Skip to main content

Is Social Media Marketing being done at all?

Coders should not try to be marketers. They are not Steve Jobs!

Brands spent a dime collecting fans on Facebook. Now they are spending more money on "engaging" them. But is it helping the brand?

I did two sets of qualitative studies to understand brand communication participation on Facebook. One was approximately an year back and the other concluded last month and both lead to similar results. Surprisingly most of the respondents I interviewed could NOT remember even five Facebook pages they had "liked". But yes they did remember they had liked "a couple" of pages on Facebook. I am here restricting my discussion to Facebook and Facebook pages in particular. Some of my propositions after my study were
  • Brand Communities or brand fan pages on internet are not affecting brand awareness for the un-involved consumer.
  • Brand communities are not impacting brand loyalty to the un-involved consumers.
  • Brand communities are not impacting purchase intentions of the un-involved consumers.

The Reasons

Brand fan pages are impacting which set of consumers? They are helping those who are already involved with your brand. Fans of Eminem, Harley Davidson or Manchester United are already involved with the brands. They don't need to be pushed to join or engage with the brand.
Facebook does provide a perfect platform. But it provides a democratic platform for brands. Consumer volition is primary. This is not T.V. or a retail outlet. 
I might have an answer. There are too many software companies with little experience in marketing trying to be "Marketers". They are essentially a bunch of coders trying to conjure things like engagement, branding etc. How can they ever make the cut?

Brand Community & Culture

The concept of brand communities started as communities of consumers, by consumers. Advertising your Facebook page is like deliberately pushing something, which is essentially social in nature down the throats of consumers.
How can consumers fake it? They cannot!
The brands that manage to climb up the ladder are already a part of culture. Take the case of Oreo. You can't make your brand a cultural resource by blatantly talking about it on your brand community. 
I don't know the exact answer, but a deeper understanding of the culture around the brand might have an answer. Marketers are no longer cultural authorities. That was the modern branding paradigm and belonged to the 1950s and 60s. Culture will evolve by allowing people to participate. Facebook pages don't allow users to participate. Their role is restricted to commenting, liking and sharing. Techies especially the guys at Facebook did not build a page that would look into this aspect. I don't want to undermine their contribution. It is beyond measure. But when it comes to marketing, we probably need to rethink.

Popular posts from this blog

Giving the finger to a scripted life!

It's crazy to take jobs just because they look good on your resume. That's like saving sex for your old age. ~ Warren Buffet. You have plans for your life, career etc. You've built an entire script but what is this based on? Scott at Ted talks about how almost 80% of the people around the world don't like the job they do. In his career, he found one day that most of the job he did was automated by his competitors. Building the resume was clearly not way forward. It was during that time he he heard the quote by warren buffet, " It's crazy to take jobs just because they look good on your resume. That's like saving sex for your old age ". This was when he left his job. While there are know universities, which talk about finding your passion, Scott talks about a lens that can help in finding the job we love.

Twitter and the world of hate - Delhi Gang Rape

Common wisdom says that venting out reduces frustration. Twitter, Facebook, and blogs help us achieve the same. While what normally starts as a "venting out" experience, I suspect is turning out to be an anguish enhancer. When I look at trending topics on twitter all what I see is a world of "Hate". Small pieces of hate messages turn out to be a big collective bunch of hate. Take the case of Delhi gang rape and some ill-minded comments of politicians and spiritual gurus. What started as scattered bickering remarks against a comment made by "Asaram" has now become a full fledged ball of rage. This rage was "non-directional", had no agenda and was oriented towards sarcasm and wit. While Delhi gang rape highlights poor governance, societal problems and problems of law and order, venting out on a forum that accumulates the frustration by many such people only adds to the low well-being. It is time we use some discretion and post messages that...

Twitter vs. News - Effectiveness in building relations

Social Media has been termed as an effective way to build relationships. Brands are trying to harness this capability by building social presence on this new media. Celebrities today account for the maximum amount of followers on the web with twitter being a fine example for this. But is this new media effective in creating relationships with this vast list of followers, which celebrities often tend to have? In an interesting research by Lee and Jang , they explore the effectiveness of celebrities in building social presence on new media. They compare twitter and a news website to check the relative effectiveness of enhancing social presence. While the traditional PR machinery used by celebrities might give them news coverage, they contend that their tweets can reduce the barrier of relational development as compared to a news website. Their findings are counter-intuitive and very interesting.