In one of last week’s edition of the new national newspaper, i, the headline “Marketing in Social Networks is the future” caught my attention. Not because I agree or disagree, but because it would inevitably turn out to be another useless piece of journalism, rushed to print because… well there was probably nothing else to fill the gap.
So why is marketing in social networks the future? Apparently because it is cheaper (compared to what? And are they taking into account the resources needed? ) and it allows marketers to “advertise without it appearing to be advertising“. How stupid the consumer has become…
Quoting Forrester will get you only so far especially when cited out of context and void of any substance. Not mocking Forrester at all, just those that choose to use it, as well as other predictions, to prove a point. I always remember a Nokia executive (himself a statistician) saying that “statistics don’t lie, statisticians do“.
The article wouldn’t be complete without the Dell “case study” of 2.1 million € in sales from Twitter or Burger King’s investment of 35,000 € that yielded 250,000 € on Facebook. 35,000€? Burger King? Hmmm.
The article then shifts to the Portuguese market – the first study by Netsonda shows that 45% of the “users” (the “stupid ones”) are already on Facebook talking up/down brands in their everyday use of the network. I have to admit that, even though I only have 750 connections on Facebook (no they are not my friends) and over 11,000 on LinkedIn, I’ve yet to witness a conversation about a brand – maybe my selection of friends is skewing the results.
And why is the investment in Portugal left to the Viagras (here comes the spam) and SMS swindles? Most probably because people like Pedro Pina (McCann Erickson) claims that “no one invests in what they don’t know“. Ironic to hear the VP for Iberia acknowledge that they themselves seem to fail in selling social media to their clients.
This could turn out to be the ideal time to recommend the SMRFP (Social Media Request For Proposal) for clients who are interested in ensuring they get the right partner to begin with before investing in what they, and others, don’t know.
My very brief personal opinion is that the future belongs to those that understand media and the varied channels available and are able to use the most relevant ones – not for marketing sakes or quick PR fix, but for legitimate reasons. The future of marketing rests indeed with the correct utilization of the different tools. As Edelman release their executive summary of the Trust Barometer 2010, we realise one “truth” – The future of marketing must incorporate “building a mosaic of trust” (Richard Edelman).
{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }
Nuno, however addressing a different issue, the arts rather then marketing/advertising, I find this Jaron Lanier talk on social media and web 2.0. very interesting. I hope you like it.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/video/2010/f...
Thanks for the link and the insight – it's an interesting perspective though I have to say that even though the point of view is interesting – Aleks Krotoski doesn't seem to have an alternative/solution – more doom and gloom. Reminds me of failed music artists that pursue the market through Passemusica claiming incoherent sums from those prepared to pay. I always find that the most outspoken of critics use the tools and the medium to voice their opinion – and actually get heard by a lot more people in the process – hypocrisy? Maybe, maybe not…
Thanks for the link and the insight – it's an interesting perspective though I have to say that even though the point of view is interesting – Aleks Krotoski doesn't seem to have an alternative/solution – more doom and gloom. Reminds me of failed music artists that pursue the market through Passemusica claiming incoherent sums from those prepared to pay. I always find that the most outspoken of critics use the tools and the medium to voice their opinion – and actually get heard by a lot more people in the process – hypocrisy? Maybe, maybe not…