Trends and Truisms Day Four: All Media Is Social/ “Eventess”
Number four is a two-in-one Trend and Truism 
I started writing this one and got a little lost, and the post began to meander. In the end I think that I was able to put together something fairly cogent.
The first part of this title was meant to be a bit evocative, as well cautionary for those who tend to latch on to buzz phrases at face value. Let me explain.
According to dictionary.com, the word medium is defined as:
- a middle state or condition; mean
- something intermediate in nature or degree
- an intervening substance, as air, through which a force acts or an effect is produced
- an intervening agency, means, or instrument by which something is conveyed or accomplished: Words are a medium of expression. One of the means or channels of general communication, information, or entertainment in society, as newspapers, radio, or television.
The common thread here is some type of duality or reaction to duality.
I think people need to think very long and hard when considering strategies they consider to be “social media”. Just because you are advertising on Facebook does not make your strategy akin to the type of marketing that has come to be known as social or conversational marketing. Remember, by nature all media is social but not necessarily conversational or effective when it comes to relationship building. I hear terms like SMO (social media optimization) thrown around and I worry that people will forget the underlying principles inherent to good marketing and CRM.
As a marketer, don’t forget your first responsibility is to market effectively, not check off boxes on the social media to do list.
“Eventness”
Originally this was going to be its own post, but I decided it was a natural progression of the “All Media Is Social” post.
This year look out for more initiatives like the YouTube presidential debates or the ABC Facebook Debates. While these events are very compelling, as broadband adoption reaches critical mass, and streaming video becomes commonplace, more people will be taking advantage of platforms like PalTalk and Usteam.tv (and many other platforms that may have not even been launched yet) for real time events. I would definitely be on the look out for more events that you can participate in online, in real time.
As these types of events become more popular, it will be important for marketers to pay attention to all of the addition conversations and interactions that occur during these events in order to be a relevant part of the conversation.
Brad Berens talks about matters related to “eventness” or what he refers to as “Sobytiinost”. I strongly recommend heading over to Mediavorous to read more about what Brad has to say on this subject. I also wrote an article for iMediaconnection entitled, “Must See PC”. In order to get the full gist of this concept, I suggest reading all of the related posts and articles.
Tags: conversational marketing, social media, CRM, SMO, Facebook, You Tube, ABC, Paltalk, UStream.tv, broadband, Sobytiinoist, eventess, Mediavorous, Brad Berens
Jan 07, 2008
Adam,
I am not sure there is any industry incentive to streamline the accessibility to fresh content. While we all enjoy the frenetic pace that television offers I have a concern that didn’t enter my mind until I read your post.
Brad Berens asks why the “last 10 feet” of convergence cannot be bridged between his TV and his pc. He builds on Henry Jenkin’s Convergence Culture and notes how the demand for content increases while the ability to reach such content has become more convoluted.
So I put forth this analysis, I believe that the “Convergence Class” (those vendors who produce the technology that allow us to retrieve the much coveted content), have intentionally created artificial barriers to easily accessing content.
It is the same fundamental argument that is found in college football and the bowl games that culminate at the end of the season. The amount of revenue gained by a single “championship” game is Spartan in contrast to the millions of dollars spent on the alphabet soup of games held across the country.
Sure it would be nice to say the winner of tonight’s game is the undisputed National Champion, but it is much more lucrative to have a rainbow of competitors involved. Since those who produce engaging content aren’t responsible for the delivery of it into the home, these last 10 feet are as good as 10 miles.
Jan 08, 2008
Adam,
You’re right on about the dangers of the social media to do list. You’ll often hear me asking new clients if they have the in-house resources to carry on the conversation with frequency and transparency post launch. I think advertisers are still stuck in the old, 1.0 agency mindset that post-launch activity is limited to measurement and evaluation of the campaign. The social media or conversational campaign must be nurtured and maintained on a daily basis. Otherwise the most you can hope for is a one-shot PR hit for joining the 2.0 bandwagon. Didn’t we learn anything from the ghost-towns in Second Life?
For my money, the YouTube and Facebook debates are simply old media trying to show off how new media they are. But in the end, they’re simply checking off the list themselves. The YouTube debates were interesting, but really didn’t tap into what is truly social about YouTube – the network. It was essentially an electronic town hall meeting and felt like little more than an old-fashioned webcast – only less social. And while Facebook did an admirable job of polling and stirring conversation online, the actual debate was merely sponsored by Facebook, having no interaction with the community at all.
It’s tempting to pat them on the back, since even the mainstream acknowledgment of social media was a struggle to achieve, but let’s not let them off the hook that easy.
In order to engage with these social networks, advertising campaigns and events must first fully understand and appreciate what drives these social networks. It’s not just that it’s online, or consumer-generated, or grassroots or democratized. It is the network of people. They’re friending and linking and meeting and discovering and creating on these websites because it is easy and rewarding to do so. Marketers need to realize that the real benefit is tapping into the network in ways that leverage the network’s value. Running ads or throwing up a sponsored profile won’t satisfy the checklist anymore… if it ever did.
Jan 08, 2008
Kirk
Thanks for the comments and thanks for joining in on this experiment!
I was in 100% agreement with you on almost everything, however there is one point that I have to counter. You say,
“For my money, the YouTube and Facebook debates are simply old media trying to show off how new media they are. The YouTube debates were interesting, but really didn’t tap into what is truly social about YouTube – the network.”
While I agree that this experiment did not fully exploit the power of YouTube’s network, I do think they the community was tapped into to some degree. After all, they did solicit questions for the candidates from everyday people; an unprecedented act if you ask me.
Still, I agree it was sterilized and could have been more powerful, but….baby steps
Jan 08, 2008
[...] Contact The Ringleader (Adam Broitman) « Trends and Truisms Day Four: All Media Is Social/ “Eventess” [...]
Jan 08, 2008
Adam – I still say we have to call a little “bullshit” on CNN.
Questions from ordinary people? Political campaigns have been exploiting the town hall meeting on the mass media stage since George H.W. Bush looked at his watch in ‘92.
CNN could have just as easily encouraged viewers to upload their video questions to CNN.com like they’re doing with iReport, so the YouTube platform was not imperative for the debate.
I suppose you could argue that YouTube has the widest base of people already inclined and technologically capable of posting questions, and that is why they collaborated. So I’ll give them that. But not much more.
Jan 08, 2008
Kirk
While I do not think that this was 100% revolutionary, I am going to have to stick to my guns on this one and say it was not bullshit. I think the fact that the candidates and CNN opened themselves up to this is pretty significant (even if it had been done before in other forums).
That being said, I would love to proven wrong
Do you have some thoughts on what could have been done to leverage You Tube in a more effective manner?
Perhaps someone else out there has some thoughts on the matter as well.