Another excerpt from my research.
Criticism of Social Media
In my attempts to stay relevant with the industry, I’ve been overwhelmed by the attention that social media has gotten. Article after article, praising its name as if a new marketing deity has risen – then one day that all changed. I came across a few articles that weren’t so sure about the whole thing. In fact, they really didn’t think it was that special at all. One of them even compared it to alcohol: it seems to great at first, but then you come to find out that it may not be so great after all (Doug deGrood, Adage) Here’s why:
1) It’s a social platform. Therefore, the users visit the websites etc. in order to do social things. After all, that is their purpose isn’t it? Statistics were recently released stating that less than 5% of social media users “regularly turn to these sites for guidance on purchase decisions” (Knowledge Networks), which could leave all those jumping on the social bandwagon wondering if it’s really the right choice for their company. So while the industry is screaming from the mountaintops about the importance of conducting a dialogue, rather than a one-way conversation; there is an abundance of consumers that have no interest in joining in on the fun. They just want to talk to their friends and family, not to brands. They want the companies to satisfy their needs, but the companies have been doing that for years even without the social platform, or else they’re out of business. In concession, social media does make it quite a bit easier to understand the consumer, their lifestyle, their preferences, and their purchasing behavior.
2) It’s a medium, not the cure to all ills. Years ago, television came along and the advertising industry got flipped upside down. People sung its praises, and everyone hopped on board. But in the end, it was just a medium. Yes, its reach allowed the brand’s message to spread faster, however a broader reach doesn’t equal higher sales. Ideas do. Regardless of the competitive advantages offered by social media, the agencies still have to accurately interpret the research, generate innovative ideas from that research, and communicate those ideas with a finely-tailored message. Therefore, the only thing social media really does is help collect the information, and act as one of many avenues to communicate it. Is that useful? Yes. Is that an advertising revolution? No. The fundamentals have not changed. They remain steadfastly in place, only now there’s another tool in their utility belt.
3) It has no business model. DeGrood stated it perfectly in saying, “Currently, the only thing [social platforms] are generating is more users, which requires more bandwidth, which requires more capital, which, at some point (soon?) will require a boatload of ad revenue to satisfy the venture capitalist folks who ponied up the money for this worldwide digital kegger in the first place” (Adage). So where is this revenue going to come from? We’ve already established that consumers don’t use it to research purchasing decision, so unless this statistic is kept on the hush for years to come, the revenue from banners ads etc. won’t be able to support the providers. Forcing consumers to pay subscriptions isn’t likely either, as once it’s free, there’s no turning back. That leaves the research and communication attributes to save the sinking ship, both of which have potential. For research, the biggest obstacle to overcome will be the legalities of consumer privacy. For communication, the balancing act between implementation and intrusion will be the deciding factor. Will they work? I have no idea, however I wish the executives of those companies the best in figuring it out.
No comments:
Post a Comment