furthermore, it will cause employees to openly oppose internal corporate culture, openly challenge management strategy, cause openly shared silos and rifts and disintegrate corporate culture, which in turn can affect the brands values by affecting customer service, employee morale etc. This goes a LOT deeper than the internet ‘guru’/ work at home mom/ soccer mom mentality. SMM can damage brands beyond repair.
2) SMM is extremely time consuming and generates trickles of revenue compared to traditional main-stream media. SATELLITE, TV, RADIO, MAJOR NEWS/ MAGS, INTERNET ADS—these are the channels that even though are saturated, they have more consistency and enable more control over your message. The SECOND you hand over your brand message to the masses of un-qualified ‘brand specialists’ AKA the public, then you are going to cause chaos, confusion and mayhem. Imagine if the government said tomorrow, we are resigning and would like YOU the people to run the country! IT would end in utter chaos because people look up to LEADERS, but if you have NO BRAND LEADER and just millions of ‘followers’ trying to dictate what a brand should be—it makes millions of leaders, which causes disintegration and damage.
3) RISK! SMM can produce unprecedented amounts of risk to a brand. Not only is there the direct threat from competitors, and dissatisfied customers, but there also is the threat of data protection violations which can cause people to lose trust.
If you REALLY THINK about WHY in the past the peasants WORSHIPED ROYALTY, or in the present day WHY the masses WORSHIP CELEBRITIES—it is because of the perceived POWER! It is because they are JUST OUT OF REACH, it is because they cannot be touched—BUT—the second you remove that perception and you say, hey WE ARE JUST COMMON LIKE YOU—then the POWER goes out of the window… and with it goes the perception of being ELITE—and when that happens no one will want your brand anymore. If ROLEX advertised on the back of milk cartons no one would pay $5000 for it. THE CHANNEL is just as important as the message—and if you ‘advertise’ using SMM you can damage brand reputation.
All this is just the tip of the iceberg—I have written an in-depth thesis about all this backed up with evidence—it is controversial but highly engaging and interesting. Thanks for your comments and I hope this opens up a huge debate because I would love to learn from everyone out there too. Thanks!
Dear Oliver and Jason, (firstly thank you Jason for your email and allowing my controversial comments–as I mentioned I am researching and writing a book that completely opposes the views of the masses–according to pre-publication research, the book will sell because of its controversial nature—but the proof will be in the pudding!)…
Oliver–I completely agree with your positive comments about the benefits SMM can have on spreading news FAST in terms of say, a change of exam location for students or a police warning or charitable drives or networking. However, please note I am writing these comments with respect to LONG TERM brand reputation and not short-term news. NEWS (NORTH EAST WEST SOUTH) moves fast and is forgotten rapidly – social media marketing does not help brands build long-term solid reputation bases, it disintegrates a brands message across multiple platforms mainly because of multiple external and internal input—the loss of control of the message is not a blessing, it is a curse. Then there are the issues of MISINFORMATION – competitors can easily poach, steal, misinform and destroy brands by merely following and getting in touch with people who follow you. Corporations can set up 'FAKE' accounts or they can set up individual accounts and then start vindictive campaigns with your user lists in full view. Litigation is of little use if they can shut down their accounts in seconds and hire people in China to keep setting up FAKE accounts and destroying brands—the same vindictive libel behaviours CANNOT occur in traditional media as the perpetrator would be sued for libel.
Now Jason, I absolutely agree with you, and I too have heard about the revenue generated by SMM for Dell, Comcast, et al., however, these amounts are TINY! $3 million US is a drop in the ocean and may impress a work at home mom/ soccer mom, or an individual starting a home business, but please note I am writing about BRANDS and corporations—not individuals. The ROI of even $5 million US for the amount of time, effort, energy, and potential risk to a brand is very poor indeed. If the revenue from SMM was $100m then I would perhaps alter my views.
I know I am being very controversial about not agreeing with the masses of people that are embracing social media–however, during the .com boom, the wise sage Warren Buffet disagreed with the masses of investment professionals around the world who were jumping on the bandwagon regarding the dot com boom – Warren Buffet never invested even one dime in the tech stocks of the dot com boom and he predicted the crash and it happened. Now, to give you a bit about my background, I have an elite MBA in Finance & Strategy with International Marketing and have worked for numerous Fortune 500 Co., as well as run an advertising agency. This does NOT make me an expert of any sort, but I do have a deep understanding of business and branding and corporate functions. It appears EVERYONE is trying to get something from nothing—this attitude in society caused the .com BUST—where investment bankers and MBAs and private equity firms were throwing money at any .com startup even if they had NO IDEA of HOW or WHEN they would generate revenue. The same attitude caused the current credit crunch crisis—trying to generate money out of nothing—thin air by living on CREDIT and not knowing HOW to pay it back. Similarly, SMM is free and people are trying to make it generate millions—there is a fundamental flaw in this business model that people cannot see. The main problem with the SMM model is the very nature of the fact that it allows everyone to comment on anything and everything—there is no longer any strategy or coherence in the message as you cannot coherently control millions of individuals with millions of opposing views.
SMM can:
1) Disintegrate a strong internal corporate culture by giving individuals too much power. Governments are elected by people to RUN the people and country to prevent ANARCHY! If you give PEOPLE all the power to have a referendum on EVERYTHING then you ruin the country and cause CHAOS. Similarly, if you give CUSTOMERS all the power to dictate what a brand should be, the multiple opposing views will cause brand anarchy and OPENLY annoy and anger people around the world at a rapid pace. Furthermore, it will cause employees to openly oppose internal corporate culture, openly challenge management strategy, cause openly shared silos and rifts and disintegrate corporate culture, which in turn can affect the brands values by affecting customer service, employee morale etc. This goes a LOT deeper than the internet ‘guru’/ work at home mom/ soccer mom mentality. SMM can damage brands beyond repair.
2) SMM is extremely time consuming and generates trickles of revenue compared to traditional main-stream media. SATELLITE, TV, RADIO, MAJOR NEWS/ MAGS, INTERNET ADS—these are the channels that even though are saturated, they have more consistency and enable more control over your message. The SECOND you hand over your brand message to the masses of un-qualified ‘brand specialists’ AKA the public, then you are going to cause chaos, confusion and mayhem. Imagine if the government said tomorrow, we are resigning and would like YOU the people to run the country! IT would end in utter chaos because people look up to LEADERS, but if you have NO BRAND LEADER and just millions of ‘followers’ trying to dictate what a brand should be—it makes millions of leaders, which causes disintegration and damage.
3) RISK! SMM can produce unprecedented amounts of risk to a brand. Not only is there the direct threat from competitors, and dissatisfied customers, but there also is the threat of data protection violations which can cause people to lose trust.
If you REALLY THINK about WHY in the past the peasants WORSHIPED ROYALTY, or in the present day WHY the masses WORSHIP CELEBRITIES—it is because of the perceived POWER! It is because they are JUST OUT OF REACH, it is because they cannot be touched—BUT—the second you remove that perception and you say, hey WE ARE JUST COMMON LIKE YOU—then the POWER goes out of the window… and with it goes the perception of being ELITE—and when that happens no one will want your brand anymore. If ROLEX advertised on the back of milk cartons no one would pay $5000 for it. THE CHANNEL is just as important as the message—and if you ‘advertise’ using SMM you can damage brand reputation.
All this is just the tip of the iceberg—I have written an in-depth thesis about all this backed up with evidence—it is controversial but highly engaging and interesting. Thanks for your comments and I hope this opens up a huge debate because I would love to learn from everyone out there too. Thanks!
Hi Oliver, thanks for your comments–I've replied to you and Jason below…
Aaron I think you have entirely missed a trick here. I am a currently working for at an ad agency based in the UK and in the process of writing an essay for my university on the commercial value of Social media to an agency (hence coming across the article).
You say there is a risk in engaging with your customers on Social networks, that could not be further from the truth. The real risk is NOT engaging with your customers. Take Comcast for example, should they have had your opinion they would have continued to ignore the problems of their customers and the negative publicity they received (e.g. comcastmustdie.com). Not only would this provide further damage to their brand but it would also give their clued up competitors an opportunity to steal their customers away from them, a point you illustrated yourself “Then there are the issues of MISINFORMATION – competitors can easily poach, steal, misinform and destroy brands by merely following and getting in touch with people who follow you.” It is exactly this reason why companies MUST be present on Social networks, in order to dispell false information.
You say that the monetary value is insignificant and it is likely to be a passing fad. Twitter grew by over 400% in 2009! Furthermore the amount of money to be invested in Social media marketing is set to increase from $716 million in 2009 to more than $3.1 billion in 2014. This is an average annual growth rate of 34%.
You claim that $3 million dollars is insignificant but if you consider the amount that Dell has probably invested, I am sure their ROI will be somewhat significant. That is before you consider how much carrying out customer service on Social networks could save a company compared with a call centre.
You then state that “Customer services depts speak to customers one on one without the world watching.” The transparency of sites such as Twitter is a good thing as it makes companies accountable for the service they provide. The beauty of customer service on Twitter is that if carried out correctly the evidence is there for EVERYONE to see. One on one customer contact has allowed companies to get away with scandalous service because lets face it, who cares about one measly customer. If a company is rude or offensive to a customer on Twitter everyone will be able to see. Therefore this forces companies to treat customers with respect or they risk signing their own death warrant…..surely you must agree this is a good thing?
Nobody with any sense is suggesting that there is a big war between traditional advertising and social media. Social media marketing is purely another media channel; like TV, like print, like radio. Any company worth its salt should realise that the best possible business practice is to integrate your traditional advertising with Social media marketing. Take comparethemarket.com as a prime example, they have successfully integrated an excellent TV campaign with Social networking sites like Twitter and Facebook. The even created a comparethemeerkat.com. Now try telling them that Social networking ruined their branding, without it it is just another funny TV ad. By the way you should look up Alexsandr Orlov on Twitter, he is hilarious!
You talk about POWER, POWER, POWER and how companies need to remain “out of reach” otherwise they lose their POWER! Aaron this is the attitude companies had 100 years ago like Henry Ford “you can have any colour as long as it's black.” This elitist attitude do not work in the 21st century, marketing is now all about engaging with customers in the right enviroment, which for many people happens to be a Social network. If you ignore Social media you are only going to isolate millions of current and potential customers, hence damaging your brand!
This is not to say that Social media marketing does not bear risks, but then so does every form of media. Are you saying their is no risk involved in plugging millions into a TV ad campaign that fails miserably and only succeeds in damaging your brand?! The whole point is, like with traditional advertising, if you do not plan or make a strategy then the chances are you will fail (like Harvey Mckay said “If you fail to plan, then you plan to fail”). The same rules apply to Social media, if you go in with a lack of understand and no strategy then yes you could damage your brand, however if properly planned and managed it can become an extremely useful medium for reaching your customers and promoting your brand.
I could go on for days but as I mentioned I do have an essay to write. I was not going to post a reply initially until I read that this bizarre opinion came from someone who has “[...] an elite MBA in Finance & Strategy with International Marketing and have worked for numerous Fortune 500 Co., as well as run an advertising agency,” and you are writing a book. I find some of this extremely hard to believe considering how close-minded your opinions are…let me guess you are a devout Christian too?
To be perfectly honest your whole post just smacks of someone who is trying to sell a book they are writing, you even said this yourself “[my in-dept thesis] is controversial but highly engaging and interesting.” Well let me tell you something, Warren Buffet you aint! You will not become famous for predicting the Social media bust, simply because it is not going to happen. Embrace change Aaron, it is inevitable.
Regards,
Alan
p.s. I found it highly ironic that you repeatedly misspelt the word 'intelligently'…I think it speaks volumes! I wouldn't normally pick someone up on spelling, as I am sure I made a few mistakes myself. However, the difference is I am not trying to sell my own book. I am merely a hero writing an essay for Uni!
Booker!
Good article Jason, I understand for the purpose of the article you had to generalise ad agencies, and I appreciate that is not the point of the article.
I am currently responsible, at the ad agency I work for, for educating the agency about Social media and its commercial value. The agency is a traditional agency but recognises a need to integrate Social media into their offering.
Thanks again, your article has helped me in writing my essay for my university!
Thanks for the continuation of the discussion Alan. Glad the post and
conversation proved useful.
Aaron I think you have entirely missed a trick here. I am a currently working for at an ad agency based in the UK and in the process of writing an essay for my university on the commercial value of Social media to an agency (hence coming across the article).
You say there is a risk in engaging with your customers on Social networks, that could not be further from the truth. The real risk is NOT engaging with your customers. Take Comcast for example, should they have had your opinion they would have continued to ignore the problems of their customers and the negative publicity they received (e.g. comcastmustdie.com). Not only would this provide further damage to their brand but it would also give their clued up competitors an opportunity to steal their customers away from them, a point you illustrated yourself “Then there are the issues of MISINFORMATION – competitors can easily poach, steal, misinform and destroy brands by merely following and getting in touch with people who follow you.” It is exactly this reason why companies MUST be present on Social networks, in order to dispell false information.
You say that the monetary value is insignificant and it is likely to be a passing fad. Twitter grew by over 400% in 2009! Furthermore the amount of money to be invested in Social media marketing is set to increase from $716 million in 2009 to more than $3.1 billion in 2014. This is an average annual growth rate of 34%.
You claim that $3 million dollars is insignificant but if you consider the amount that Dell has probably invested, I am sure their ROI will be somewhat significant. That is before you consider how much carrying out customer service on Social networks could save a company compared with a call centre.
You then state that “Customer services depts speak to customers one on one without the world watching.” The transparency of sites such as Twitter is a good thing as it makes companies accountable for the service they provide. The beauty of customer service on Twitter is that if carried out correctly the evidence is there for EVERYONE to see. One on one customer contact has allowed companies to get away with scandalous service because lets face it, who cares about one measly customer. If a company is rude or offensive to a customer on Twitter everyone will be able to see. Therefore this forces companies to treat customers with respect or they risk signing their own death warrant…..surely you must agree this is a good thing?
Nobody with any sense is suggesting that there is a big war between traditional advertising and social media. Social media marketing is purely another media channel; like TV, like print, like radio. Any company worth its salt should realise that the best possible business practice is to integrate your traditional advertising with Social media marketing. Take comparethemarket.com as a prime example, they have successfully integrated an excellent TV campaign with Social networking sites like Twitter and Facebook. The even created a comparethemeerkat.com. Now try telling them that Social networking ruined their branding, without it it is just another funny TV ad. By the way you should look up Alexsandr Orlov on Twitter, he is hilarious!
You talk about POWER, POWER, POWER and how companies need to remain “out of reach” otherwise they lose their POWER! Aaron this is the attitude companies had 100 years ago like Henry Ford “you can have any colour as long as it's black.” This elitist attitude do not work in the 21st century, marketing is now all about engaging with customers in the right enviroment, which for many people happens to be a Social network. If you ignore Social media you are only going to isolate millions of current and potential customers, hence damaging your brand!
This is not to say that Social media marketing does not bear risks, but then so does every form of media. Are you saying their is no risk involved in plugging millions into a TV ad campaign that fails miserably and only succeeds in damaging your brand?! The whole point is, like with traditional advertising, if you do not plan or make a strategy then the chances are you will fail (like Harvey Mckay said “If you fail to plan, then you plan to fail”). The same rules apply to Social media, if you go in with a lack of understand and no strategy then yes you could damage your brand, however if properly planned and managed it can become an extremely useful medium for reaching your customers and promoting your brand.
I could go on for days but as I mentioned I do have an essay to write. I was not going to post a reply initially until I read that this bizarre opinion came from someone who has “[...] an elite MBA in Finance & Strategy with International Marketing and have worked for numerous Fortune 500 Co., as well as run an advertising agency,” and you are writing a book. I find some of this extremely hard to believe considering how close-minded your opinions are…let me guess you are a devout Christian too?
To be perfectly honest your whole post just smacks of someone who is trying to sell a book they are writing, you even said this yourself “[my in-dept thesis] is controversial but highly engaging and interesting.” Well let me tell you something, Warren Buffet you aint! You will not become famous for predicting the Social media bust, simply because it is not going to happen. Embrace change Aaron, it is inevitable.
Regards,
Alan
p.s. I found it highly ironic that you repeatedly misspelt the word 'intelligently'…I think it speaks volumes! I wouldn't normally pick someone up on spelling, as I am sure I made a few mistakes myself. However, the difference is I am not trying to sell my own book. I am merely a hero writing an essay for Uni!
Booker!
Good article Jason, I understand for the purpose of the article you had to generalise ad agencies, and I appreciate that is not the point of the article.
I am currently responsible, at the ad agency I work for, for educating the agency about Social media and its commercial value. The agency is a traditional agency but recognises a need to integrate Social media into their offering.
Thanks again, your article has helped me in writing my essay for my university!
Thanks for the continuation of the discussion Alan. Glad the post and
conversation proved useful.
← Previous Comments