Is 'Social' Media?: The View from a Social Media Agency: C&M*

Is ‘Social’ Media?

POSTED BY: Roger Warner / CATEGORIES: Content Optimisation, Keywords, Online PR Agency, Social Media Agency, Social Media Marketing, Twitter
POSTED ON: 21 Jan 2009
TAGS: Online PR Agency, Social Media, Social Media Agency, Social Media Marketing, Twitter

If you’re a brand, then there’s a good chance that you’ve entertained the idea of ‘doing a Facebook’ recently.

And, if you’re a digital/marketing agency, the chances are that you’ve already recommended one to a client…

But why?

Is ‘Social’ really ‘Media’ and can we measure what we do with it…?

This one’s been itching us here at C&M for a while. We love the idea of all this wonderful Social stuff as Media, because clearly it’s another great mechanism for spreading the word. Things like Twitter are becoming very powerful networks in which to distribute ideas and content …and in many ways, this feels like ‘Media’.

But, on the other hand, as Mark Earls (author of Herd: How to Change Mass Behaviour by Harnessing Our True Nature) says, all of our blog commentary, social profiles and such aren’t really ‘brandable’ like traditional media. The real point of Social is the act of communication – the “watching and listening and interacting with other people.” In other words, you can’t slap an ad on a Tweet. (Or, more to the point, you can, but it’ll bomb ….very fast.)

Another difference is in how we grapple with it. Anyone who’s dabbled in a spot of social media monitoring / listening / tracking will tell you it’s not easy to separate the signal from the noise. The web really is a firehose of ‘Social’ stuff. And this is anathema when it comes to the all important question of measurement (ie, figuring out value for money).

Here’s what James Cherkoff of Collaborate Marketing has to say on the matter: “The irony here is that measuring social media is very easy to do in practice, but very difficult to do in theory. On the web you can see if people are interacting with you through analytical tools that interpret what is happening in real-time…. However, this approach doesn’t really fit in a theoretical conversation such as, ‘If we invest in this media plan we will reach x percentage of the demographic over this period of time which means a unit cost of y’ ….We all know blogs, communities, forums, social nets and other networked media are very real in practice. But they’re invisible in theory. Which makes people’s heads hurt.“ (Check out James’s blog for more very lucid thoughts on all things new media – we’re big fans.)

So, can ‘Social’ really be Media?

Well, yes in the sense that our clients understand how to work with Media (with a capital M), and so the term helps them to get a handle on it, and get buy in from colleagues/bosses. The idea of Social as ‘Media’ also gives them a starting point for doing work by taking money from a traditional ‘Media-ish’ budget line and reallocating it to some Social activities.

But at the end of the day, we’re with our friends at We Are Social, who prefer to talk about Social in the context of ‘Conversations’ rather than ‘Media’ and out-and-out ‘Marketing.’ In their view, the most useful things that Social can teach us is “what business impact [these conversations] have, what the underlying issues and sentiments are, who the influencers driving the conversations are, and what actions to take as a result.“

And that’s a completely non-Media thought. ‘Media’ is about brand-ability, distribution, impressions and other broadcast-like thoughts. ‘Social’ is – in these terms – its antithesis: listening, learning, engaging, etc.

Why Social isn’t really Media at all

Tools like Twitter enable you to create content, but not ‘Media’ content. Social content is often more like a handwritten note or a personal noticeboard. And at the end of the day the brand is the user, not whatever they’re talking about – so it’s best to avoid interfering in any normal mass Media way.

Try listening instead, and then get involved and see what you can do with all of the good stuff that you learn…

Bookmark/Share

Roger Warner

i'd say you're an expert, mr 'video conferencing setup' :) top marks for chutzpah, enjoy the link!
video conferencing setup

I enjoyed reading your post; I am running a small website on video conferencing I am a beginner in this business. I don’t know much about it but I am searching around for material that can increase my knowledge
Roger Warner

hi nick. no, to my mind the brand is not dead. and, yes, some method of comms (thei new-fangled Social stuff) needs to be non-Branded. sounds like a great paper : ) i'd buy it
Nick Garnett

Roger
So, brand is dead? without the need for branded comm's, why brand? here's a good idea - disseminate the notion that 'Brand' as we know it is dead (all those ghastly assumptions that drive marketers to portray us as hostile, grabbing sex machines, running into the sunset on a wave of sentimentality), write a paper (and deliver it somewhere really significant) outlining the notion that the new 'brand' (you will need a new word) is a consumer generated mash-up of product useage results, consumer feedback and factual information fed back to consumers by consumers (in our new socially linked up atmosphere. It's the theory of no brand, brand. Would a business be brave enough to leave the judgement of their product to customers?
Roger Warner

hey nick. short answer: no. the brand lives on. but one can't expect to use all these new-fangled webby social sprockets for doing branded comms like they used to, cos it won't work... we need new comms tactics, not a new brand
Nick Garnett

I want you to think about this - does a networking, social media plugged-in, viral business model signify the end of the 'Brand' and all it's incumbent investment?
Jo-Rosie Haffenden

Here here!

I think that, perhaps, the importance of branding Social Media communications is for the retention of custom, with the emphasis not so much on the acquisition or initial conversion which it's place in PR and Marketing. That said, i think good branding is icing on all these delicious cakes - ensuring users can distinguish one event/product/service from another, immediately see the core values and flavour and then recognise the brand in the event of more marketing and PR!

It is all a continuum I suppose and every truly super comapny is the constant sum of all its fantastically effective parts working together (awww)!
Roger Warner

Hey Jo-Rosie. I agree with you, a lot. Yes, it's great to get brands involved, enagaged and active. In fact, brands have to be doing it now....

But doing so doesn't necessarily buy that magic thing that traditional mass media brings.... distribution. In other words, a brand can go Social, but - without doing some other smart things - it may be screaming into space...ie, it may never get 'motion.'

This is where the idea of Social as Media gets a little screwey. That and the fact that many brands wish to jump on other people's Social activity in an attempt to brand them (ie - try to get free distribution)...

It's an interesting debate.... To my mind, the smart brands (and the most effective) are the ones that are using Social not for immediate distribution but for getting engaged in other Social networks, contributing something (ie, being Social) and so extending their footprint in new areas...
Jo-Rosie Haffenden

I think, firstly, that you are right to suggest that there is no valid and reliable tool which can calculate that "X investment = X profit", as the measurement of the value of any content (including Social Media), has to be qualitative due of the subjective nature of how users value it.

I think what is interesting here, is Mark Earls view that: "all of our blog commentary, social profiles and such aren’t really ‘brandable’" - Surely a brand using Social Media is a brand-in-motion, if you will. If the brand identity is "true" and first originates within the core values of a company itself and then runs through every intrinsic part of the company, compounding finally in a wholesome representation of itself (a visual and vocal epitome; "one true voice") then Social Media is the most fluid way a brand can mediate, socially, with its market. If the brand is honest and transparent then Social Media, as a tool is an awesome way to prove business integrity while at the same time, get to know your market!

blog comments powered by Disqus

RSS

What’s a Social Media Agency?

Rocket science not included. Proceed at ease...

Get the Scoop on Social Media PR…

Been there, seen it, bought T-Shirt, wrote it up....

What the Hell is Social SEO?

Clue: it's not spammy and it adds value to users....

ONLINE PR & SOCIAL MEDIA AGENCY KNOW-HOW

Roger Warner, Managing Director

Rowan Stanfield, Director of Creative and Planning

Michael Wilkins, Head of Social SEO & Analytics

Online PR & Social Media Blog /// MORE

Say Hello to Paul, Our Very Affable New Head of Accounts

As our original ad for the role stated, Paul’s job is to be more Mad Men than IM, Twitter, Foursquare and the rest. His job is to talk to all of our clients – preferably at a distance of three paces, and to get the Martinis in whenever they’re needed. Oh, and to always have a glowing report to hand.

POSTED ON: 01 Sep 2010 / POSTED BY: Roger Warner

Why do 95.769% of Social Media Projects Fail? PLANNING!

In C&M’s experience, failure to deliver value on Social Media projects is 95.769% down to the lack of a plan. Why? Because 95.6579% of the time Social Media is seen as free