where content, technology and people meet. (SM) Publishing and content technology executives use Shore to measure and understand their markets and competitors, define marketing strategies and implement successful content products and services using Shore's highly actionable insights into vendors, institutions, individuals and virtual communities.
COMMENTARY: INDEX
CONTENTBLOGGER
INDUSTRY EVENTS
CONTENT NATION

Read ShoreLines, our complimentary email newsletter.

weekly   daily
Sample issue
RECENT ENTRIES
WEBLOGS: ARCHIVES
 
 
ContentBlogger is the 2007 SIIA CODiE Award Winner for Best Media Blog
COMMENTARY:

Insights and headlines from Shore analysts on trends in enterprise and media content markets.
Subscribe to our XML feed (?) or add to: MyYahoo  Bloglines  Rojo  NewsGator Online  CNET Newsburst
 
Friday, April 13, 2007
The Social Media Club is a growing network of social media enthusiasts from many different walks of life, including both the commercially-oriented online crowd as well as academics focusing on media studies. I was invited to speak on a panel for their April Boston area meeting a couple of months ago and so I found myself braving cats-and-dogs rain to join the group in Dedham, Massachussets last night along with other hardy New Englanders. The panel consisted of myself, Judith Perrolle of Northeastern University and Douglas Quintal of Emerson College considering the question of whether the bomb scare in Boston earlier this year triggered by a promotion for the Cartoon Network may have implications for social media.

The short answer was: not really. This was a stunt by a mainstream media company that was using well-established "guerrilla marketing" techniques across the nation to put out a message on portable electronic displays - which in Boston were placed near and under key infrastructure points. Someone implied that perhaps backhandedly the promoters knew that this might get a rise out of the authorities - or that perhaps they even brought it to their attention. Who knows. The bottom line is that the City of Boston was not consulted, and in general good citizens try to keep the protectors of community interests in the loop. By contrast, social media is all about sharing communal interests and self-policing of boundaries of conduct by community members.
In a sense social media is the exact opposite of guerilla marketing: since individuals already have access to powerful tools to create and contextualize content mainstream marketers come to their content to get into the communal flow of things. I think that Judith Perrolle hit the nail on the head when she characterized the ill-fated Cartoon Network campaign as "solid-state spam."

But on the other side of the incident are the younger people who looked at the reaction in Boston and said "They don't get it." That's certainly valid from the perspective of the younger target audience for the Cartoon Network - we all know that if your parents get something it must not be "cool" - but it's also a sign of people who have come to accept that commercial messages can appear anywhere. Social media tends to extend this concept by its ability to make it easy for webloggers and other personal publishers to embed ads on their sites as well as content from other sites. For younger people this is kind of an extension to the logo-laden clothing and accessories that are pervasive in our culture: they "wear"brands on their content the way that they do going to school. So to them seeing the Cartoon Network or any other brand in a public space is not that big a deal. Social media, though, is not really the cause of this, just an extension of a pre-existing branded culture.

But as social media matures I believe that people will become more sensitized to how they are using their personal brands cultivated via their social media persona to endorse other brands in personal and public spaces. Kids - and many adults - are beginning to understand more clearly when people are using advertising to support a personal and community function without prejudice and when the advertising is tainting a person's online persona. Doug Quintal pointed to research of 2,500 young people which indicates that the stereotype of social media enthusiasts as loners/losers does not pan out statistically: their use of social media is pervasive, with the proportion of loner/loser personalities in virtual spaces being about the same as in the real world. So as social media becomes more pervasive marketers are going to have to be increasingly sensitive as to how to present messages more authentically as participants in social media communities rather than as mere commercial wallpaper. Authenticity counts in social media more than artificial "underground" marketing.

This was a fun group that stimulated a lot of thought-provoking discussion about social media and its impact on how we are communicating with one another. I may have second thoughts about taking another long slog through pouring rain to get to the Boston meetings but I look forward to other Social Media Club events in the future.

Labels: , , ,


By John Blossom - posted at 11:31 AM
permanent link to this entry        bookmark this entry:  AddThis Social Bookmark Button
  3 comments (click to view or to add your own) 
Comments: 
You know what I'm tired of, old guys who generally know what's up acting like the young people are the only ones who get whatever it is.

I'm 47, I'm keeping up ok. You ain't no spring chicken. Even Paul Conley does it and he's written almost as much about how young journalism students are missing the point as he does about how b2b execs are missing it.

http://paulconley.blogspot.com

What's really weird is that I hear this more from old guys like myself [I'm 47]. To be honest, I see young people immersed in this new world but is that "getting it"? When I was a young lad glued to the tv, was I "getting it"?

I know a lot of kids that would dig the Lite Brite campaign primarily because it upset people. Is that "getting it"?

Dude, when I was a kid, I was just grooving on I Love Lucy and The Brady Bunch before graduating to Saturday Night Live. I had no idea what was going on. I was simply immersed.

Let's stop these silly ageist divisions that don't actually reveal anything useful and that also let other old people off the hook.

This stuff isn't so hard for folks who think flexibly. The others, of whatever age, deserve to fall by the wayside where they can Twitter in peace without having to worry about whether or not they get it.

In regards to the Lite Brite campaign, I dug it and felt sorry for those who got all worked up.

But I covered that as well as I could at Fast Company:
Guerilla Marketing in Post-9/11 America
http://blog.fastcompany.com/experts/csmith/2007/02/guerilla_marketing_in_post_911.html

Peace
 
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
 
Clyde,

Thanks for your comment. I think that you would have enjoyed the discussion at the SMC meeting.

Your point that the kids who dug the Boston authorities getting upset were enjoying it most seems to underscore the overall failure of the campaign: it was a flop in the other cities until Boston took the bait of the extra-provocative positioning of the signs. With all of the legal scuffling I doubt that they'd fess up to looking for a reaction from the city most likely to give it to them but it's not unlikely that the ad agency was hoping that they'd get a reaction from the "establishment" to give their client's show an "anti-establishment" positioning.

But the main people who don't seem to be "getting it" are people soaked in the pervasiveness of commercial media who have lost all sense of moral and professional boundaries. What is so hard about moseying over to City Hall to ask for a permit to put electronic equipment on public property? Professionally speaking, such 101-level prep work should be a no-brainer. If you want your message to appear "underground" and provocative, fine. But since "underground" is a completely manufactured concept for mass media in the first place you may as well use your head and at least communicate with the authorities.

One of the things that came up in the discussions at the SMC meeting is that people who "got it" were probably watching the show already or aware of the programming anyway and those who didn't were not likely to find the messaging accessible enough to persuade them. It was a very poorly targeted campaign overall. Were it not for the reactions of Boston authorities it would have settled into complete obscurity.

And overall the campaign itself is entirely beside the point. The point is that public space - the "Commons" that we hear so much about - was violated without opt-in. Judith Perrolle's characterization of it as "solid-state spam" is absolutely to the point. Flexibility is one thing; overstepping boundaries of private and public spaces to force commercial messages on people without consent is quite another. That's not freedom of speech: it's corporate-sponsored terrorism.

By contrast Spencer Tunick, an artist well known for his photographing of nude crowds in various urban locations, is always careful to obtain legal consent from participants and works with the authorities to gain permits and consent as much as he can. He pushes the limits of the envelope to make his artistic statements, but he works consciously with the people responsible for his venues.

I agree that flexibility can be the key to creating compelling public messages, but the flexibility needs to work both ways. Advertisers along with other media players are so stressed to find effective ways to cut through the blinding haze of consumer overdigestion of traditional forms of advertising that they have taken to shouting at their audiences in increasingly shrill and numbing ways. The Cluetrain Manifesto reminds us that markets are conversations, yet most advertisers still focus on inefficient monologues. Social media and the one-to-one communications offered by the Web are leading us back towards conversational marketing. That's a good thing, overall. The viability of long tail marketing is returning commercial relationships to sanity.
 
Post a Comment
 

To top of page To Top of Page

   
shorename.gif (1190 bytes)
[HOME] [US] [SERVICES] [COMMENTARY] [RESEARCH] [COMMUNITY] [PRESS] [CONTACT]
Copyright © 1997-2008 Shore Communications Inc.  All Rights Reserved - Click Here to Read Terms of Use
Corporate Privacy Policy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?