The potency of Facebook, Myspace, YouTube and Twitter should no longer be described in terms of an uncontrollable volume of “likes,” re-Tweets, views and comments. These social media outlets are becoming increasingly concrete and well-disciplined sources for measurable marketing activities that resonate with the traditional sales concerns of many businesses. Yes, these outlets are powerful and sometimes expansive beyond our comprehension. But in order to maximize their appeal, marketers should strive to overcome the language barrier commonly found in social media, on one hand, and the fixed orthodoxy that prevails in some industries, on the other.
An article written by Pia Mara Finkell entitled “Five Ways to get Traditional Clients Onboard with Untraditional Methods” discusses the ways in which people in the food and wine trade specifically might be disinclined to engage their customers through social media. Finkell writes, “their job is to be skeptical of anything new and flashy, anything not based in science and tradition and definitely any trend that seems fly-by-night.” At the risk of oversimplifying, Finkell states that the common marketer in these industries tends to be verging on conservative and cautious. The article goes on to prescribe a series of solutions in order to better connect with these reluctant clients and forge congruency with their existing marketing ideals. Some of these solutions include: explaining the benefits of social media in terms of ROI and other demonstrable measurements, real world value and case studies presented without hefty theoretic foundations, integration with their core programs, and the idea of long-term brand presence. In essence, proving to those in such industries that social media isn’t a stark deviation from the framing of their current practices.
Marketing programs within all industries attempt to leverage a series of methods to increase sales. So
cial media is no different. It’s not an ungovernable or rash system lacking formal structure. The current dilemma, however, is to refine its language in a way that demonstrates that these practices are actually calculated techniques that have the same objectives as long-standing strategies. Furthermore, it should legitimate itself through a codified language so that others can find it as useful as it really is.
Last week, the New Yorker published a provocative article by Malcolm Gladwell entitled, “Small Change: Why the Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted.” In the article, Gladwell discusses the nature of social activism, arguing that the kind of ties we establish through social media are too weak to inspire genuine risk-taking for the sake of a cause. An invitation via Facebook may cause you to join a Facebook group about saving Darfur, but could it inspire you to actually go there and help on the ground? Gladwell thinks not.
Gladwell’s clear disdain for social media has provoked more than one irate response from those who believe in social media’s ability to drive social movements. But getting defensive about the power of social media seems a bit silly—communication between weak-tie connections through social media is certainly an efficient way to spread information, but to inspire dramatic action, or behavior change, closer networks are much more effective.
Gladwell was not trying to say that social media is useless, but rather that we have to be aware of its limitations. The revolution may not be Tweeted, but opinions, news, and product recommendations will—and that is enough to keep social media relevant as a marketing tool.
The world is made up of things, physical objects we humans interact with on a daily basis. Because they are so central to almost everything we do, there is no shortage of theories for understanding the value and meaning of things—from how they are exchanged and acquire value (Simmel 1978); to how gift-giving and exchange are tied up in establishing and maintaining social relations (Mauss 1990); to how objects take on different roles through their lifetimes, and may even have agency themselves (Appadurai 1988).
As business and social interaction are increasingly conducted online, a market has emerged for virtual things—“gifts” on Facebook, houses in Second Life—that have no tangible counterpart. Some people find it odd that people are willing to pay real money for digital objects; others purchase virtual things by the dozen. User experience researchers have explored in detail how humans interact with digital objects, but there has been relatively little analysis with regard to their monetary and social worth.
A notable exception is a recent article by Adrian Chan, who argues that digital objects must be understood not only as objects, but also as symbols of interaction (2010). A “beer” given over Facebook does not function as “beer” but rather as a symbol of the process of gift exchange. Whether I am willing to pay a dollar for it depends less on what the icon depicts than it does on my interest in showing other people that I am giving my friend a gift.
Most interestingly, Chan’s definition of digital objects includes verbal exchanges. This is a major departure from how we think of objects, for, as Appadurai has pointed out, “contemporary Western common sense… has a strong tendency to oppose ‘words’ and ‘things’” (1988:4).
This is one example of the major differences between physical and virtual things. When words are encapsulated in posts, Tweets, or ‘Likes’, they become verbal objects, things that can be exchanged. The exchange of verbal digital things serves to signify prestige and social importance; the more someone comments on your messages, or repeats what you have said, the more important you must be. This concept is the underlying assumption of Klout, a startup dedicated to analyzing a particular person’s influence online based in part on their Twitter followers and retweets.
As social media and virtual things become more and more prevalent, we are going to need a framework to interpret the meaning and exchange of virtual objects. While there has been little done so far, in the coming years, we ought to expect a more thorough theoretical exploration of the meaning of public exchange online.
References
- Appadurai, Arjun (1988). “Introduction: commodities and the politics of value.” In Appadurai, ed., The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Chan, Adrian (2010). “What’s Up With Social Objects?” http://johnnyholland.org/2010/05/03/whats-up-with-social-objects/
- Mauss, Marcel (1990). The Gift. New York: W. W. Norton and Company.
- Simmel, Georg (1978). The philosophy of money. London: Routledge.
Recently, Bloomberg Businessweek published an article on the success McDonald’s has had using ethnic niche marketing. The article focuses on the increasing importance of the minority consumer as trendsetter for “white America,” citing the success of the Fiesta Menu in majority-white neighborhoods as a sign that where ethnic customers go, white Americans will follow. However, the article also notes that the Fiesta Menu did not do as well as expected in the Hispanic communities at which it was targeted.
This begs the question: are ethnic minorities truly bellwethers of market trends, or does the McDonald’s example simply reveal a fetishization of minority culture that is appealing to the majority? This issue is addressed intelligently in an article by Gary Nelson, who claims that ethnic niche marketing often resorts to stereotyping its intended consumers in a detrimental and alienating way.
We see great potential here for social media intelligence to help brands learn how their customers want to be spoken to. Ethnic minority groups are not uniform, and understanding and acknowledging the differences between individuals in those groups can win your brand favor. Our hope is to leverage social media to help your brand engage in a more ethical and more appealing type of niche marketing– niche marketing beyond stereotyping.
McDonald’s and Ethnic Marketing:
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_29/b4187022876832.htm
Gary Nelson’s article:
http://www.imediaconnection.com/content/17166.asp
The demand for social media marketing services continues to grow and expand worldwide, I came across a services provider today located in Brazil by the name of Direct Labs:http://www.directlabs.com.br/. Direct Labs is a marketing company that operates out of Sao Paulo, and provides services like social media audits, policies, and brand services. This company demonstrates emerging markets are using social media for marketing purposes. With Orkut taking the lead as the #1 social network in Brazil with close to 10M members, more service providers like Direct Labs will begin to sprout and grow.
You got to love the creativity of New York, always pushing the limit in unique and innovative advertising programs. We tout that social media marketing works in online and offline environments, and this article proves it. The question begs, what is the right advertiser and is this repeatable? http://www.adotas.com/2010/09/scanners-going-wild-with-mobile-barcodes/
