Defining Social Media: It's Different For Everyone

The recent Unity Marketing survey — that suggests few affluent consumers connect to brands on social networks, research purchases, or look for coupons — goes well beyond the single demographic. It underpins the problems with most platform strategies, program measurement, and the trappings of crowd-sourced connections.

Highlights From Unity Marking Surveys

• Only 26 percent feel the country is better now than three months ago.
• Affluent consumers spent 50 percent more on luxury items than one year ago.
• As many as 78 percent of affluent consumers have at least one network profile.
• As many as 70 percent of affluent consumer over 40 have at least one network profile.
• Approximately half of affluent consumers view brand pages at times, but do not "friend" them.
• 30 percent of young affluent consumers (under 45) have visited a shopping site in the past three months.
• Only 7 percent sign on to sites to look for special offers; only 6 percent share purchases with friends.

Even among the affluent consumers, Unity Marketing breaks out survey information in subsets, which demonstrate differences by wealth, age, and other social factors. A January 2010 Edelman report produced similar conclusions. Fewer than 25 percent of affluent consumers trust their friends' opinions on purchases. Smart marketers will segment their social marketing efforts, customizing their communications and offers based on the audience.

People are different. They interact differently. They use the Internet differently.

In 2007, we were fortunate in covering a fan-organized outcry over the cancellations of Jericho, Veronica Mars, and The Black Donnellys. It gave our firm evidence that different groups and demographics interact, organize, and share information differently across the Web.

These fan groups weren't the last. Every social media program we've worked on since, including a club for affluent consumers, uses various online technologies and outreach tactics differently. They focus on finite specifics, and not mass generalizations.

For example, volume traffic doesn't apply when a purchase includes a $2,500 to $5,000 membership. Ten thousand fans who cannot afford a membership can be beneficial but never produce outcomes. Even crowd-sourcing window shoppers could be dangerous as their input might not represent the customer, a detail some social media experts seem to forget.

"Social media seem to be experts at attracting each other," noted one of our agency clients. "We're more interested in attracting our customers."

The overanalyzed Motrin case study comes to mind. The majority of the public wasn't offended by the snarky online ad. However, that was a small consolation given that the majority of customers the ad targeted were offended.

The Reality Of Social Media Definitions.

When I present information about social media to classes at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, or any number of associations where I have spoken, I offer a working definition of social media. Mostly, I do it because the definition provides a context.

Social media describes online technologies that people use to share content, opinions, insights, experiences, perspectives, and media.

However, I also invest some time in breaking the definition down (it is people and technologies) and then breaking it into pieces. You see, nowadays, if you ask people to define social media, 80 million of them are just as likely to say social media is Farmville as they are to describe it as a "business" or some sort of "collective stream of consciousness." In short, even social media experts have about as much chance of defining what people do on the Internet as they do planet Earth. It's not scalable.

Fortunately, businesses do not have to understand what all people do within any given environment. They only need to know what their customers want (or don't know what they want). And then, they have to deliver it, online or offline.

After all, if every successful communication program could be defined by a list of bullet points, then traditional communication would have deciphered the right mix of bullet points a long time ago. Considering no one did, it might stand to reason that while we'll see an increasing number of cookie-cutter social media programs, we'll only find a few that are relatively tasty.

Looking Glass: Los Angeles Times Dives In

It seems the Los Angeles Times (L.A. Times) has chosen short-term publicity over long-term branding in a one shot advertisement that not everyone appreciates. As described by the New York Times, the newspaper allowed a garishly multicolored image of Johnny Depp as the Mad Hatter, in the film “Alice in Wonderland,” to occupy the paper’s cover page, complete with the L.A. Times masthead and a rerun of recent articles.

According to the story, Russ Stanton and several deputies vigorously opposed the ad but they were overruled by the paper’s business executives. John Conroy, spokesman for the L.A. Times, likened the ad to the common practice of having an ad cover part or all of a Web site’s home page for a few seconds.

Why Russ Stanton Might Be Right.

Everyone knows that the print editions of daily newspapers are struggling as their online versions have yet to retain a suitable level of replacement revenue. So some might say $700,000, the amount paid for the ad, is simply a badly needed boost.

But what the business executives at the L.A. Times might not be considering is long-term erosion of the brand. As the old saying goes: if everything is for sale, then everything is for sale. And given this isn't the first time that the daily has surrendered editorial space, that might be the case. Eventually, the willingness to supplant the brand for promotional revenue will define the publication.

It may have already. The L.A. Times promoted the sale, calling it a groundbreaking move. Certainly, the move might be groundbreaking, but not for the L.A. Times. While the newspaper is attempting to minimize the move by calling it a wrap, giving up the masthead (along with stories penned by serious journalists) means something else entirely. They may as well put a wrap around their building.

What is groundbreaking is Disney winning the bid to do it. Putting the Mad Hatter everywhere has resulted in a real coup for the movie that is outpacing Avatar with a $116.1 million opening weekend. For the L.A. Times, the publicity is a net loss.

Anytime you elevate awareness, you have to consider the sentiment that comes with it. And the question that might be asked over the long term is that if the L.A. Times doesn't take itself seriously, then why would anyone else? Usually newspapers want to be known for Pulitzers over the same sort of publicity stunts they often criticize.

The timing couldn't be worse, either. Forbes reported on a study that that while Web ads will grow another 10 percent this year, magazines are expected to see a small 1.9 percent increase in spending to. What does that mean for dailies?

Strongly branded dailies will survive in better times, especially with fewer of them. And that means the L.A. Times ought to keep taking its temperature while it experiments with being a tabloid. Tabloid competition is even tougher, I hear.

A Round-Up Of Opinions On Selling The L.A. Times

• Times Sells Disney Its Front Page for $700K by Sharon Waxman

• The Los Angeles Times Sells Out The Front Page by Donald Douglas

• L.A. Times Splashes Mad Hatter Across Fake Front Page: No Harm, No Foul by Si Cantwell

• L.A. Times sells Disney Front Page For Movie Ad by Steve Gorman

• L.A. Times Runs Cover Wrap for ‘Alice in Wonderland’ by MediaBuyer Planner

Looking Forward: Social Migrates To Mobile

Need another reason to keep your eyes on the mobile market? A new study from comScore, Inc. found that 30.8 percent of smart phone users accessed social networking sites via their mobile browsers in January.

The number is not static. It's up 8.3 points from 22.5 percent one year ago. And some networks are experiencing even more growth with mobile. Mobile access to Facebook grew 112 percent; Twitter access jumped 347 percent.

"Social media is a natural sweet spot for mobile since mobile devices are at the center of how people communicate with their circle of friends, whether by phone, text, email, or, increasingly, accessing social networking sites via a mobile browser," said Mark Donovan, senior vice president of mobile for comScore.

More than 25.1 million agree. That is the number of people who accessed Facebook from their phone, which means Facebook mobile users surpass MySpace users. Twitter attracted 4.7 million mobile users in January. These numbers do not include mobile consumers who access social network sites through a mobile application.

When combined with another study released by Euro RSCG Worldwide PR today, it underpins the next migration of social nomads. The study might be specific to a small group of teenage girls (ages 13-18), but the numbers are compelling.

• Seventy-eight percent of teenage girls use social media to keep in touch with friends, while three-quarters report being in "constant contact" with friends through texting, Facebook, iChat, AIM or other social media services.

• They show a clear preference for approaching a brand to find out about sales and promotions rather than having the brand approach them. But when they do approach a brand, 40 percent sign up for e-mails.

• Sixty-five percent say when their favorite brand or store has a sale, they want to share the information with friends and family with a preference toward one-on-one communication (texting) over social networks (Facebook and Twitter).

The original release can be found here. Only 100 girls were included.

The trending toward mobile suggests that most social media programs will have to be revamped within two years to include for a greater emphasis in reaching increasingly mobile consumers. Jokes about the product aside, the release of the iPad will likely stimulate an increased emphasis on mobility over sociability as technology gives consumers more flexibility in communicating publicly (one to many) or privately (one one one). Stay tuned.

Stacking The Deck: Fresh Content

The topics might be reoccurring — measurement, popularity, persuasion, media musings, and customer experience — but each of these fresh content picks brings something new to the table instead of rehashing what most people already know.

All five posts focus on application and insight, helping you understand why things work the way they do. In some cases, you might walk away and wish you didn't know. Sometimes the truth is like that.

Measurement can be easier than you think. Popularity does command attention. Conflicts do create allies. Media is much less serious than the news it reports. And customers do rate your company based on expectation and experience. See for yourself.

Best Fresh Content In Review, Week of February 22

• Putting the Public Back in PR Measurement.
With 88 percent of public relations professionals believing that measurement is an integral part of the public relations process, most executives would think that there is some sort of standard. It's simply not true. Most firms measure it differently and column inches prevails as the end-all cost vs. exposure analysis for clients. Valeria Maltoni provides some insight into how measurement might be done right.

• Popularity Matters – Ignore It At Your Own Peril.
Anyone who knows me might be surprised to see this land in the fresh pick project basket. However, there is a difference between discounting popularity and ignoring it all together. Adam Singer provides a tempered and objective view on how popularity helps propel some people, companies, and messages (whether the work or product has real merit).

• How to Use “Us vs Them” Stories to create Social Media Evangelists
Dan Zarrella pens a great post on how to identify one of the oldest and most powerful persuasion tactics on the books: "Us vs. Them." Zarrella uses Apple as his quintessential example, but the tactic is ripe with case studies across social media. Several people have leveraged "Us vs. Them" scenarios to create online followings. If you are the underdog or side with consumers, you will likely win. Simple.

• The Mcarp Guide To Sweeps Series Planning
If you haven't been following the republishing of Michael Carpenter's series on Occam's Razor, you are missing out. This post takes a peek inside the networks as they prepare for sweeps and the mad dash to juice the numbers. It's a humorous and revealing look at things inside the newsroom. Check out the entire series too.

• Creating Remarkable Customer Experiences is About Two Things
Jay Ehret provides three purposes of a planned customer experience — meeting brand expectations, creating loyal customers, and sparking word of mouth. The post emphasizes the importance of customer service, which is especially timely given the state of the auto industry. When was the last time you really, really loved your car or airline? Ehret reveals why or why not.

Writing For Public Relations: The Importance Of Planning

Planning is one of the single most important functions of public relations and/or corporate communications, and yet it remains the single most neglected function. More than half of small companies operate without it (CDW Report, 2009). Of companies that have plans, most do not update them regularly. Fewer measure performance against the plans they create.

Small companies are not alone. Medium and large companies have plans that are often outmoded or ignored. Even companies that do have plans seem to have little faith in them, given that fewer than 15 percent measure external communication (IABC Research Foundation). And only 15 percent of internal communicators say they can demonstrate a return on investment.

So, every year, I provide students with a basic communication outline. This year, I created a supplement deck using Toyota as the model. The supplement is only a sketch of a strategic communication plan, but it still manages to pinpoint communication challenges, opportunities, and failures experienced by the company in recent months.

The Importance Of Planning from Rich Becker, Copywrite, Ink.

The above deck is a supplement teaching tool for Writing For Public Relations at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. The intent of this deck is to provide students with an applied case study to underscore elements contained within a handout.

Picking Roads: Personal Brand Or Persuasive Persona?

When it comes to personal branding, there are plenty of roads that people can take to reach a destination. Unfortunately, most personal branding tips and discussions prompt people to take a different road than the one they prescribe. In fact, most directions have very little to do with being real and very much to do with developing a persuasive persona (intended or not).

Personally, I don't agree with developing a persuasive persona because it seems to be the polar opposite of authenticity. Even when I think to write about this subject, I always wonder if some people will use the tools for agenda over best intent. At the same time, good people probably need to know the ingredients to identify which is which. So here they are...

Three Ingredients For A Persuasive Persona.

This isn't communication theory as much as it is a psychological proof. The tactics are well known in psychology. They have been applied and studied for as long as there has been formalized propaganda. They were employed by con artists well before that.

• Credibility.

Communicator credibility, the degree someone can be believed, depends on how much expertise they appear to have. Appear is the operative word. Credibility can consist of pure fiction, provided someone has the right fact, message, position, affiliation, frequency, or mass following.

All of these things lend to perceived credibility, which creates a persuasive persona. Whether or not there is any verifiable evidence that they are an expert, such as experience or results, hardly matters. It's the platform that Tac Anderson talks about in his post on personal branding.

• Attractiveness.

By attractiveness, I'm not talking about physical qualities as much as charisma. Simply put, people tend to seek out and gravitate around people they like and admire. It's the basis for most social media tactics: People will like you if you make it about them. Everybody loves to be noticed. It's the rule of reciprocity.

There are dozens of posts that could be written on this subject. It can be influenced by any number of factors: schematics we create about people, the primacy effect, pre-existing stereotypes, sense of personal attachment, dispositional bias, self-serving bias, self-attribution, and all sorts of other stuff. But, the bottom line is still the same. People tend to like the ideas of people they like, whether or not those ideas are right.

• Context.

Every group, over time, begins to develop implicit and explicit sets of beliefs, attitudes, ideas, and protocols. The more you adopt or pretend to adopt those beliefs, the more likely you will receive social approval from the group. It has worked this way for a long time. It will likely work this way for a long time to come.

A tribe, as some people call them online, like any other group throughout time, establishes its own set of rewards and punishments for accepting or not accepting social norms. It's also the basis of most social media outreach programs — listen first and then adopt the norms established by that group. By doing so, agents hope to increase their likability until they establish enough credibility to persuade the group.

Persuasive Personas Aren't Always Real.

These tactics are precisely what social media detractors do not like about some social media personas. Intangible credibility, likability over earned respect, and faux belongingness seem all too apparent to them. They say the public is being duped.

Of course, the detractors are only partly right. There are some very smart, experienced, and like-minded people involved in social media. And, of course, some are not. The latter only seek out the endearment of others to elevate their credibility in order to sell products or launch a paid service space to be staffed by volunteers who will do the work for free.

There is nothing wrong with that, per se. Everyone has to eat. All I'm saying is that there are fundamental differences between personal branding, reputation management, and persuasive personas. And in developing your online presence, I hope you take the high road as opposed to the one I've outlined above. Good night and good luck.