Having been in the space we now call “Social Media” for over 15 years, I am trying to recall how we came to this phenomenon and why some are still questioning it. We have several hundred million people connected via Facebook and an academy award nominated film on the subject.
Why are some still in the throes of wondering whether there is a ‘there there’ with Social Media?
I remember creating a graph a few years ago so our agency could explain the evolution of social media and why SocMe, our own approach and Content Management System (CMS), might be a useful way to create a digital footprint. Looking at this old graph again, I see it may still have some merit:
© Clare Munn 2008-2011
I am sure today there is quite a lot missing from this old graph, but what I find glaringly absent is the collaboration and reputation management required to design a content strategy that involves and engages an audience. I discuss this rather frequently with my business partner, and brother, Alasdair Munn. Neither of us are avid followers of pop culture – although many in our agency are, thank goodness – but we are voracious readers and observers. We’re constantly curious of communication techniques and how to measure levels of interest by others.
With Social Media, it is easy to see a level of interest if a “Like Us” button is clicked, or if you generate a retweet, or a list is compiled on your subject. The mystery remains as to the value of the retweeter or list maker. Typically, further analysis is made by reviewing the profile of this individual, their followers, whom they are following… and so it goes on. This may all seem laboriously time consuming, but yet it really is one of the only ways to determine, with integrity, the quality or value of your audience.
Having come from a traditional publishing family, the way success was measured was a pretty basic formula:
1. The number of magazines or newspapers sold
2. The number of subscribers
3. The number of estimated readers per subscription
4. The number of advertisers
5. And the price advertisers were willing to pay per size of real estate within a magazine or newspaper
© Sonja Nuttall 2008-2011
Today, the above remains the same but we can also add transparency to that formula. It is transparency, after all, that shows the pathways to integrated marketing avenues such as social media and broadcast techniques. This is typically done through integrated campaigns and contests followed by measurement software tools.
Many have said that television, print, and radio will die. I don’t believe this at all. I believe the old ways of silo marketing has already died. It is now about integration, but only implemented once we understand the audience and their needs. This, to me, is what social media is about: the glue and the bridge(s).
So, perhaps questioning whether there is a ‘there there’ of social media, is actually questioning whether integrated marketing and measurement tactics have any merit.
I hope you find this of some use.
Be well,
-c
Great read Clare. As always thank you. As we discuss social media with each and every client and SEO becomes something that anyone with a firefox plug in thinks they can do, I find myself as a lone cheerleader for integrated marketing instead of the often preached abandonment of “traditional” marketing. I’ve also come from a world of print media as well as radio and the measurement of success and ROI wasn’t as clear as internet marketing has become today. However I think the reason so many people embraced it was that it was easy to wrap your brain around and feel good about it even if you weren’t sure if anyone saw it or heard it or read it. You could put your ad on a rotation and be mixed in with the “big boys” and as Mr/Ms. business owner, beat your chest and say “look at me”.
It’s that almost primal gratification coupled with an overall lack of a clear understanding of the power of the internet that keeps many CEO’s, CMO’s, and “traditionalists” saying “there there”. In my opinion that is….
You’re awesome!
Dan
Interesting read. I think it’s odd looking at the decline of TV. The inability for shows to garner the level of ratings that they have had in the past should definitely be worrying to networks and I wonder what their contingency plans are.
Plus, the rise of Hulu and Netflix for streaming TV and DVR make it so easy for a person to schedule watching shows around their life instead of vice versa. if you’re going to have a timesuck, it might as well be on your own terms, right?
I’ve actually seen TV shows like NBC’s Community use social media to provide a bridge between the web and television. Before their season premiere, each of the characters’ accounts were tweeting at each other making plans to meet up and what they had been doing. The plans ended up being the basis of the episode.
Dave
Thanks Clare, always great to see an insider’s view. I didn’t even know social media had been around for 15 years!
Nice post Clare, like always. The most interesting statement in this article, for me, was: “Many have said that television, print, and radio will die.” I don’t feel it will necessarily die, but I do feel it will change or has already. Regarding television advertising, commercials are being fast-forwarded more frequently, due to DVRs. More and more TV is also being watched online. Online TV commercials are watched more, and I feel have, higher impacts. Personally, I don’t reach much in print, but instead read online. Lastly with radio, I feel this is almost obsolete due to iTunes, iPods and sites like Pandora. Would really like a more in-depth post about these forms of media, very interesting to me!
Thanks for posting. It’s strange to see the transition from silo marketing, like you said, to more integrated and social forms of media. Hopefully in the future this will inspire more feedback and, ultimately, higher quality content.
Great post,
Alex