I'm in the middle of researching for a presentation I'm giving at a seminar on using Social Media for Businesses, and I'm thinking to myself, this is going to be a really hard topic to talk on, especially since I'm not a consultant. Social media (at least to me) is a buzz word, much like e-commerce was in the late 90's and early part of this century (can some tell me what to call this decade?).
And then I stumbled on this link. Social Media Myths that Irk Me. First off, it's an awesome title to a blog entry. At the time of this post, I looked up major social media networks and it's the fourth link in Google. Secondly, it iterates (some alliteration there) my thoughts on Social Media. Briefly (please click on the link above for more info) the points are this:
- Social media is a medium, kind of like television and (gasp!) the newspaper.
- Social media isn't a product, it's a platform for a service (see above) to promote your message.
- Social media should be considered a part of traditional marketing (just because the platform changes, doesn't mean the message should).
- Social media is a controlled discussion. Just because the platforms don't censor, doesn't mean your business can't control the initial message. If you're that concerned about the blow-back, maybe you should concern yourself with either this is the approriate medium or your business's track record.
- Social media outcomes can be tracked. It's all apart of the same internet. Google can track where I come from when I visit a new site, why can't you?
In my opinion, all of this makes sense! All that has changed from "traditional" marketing and "new" marketing is the speed that the message is received. It may be a stretch (but not a tough one), but is a store boycott different from someone blasting a business on a forum, blog or tweet?
Trent Reznor (of NiN) makes a comparison between Wal-Mart and Apple because his iPhone app is rejected for something his band did in 1994. In that same week Apple revokes its decision and allows the app to go forward.
So let me get this straight. Trent Reznor publicly airs a grievance against a party, the party nearly immediately retreats from its previous stance. Rather than deal with the negative publicity (and more importantly the lost sales it could potentially generate), the party retracts its original position. The internet (the medium) provided Mr. Reznor the ability (the service) to voice his issue (by starting the discussion, he initially controlled discussion). Apple (granted, it probably drew some conclusions, but it could track customer service complaints) retracted itself.
What are your thoughts?