Social Media Simplified

Brilliant. Courtesy via.

Social Media Guru

(Via. Courtesy Gavin Heaton)

Trust Onion to come with the best satire on social media. You cannot but agree with the dissection of social media gurus and agencies in this video as they are so true.

"Using your brains to think of an idea and your skills to implement it? That's the old model."

Another example: 

"Our firm was hired to expand SpeedStick deodorant's Twitter footprint. But they already had a Twitter feed -- and we of course had no original ideas. So we hired a separate company to create thousands of fake Twitter accounts designed only to follow SpeedStick. We were able to increase the number of accounts following SpeedStick from 300 to 900,000 in less than a week. And the best part is, all of these accounts were robots -- so we didn't have to tweet anything, because nobody was reading it."

The inevitable conclusion?

"Ideally, real human users will leave social networking altogether, and all that will be left will be thousands of robots, talking to each other, who we can then advertise to."

HA!

5 types of social media strategies

 

(via)

As always, Tom Fishburne nails it with the above cartoon. There is also a wonderful quote in his post attributed to Kathy Sierra.

“It does not matter how awesome your product is or your presentation or your post. Your awesome thing matters ONLY to the extent that it serves the user’s ability to be a little more awesome.”

Social media can never help if the organization (and brand) is inherently anti-social. Being anti-social takes many forms. For example, the organization imposes restriction on 'free speech' or customer service sucks( and is rude) or the product/service is bad. Simply put, social media is not a substitute if the brand and organization suck in the real world. It is an amplifier, an enabler.

Finally, brands and their agencies have to work towards making the customer more 'awesome'. And that is a lot of hard work.

Social Media Revolution

(Via)

At last someone made this video. It is a brilliant parody that rips apart the BS that mavens and zealots thrive in. 

Social Media and Digital are far too precious to be left in the hands of agencies and marketers.

7 reasons why I think social media is a woman

This post by Brian Solis has stats to show that social media is dominated by women. I am taking it a step further. I think that social media is a woman and here are seven reasons why I think so. 

1. If you want to make some headway, shut the f*ck up and listen
2. Remains a conundrum in spite of all the experts and guru’s 
   
3. Has a long memory and never lets you forget your missteps
   
4. Dismissive of fakes and prefers real men
5. Believes healthy relationships are built when expressing innermost feelings  
6. Needs constant care and attention  
7. Headache, when you desperately want to control it

(Image courtesy: pericomart)

Rumours, Lies and Social Media

It is rightly said that bad news, rumours and lies spreads faster than good news. Magnifying the speed a zillion times is Social Media. More than the speed, it is the erroneous opinion one tends to form about a person or event that makes it so damned dangerous.

I came across this post by Nassim Taleb wherein he accuses Guardian of distorting his views and comments on a particular topic. In this particular case though, one knows the source (Guardian) and what they represent. But is it realistic to expect to know the source of content always?

Theoretically, Social Media provides an equal platform for extreme views. But such is the power of misrepresentation (and Social Media) that more often than not the damage is done before one can react.

While the premise of this post is negative, it is with a reason. I do not want Social Media to become like 'traditional media'. Whatever be the debate amongst pundits about Social Media, I can confidently say that I am deriving enormous benefits from it. Social Media represents the hope that I have for getting information, knowledge and entertainment in a manner devoid of prejudices. Even if there were prejudices, it is out there in the open. This is not true of traditional media.

Traditional media(journalism) professes to be balanced, but that is hardly the case. For example, the newspaper that epitomised balanced journalism and which most Indians in the South like me grew up with is now increasingly sounding like Pravda. I continue to read it not because I am a leftist or that I have any sort of political inclination (far from it) The irony that is not lost on me is that the options to this paper are far worse. The reason for this deterioration in standards is pretty straight forward.

Media houses have sold their souls at the altar of rating points and readership. They are peddling conjectures and rumours as facts. Probably, the influence of electronic media and its inherent superficiality has a role to play. What is worse is that even the dead are not spared. I am not just talking about celebrities like MJ.

An incident that upset me and other like-minded Indians was the coverage of the murder of a 14-year old girl. The media circus that followed must be one of the most shameful episodes in India’s journalistic history. Indian media in collusion with the authorities tore that poor child’s name as well as that of her family to shreds. They reminded me of a pack of hyena’s circling an innocent prey.

I hope Social Media does not become an instrument to perpetuate social lie. Crap detection in Social Media is very easy. But for that we need to shake ourselves out of the habit (from time to time) of being mere passive consumers of information.

One cannot justify lies and rumours under the guise of freedom of speech. The enormous freedom and reach that Social Media gives us, comes with a rider. Responsibility!

(Image courtesy: somebody)

Why does it have to be either this or that?

What will you choose when the genie in your computer pops out and offers you the following:

A. A dream date (and much more) with the person of your fantasy (HORNY)

B. A billion dollars in your bank account (MONEY)

C. All of the above (BOTH HORNY AND MONEY, WOW)

The correct choice will only be known at the end of this post. So I request you to control your primal urges and read on.

I am relatively new to blogging and the whole social networking she-bang. However, I am not new to the world of internet and I am not talking about my email account :-) I can claim to have worked (?) in this space for nearly three years of which two years was spent in a full-blooded dotcom. In fact I entered the world of internet just when the dotcom bubble was about to burst. There is a sense of déjà-vu when I compare the dotcom days with what is happening today.

This sense comes from the ongoing debate (noise) between the agency types (advertising and related) on the one side and the social media mavens on the other. Both of them have drawn a line separating ‘mainstream advertising’ (TV, Print, Experiential etc) and the ever-morphing world of internet. Some of the agency types question the efficacy of ‘social media’ while the mavens keep predicting the death of advertising as we know it.

In the dotcom days there was a similar debate about how advertising was going to be eclipsed by anything prefixed with an ‘e’ (Remember it?) The dotcom bubble burst. Did it mean that advertising won and internet lost?

No.

Dotcoms lost, though. However, the bursting of the dotcom bubble was the best thing to happen to the world of internet. The VC’s moved away. The internet companies that were serious like my company focussed considerable efforts on achieving great UI, outstanding customer service and innovative marketing (I had a zero-budget for marketing) They continuously experimented, started building robust revenue streams and were eventually rewarded. Most of them are going strong even today.

In my opinion the current innovations in social networking owes its development to the critical period after the bursting of dotcom bubble. User Groups, Message Boards, Forums and other online interactions were the backbone of internet companies in those tough times especially for people like me in Marketing. They are probably the catalyst to today’s popular destinations like Facebook, LinkedIn and so on.

Am I suggesting that the current bubble on Social Media should burst?

In the first place there is no Social Media bubble, only hype. Social Media is yet another manifestation (Avatar if I were to use a popular jargon) in the wonderful world of internet. Therefore, the debate between ‘Advertising’ versus ‘Social Media’ is erroneous as the comparision is erroneous (Apples & Oranges)

Companies like IBM, CISCO and suchlike have realized this. They embrace both mainstream advertising and the opportunities emerging technologies that internet is providing (of which Social Media is a part) to succeed in the marketplace. This should be a lesson to other companies and to the people who debate either this or that.

Like IBM and Cisco, I love both the worlds. I have spent most of my career in advertising in arguably one of India’s finest and as mentioned before also have a reasonably decent exposure in the world of internet (1 month = 7 internet years) I am aware that like dotcoms, Social Media might see a lot of churn. But that is a good thing as this will only make internet stronger.

Internet will continue to grow at a frenzied pace offering endless opportunities to one and all, including advertising. Its footprints via its various avatars will steadily pervade all aspects of an individual, corporation and society's life. In that sense it closely resembles our nervous system with synaptic pulses carrying information to and fro in many ways, to many destinations. Some of the tools, like email for instance, have already become so ubiquitous that we only realize it exists when there is a problem. Like our heart!

Now that I have finished my rant, let’s move on to more important matters.

I am talking about the multiple choice question posed by the genie – horny, money or both.You might think that keeping in mind the nature of this post, the right choice is ‘both’.

That, my dear friend, is called ‘wishful thinking’. The genie was lying, you horny loser.

(Image courtesy: Talie)

The rise of the optimist

Media, economists and self-proclaimed experts seem to thrive on the volatile nature of the world economy by prophezising only a downhill trajectory. Pessimism seems to loom large across societies and conflicting statements plus actions from people in power (Government and Corporations) only seem to make it worse.

However, Newton’s third law has to kick-in sometime. It is time for pessimism to face an equal measure of optimism, if not more.

I came across this wonderful web compendium called ‘The Optimist Conspectus’, courtesy via Gavin (Servant of Chaos) The Optimist Conspectus was started by Ian Fitzpatrick with ‘no lofty world changing goal’ - I loved this honesty. It is ‘a compendium of contemporary optimism, one perspective at a time’. People from round the world have given their perspective on what they are optimistic about. They are gems. Sample this wonderful piece by Nishad Ramachandran.

“Coming from a nation that has more young people than old, more illiterates than literates, more needy than greedy you just got to believe that tomorrow will be better and that hope will ultimately triumph over gloom. Nishad is an advertising creative and father of two children aged 9 and 8.”

My perspective has been published. Why don’t you share your perspective too?

BTW, what is the height of optimism?

Hoping that the new government to assume power few weeks from now in the ‘world’s largest democracy’ will actually work for the welfare of the people!

(Image courtesy: john curley)

Why I think politicians can be successful social media marketers?

This is not a piece about Obama and his campaign that took him to the White House. That’s been captured very well here, here and here. This is also not about the initiative after Obama’s entry into White House. All of them are without a doubt awesome case-studies that I am sure will find its way into B-School curricula.

This is a random rambling of mine about how politicians, in general, can be great social media marketers. They could belong to the right, left or centre in their political orientation. I am aware that the left-leaning ones would prefer to be called “revolutionaries”. But then that is a topic for discussion over drinks.

Anyways, following are the reasons why I think what I think:

Politicians know how to create and sustain conversations

Experts keep pointing out that social media is all about conversations and that a sustained one can help build strong relationships.

Politicians can not only create conversations, they can raise it to the level of a raging debate – a groundswell if I am permitted to say so. They do this by taking a provocative stance or stoking the fires of controversy. They extract maximum personal mileage and thereby succeed in creating salience in people’s mind.

Take a look at any post that resulted in considerable debate (comments), you will know what I am saying.

Politicians are honest and transparent

This might be difficult to believe, but hear me out.

Social media, it is said, demands honesty and transparency as double-speak is easily spotted and denounced.

In the case of politicians ‘wysiwyg’ is fully operational. They are completely open (blatantly so) about their lack of scruples and love to keep everyone guessing about their intentions. This might seem hypocritical but it is their natural style. Probably, the fact that our expectations from politicians are low could be an important reason.

Denizens of the corporate world have no business pointing fingers at the politicians. Corporate actions and messages tend to bring about greater disbelief and at times comical relief than political promises.

Politicians thrive on chaos

Pundits constantly talk about the loss of control when one ventures into the messy social media space. They also mention that it is one of the reasons for marketers hesitating to venture here.

A politician welcomes chaos with open arms. It is the fuel that drives him closer to his ambition. Chaos is an opportunity for the politician to not only create a conversation, but a conflagration.

Politicians are fast to respond and extremely intuitive

Social media, unlike broadcast media, demands a quick response as one deals with the unknown. This means that one has to be extremely adaptive and intuitive. An average marketer is brought up on the staple diet of ‘linear thinking’ and therefore will find the going tough.

A politician is different. He cannot waste time (unless it is part of the strategy) as it will mean giving ground to his opponents. There is no loss of synapse time between his thinking and action – sometimes he acts first and thinks later. Some of the actions are so disruptive in nature that it can send a conventional marketer into epileptic seizures.

Politicians are undeterred by failures

There could be numerous failures along the way. Not everyone can be as lucky as this case when one ventures into the social media space. Come to think of it, this is also true of conventional media (approach) and I do not know why anyone is not making a hue and cry over it.

A politician is unfazed by failure as he views everything with a single criterion – was the noise level (buzz) high enough for him to stand out? The speed of a politician’s response mentioned in the previous point enables him to overcome a potential disaster and turn it into an advantage.

Politicians are able to command a loyal following

If the number of followers or fans is an important measure of success in social media, the politician is a winner hands down.

Even the lowest level politician, say a councilor, can attract and retain thousands of followers. The reason(s): all the above.

The more I got into the flow of writing this piece, the more I realize I have it all wrong.

This is beyond social media. The politician is, in fact, a great marketer. There are many more reasons one can think of than the ones mentioned above to prove this point.

In fact, B-Schools should invite politicians as guest faculty members. They will be able to inspire future marketers into becoming bold marketers. What say?

Note: There is no bias intended by using the masculine gender ‘he’ while referring to the politician. It was purely to facilitate the writing of this piece. If anything women in politics are as good at marketing (if not better) than their male counterparts.

(Image Courtesy: dmax3270)