Yup absolutely. I have lost faith in a lot of what is said on social media platforms since working on a pharmaceutical account in which thousands of false messages were left on blogs, new groups and threads were created on Facebook and new channels were set up on Youtube (a see what sticks approach). This included fake 'conversations' about how dangerous competitor products were, all justified by the idea that we were 'just helping people make decisions'. It felt very dirty.
PS I am being paid to leave this message by the TV networks.
Very true, especially the last bit. If a friend tells me they like that chocolate or this soap, great, i'll probably give it a go. If they send me a facebook message I'll delete it without even reading it.
Love it.
People (!) do have difficulty differentiating between fact and factoid. But I take heart in my old school motto, Veritas Vincit - truth conquers
Yet again you deliver some much needed clarity. Great stuff.
Check out the Razorfish FEED 2009 report they just published for more examples of these.
It's also guilty of a horrendously skewed sample being passed off as representative, and of using such vaguely worded questions as to make the answers meaningless.
Worst of all it's peppered with the classic 'this led us to believe' sentence whereby the writer of a report can convince the credulous that an unsubstantiated statement has something to do with the research.
Oh and they also mix up causality and correlation.
Pile of shit available here: http://feed.razorfish.com/
As a fan of rats in the New York City subway, I will do my best to encourage their further procreation.
Here's what I think is the reason behind so much of the BS you point out in your post.
It gives people with no ideas something to say.
They can blather on about "experiences," "conversations," "tweets" and so on. And guess what? They never have to write a line of copy.
Or to put it poetically, they "Spout a cliche then run away."
You should check out this report which is full of horrible examples of the above: http://feed.razorfish.com/
Read the Razorfish thing. Their groups consisted SOLELY of people who ALREADY actively shop online because, as the author points out, these are the "people our clients are interested in". (What else would the clients of a digital agency be interested in?)
I can summarise their entire report for you; people who actively shop online are likely to be advocates of the internet.
You couldn't make it up.
As a web designer who is quite savvy in the medium, and who is comfortable shopping online, I can honestly say that in my six months on Facebook no recommendation or suggestion has led me to buy a single product. If anything, I've actually thought less of the product because of how tacky the FB campaigns have been, or that they are lurking around my communication with actual friends and trying to influence me.
On a related note, I "became a fan" (yechh) of some professional services, many of which were design/marketing folks right here in my little zip code. By and large, I found that their Facebook "strategies" fell into two basic camps:
1. Using FB to evangelize about social media, or inundating me with regurgitated tiny URLs to trend articles all over the web. Enough already.
2. Broadcasting mundane events in the studio, like what music they were listening to, or that they were working on a logo or brochure or something. Or that they need coffee (or a beer, or whatever)...
The "influence economy". Ick. How about a "productive economy"?
all together now:
"The consumer does not behave as they say,
they do not say what they think
and they do not think what they feel"
David Ogilvy
Bob, I love this line: "Popularity of a communications medium -- any medium -- is not necessarily an indication of its effectiveness as a marketing vehicle."
The biggest issue I have with social media is the lack of relevancy. Most tweets are irrelevant noise. I don't want your spam, and I don't care that you just walked your dog.
This silliness is still going on? Wow. I blogged about it in 1996 and a dozen times since then:
http://tinyurl.com/y8k5bzl
But don't believe me. I'm just some guy leaving a comment here. For all you know, someone is paying me to trash WOMM.
One thing's for sure. You'll never know.
Anyone care to comment on this? Build a brand in a day. And if not a day, in 30 days. Astonishing:
http://www.simonmiddleton.com/
Well stated. Enjoyed reading this. Thanks for saying what many are afraid to suggest/admit. There's a lot of effective tools out there, but there are also many pretenders. Pulled the post into my blog http://beckyericson.posterous.co...eed-to-be-
drawn
Excellent! As usual, your common sense prevails. Thank you-I love this column.
I agree that word of mouth is the most powerful form of persuasion but the absolute key is to trust that the person making the recommendation has the same taste as you - especially, for example, in music or books.
On your point No. 2: If you read Garfield's highly documented book "Chaos Scenario," he reports just the opposite of your claim. For example:
• CBS down 2.9% in primetime
• ABC down 9.78% in primetime
• NBC down 14.3% in primetime
• Fox down 17/5% in primetime
He actually says "For broadcast networks, in the 2008/2009 season, steady erosion became a mudslide."
Who's right?
@G-Beau
Are you an account planner, a CMO, or a blogger?
Re-read my post. We're both right.
I'm just a creative guy (30-year vet) who's trying to figure it out, and you and Bob seem to be saying the opposite thing. You're saying: "The average American watched more TV in the past year than ever before in history." And he's saying: Viewership is a downward "mudslide." Maybe I'm just dumb, but aren't those opposing claims?
Whatever. I'm a copywriter (and yes, occasional blogger) and very successful as are my clients, and the real subject du jour is social media, and frankly, it's turning me and lots of my ilk off --especially the more it gets lionized. It's just a part of life, not life itself, for crying out loud. But you wouldn't know it from the pundits and pedants.
G-Beau:
Follow me here. The total amount of tv viewing is at its highest point ever.
However, because of massive competition, the major networks are getting a smaller and smaller share of the viewers.
Consequently, viewership is up, but ratings for networks are down.
The pizza is getting bigger but the slices are getting smaller.
Got it?
Got it. Thanks for staying with me.
Commenting by HaloScan
