Comments on: Is ‘Social’ Media?

By: Roger Warner

Roger Warner — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 07:39:09 +0000

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

By: video conferencing setup

video conferencing setup — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 07:36:49 +0000

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

By: Roger Warner

Roger Warner — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 10:05:04 +0000

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

By: Nick Garnett

Nick Garnett — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 09:47:27 +0000

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?

By: Roger Warner

Roger Warner — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 14:37:40 +0000

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

By: Nick Garnett

Nick Garnett — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 14:32:26 +0000

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?

By: Jo-Rosie Haffenden

Jo-Rosie Haffenden — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 23:01:40 +0000

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)!

By: Roger Warner

Roger Warner — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 21:42:39 +0000

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…

By: Jo-Rosie Haffenden

Jo-Rosie Haffenden — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 21:23:59 +0000

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!