I agree with Tim though as I’m all for opportunism, and I don’t mind people spruiking their wares as long as it’s warranted.

You raise a really big issue.

I’ve met/ talked to/ read the ravings of some utter charlatans in the last few months.

Of the shoddy operators, it strikes me that they form two groups. First – the cynical ripping off the gullible because they see a few bucks. Second – those who don’t know that they don’t know.

That said, I don’t think the question should be about people getting into this for self interest. Capitalism is about spotting opportunities in the market. Surely, it should be about whether they add genuine value for their new clients. It really shouldn’t matter if someone is being opportunisitic if they are providing a genuine service.

Cheers,

Tim – Mumbrella

I use some form of social media every day of the year. Yes, more than I listen to the radio. Yes, more than reading the newspaper. Yes, more than reading magazines.

It’s obvious there is a space for brands to be active within SM and there is space for brands to do it really really well.

However, all good media strategies (be it in offline/online) should be able to answer some basic questions – How? When? Where? Why? Who? What? These are the building blocks of any campaign.

To my knowledge – these are questions that haven’t been answered correctly by any Australian brand using SM. Why?

To quote a friend of mine – ‘It’s Hot’.

SM is hot. It’s new, it’s cool. Our brands are cool, our brands are new. Perfect fit. We love SM.

Probably not a good way to go about things.

Yes, there are brands (Skittles, Prototype, Burger King, Dell etc) who have used SM effectively – in the USA, but Australia – no.

So what are the social media strategists in Australia doing?

And re: “It could be argued this is technology [social media tracking] for technologies sake. Sure, it can be done … but does it need to be? And who really benefits from it?”

Sure not every social media mention is worth responding to (as Zak M discussed in a post recently) but I personally see a lot of value in rewarding those who mention your brand in a positive light. These consumers are natural brand advocates and should be appreciated. By rewarding these twitterers or bloggers with free product (or anotehr reward) they are even more likely to speak positively about your brand. And as all marketers know, the most effective form of advertising is word of mouth…

So I reckon all brands can potentially benefit from these tracking systems?

I personally have a lot of belief that the social web holds massive potential and that some verticals (music, entertainment, etc) should definitely be utilising the marketing potential it holds.

However at the moment it feels like a bit of a gold rush with too many marketers rushing to the hills, all the while forgetting that the people getting rich are the shovel salesmen.

Once again, not all the SM strategist/expert/specialists fall into the realm of the snake oil salesmen, but a lot do.

My guess is that over the next 12 months we will start to get a much clearer picture of the effectiveness of these campaigns and their real impact on the bottom line.

Advertising should stick to the basics: change consumer behavior. Whether it’s social media, direct, tv, etc doesn’t really matter.

Social Web does have the benefit of putting a number on those customers, with almost instant feedback, a long walk since the days of John Wannamaker.

As for the social media experts snake oil, unless they starting presenting results, they probably will end up like ‘heritage media’. But if brands like Google or Wikipedia are were they are (mostly) without advertising, it’s about time we should consider social capital, customer service and iterative product design as a worthy alternative solution.