Why "SOCIAL" media is unimportant for 90% of brands

I believe social media is pretty unimportant for 90% of brands, as regular readers will know, at least in terms of brands creating their own stream of content on Twitter, facebook et al.

A thought hit me today as to why this is the case.

The clue is in the name: SOCIAL media.

For a given brand, would you really want it involved in your social life?

Would you actually want it to join in a conversation you are having with friends or family?

For myself, if the brand is singer Jamie Cullum, Harlequins rugby club or TV programme 30 Rock, then "yes".

If the brand is Gillette (my shaver), Iams (our catfood) or Kinsgmill (our bread), then a big fat "no".

This is why FMCG as a category is low down in terms of Facebook "likes", whereas entertainment and lifestyle brands are at the top.

Its why 3 of the UK's top 10 grocery brands have no meaningful Facebook presence at all.

And why Twitter is even less important for brands, with followers for a given brand on average 1% the level of facebook likes.

Comments

[snapback hats]

I really like this.It is so beautiful.Thanks for the post. It's usefull for me.The picture you post is beautiful.The picture you post is beautiful.

[Los Angeles Lakers Hats]

So informative things are provided here, I really happy to read this post, I was just imagine about it and you provided me the correct information I really bookmark it, for further reading, So thanks for sharing the information I have really happy for this website is providing the different pots. I am very much satisfied by this technology and nice approach is visible in this blog.

[Nike Heels]

I agree 100% with your point that "The ultimate accolade is to hear someone talking (positively..) about your latest creative."

[nike free run]

If you mess up, it's not your parents' fault, so don't whine about our mistakes, learn from them.h

[David]

Thanks David - I also appreciate your response too.

I agree with most of what you have written, but, notwithstanding the need for an attention grabbing headline, I do take issue with your use of the term 'unimportant'.

Social Media has fundamentally changed how some people consume media. Look at the number of people Tweeting through TV programmes & ad breaks about the content they are watching.

Sure - bad social media campaigns are a waste of time and money. But, so are bad advertising campaigns; bad PR campaigns and bad digital campaigns.. That doesn't make the channel unimportant.

As marketers I we should consider social media in the context of our target audience and how they consume media. If social media forms a big part of how consumers interact with the world around them; we need to consider how we can communicate to them through social media channels too.

I agree with you that placing any contrived post on Facebook, just so you have a presence, is a waste of time. But carefully creating content so that consumers want to (& can) share it on Facebook is great marketing.

David

[David@thebrandgym]

David
Thanks for commenting.

I agree 100% with your point that "The ultimate accolade is to hear someone talking (positively..) about your latest creative."

This is creating great marketing and ads worth talking about. And this happened many years before social media was invented.

BUT, this is not the same as spending time and money creating social media stuff that tries to "artificially" create conversations about brands.

If you do something really, really interesting people can talk about it, as they always have.
But most brands don't have a stream of daily content worthy of conversation.

David

[Ken Griffey Jr Shoes]

Must live their own "target" and "dream" to draw on his own life a few colors!

[David]

Surely all FMCG Marketers want to create brand advertising that stimulates an emotional response. The ultimate accolade is to hear someone talking (positively..) about your latest creative. Why then would you not want to read positive posts about it online too? You would have to be mad!

Some of the most creative campaigns of the past two years have embraced new media to engage consumers through social interaction - I'm thinking Old Spice / Tip-Ex ads from the US in particular. Neither of these are particularly interesting products in their own right, but great marketing made them entirely relevant for social media.

[Perry]

Nice point. I completely agree. A lot of marketing directors love creating so called "social media" campaigns because it has such a tangible measurement for success which doesn't hurt when it comes to asking their bosses for that elusive bonus at Christmas! However, we all know that a bunch of LIKES on your Facebook account is meaningless if the rest of your marketing estate isn't firing on all cylinders. That said, I believe social media is generally misunderstood and misused by FMCG marketeers and brand managers. It does still have an important role for any business that people want to engage with. Its basically an extension of your reception desk. Thinking about it, companies should probably get their receptionists to run their Facebook accounts not their marketing teams. Social media is an incredibly useful tool for publicly talking to consumers as you might via your reception. It's also a great way of letting them openly discuss your brand in public. (a bit like them gathering for a chat in your reception I suppose?) It's also the most transparent way of dealing with complaints, compliments and faqs so perhaps marketing directors and brand managers should see it for what it is rather than simply use it to make them look good and get their pay packets bigger quicker?