We’re Living In The Dark Ages Of Social Media

If you believe the media and social media “experts”, we’re living in the Renaissance of social media. Novel and creative campaigns like the recent YouTube campaign from Old Spice purportedly demonstrate the power of social in marketing. Hundreds of thousands of blog posts, articles, and books are written every year about how big and small businesses can leverage social media.

If we all believe it to be true, is it true?

No.

We’re living in the Dark Ages of social media. Here are four reasons why:

we value words over substance: look at the blog posts in your RSS reader or on Twitter. Most of the posts are social media 101 posts offering ten tips to use Facebook and Twitter. Even those basic posts often contain little real substance – most of them reflect the same 10 ideas, regurgitated and republished thousands of times by thousands of bloggers and journalists. There are gems too – but those are rare exceptions.

I’m not suggesting that simple is unimportant. Learning must start somewhere. But simple in social media has become the norm, much like artistic elements in the real Dark Ages reflect use of simple geometric designs and patterns.

we reward complacency: Popular bloggers publish post after post containing basic and uninspiring ideas that get re-tweeted hundreds of times not because the posts are interesting – but because it has become important (both to be social and to increase our followers) to be seen as re-tweeting something written by another person. We do this despite study after study showing that the number of followers doesn’t correspond to influence.

Again, there are exceptions – people who create inspiring, intelligent and thought-provoking content. You know who you are – you don’t need your ego stroked by hundreds of people re-tweeting your posts (although that certainly won’t hurt).

we value harmony over debate: when was the last time you saw two people active in social media disagree about anything? It rarely happens. Why is that?

Perhaps disagreement is rare because social media is, after all, “social”. But when everyone is promoting the same concepts (and content), there’s not much room for disagreement.

More importantly, people fear failure. They’re worried about not getting mentioned in someone else’s blog post. Worried about not being invited to speak at an upcoming conference. Worried that their audience won’t buy their next book about social media. And so they stay clear of disagreement and debate – at the expense of progress and innovation. This fear of failure can be very harmful.

we don’t challenge perspectives and traditions: rather than fight to challenge and change perspectives and traditions, we settle by convincing ourselves that we’re looking at the world through a different prism, when in reality, our perpectives are only marginally different.

For example, when we push the boundaries like David Armano did in his recent post in the Harvard Business Review - Fire Your Marketing Manager and Hire A Community Manager – we miss opportunities. We should stop looking for ways to make social media work for us and our businesses, and instead look for ways that we can work with social media.

Rather than thinking in traditional organizational structures (i.e. which person should be responsible for community management), we should consider how we must change our entire organization to empower our social media activities.

Rather than embedding social media into every customer touchpoint, we should be looking for ways we can change our customer touchpoints to better leverage social media.

But surely the media and all those social media experts can’t be wrong!

They can be wrong. And they are wrong.

Ben Kunz, writing about another subject, explained Folie à deux:

Folie à deux means madness of two — a rare psychiatric syndrome in which a delusional belief, or psychosis, is passed from one person to another. There is a story of a woman named Margaret and her husband Michael who adamantly believed invisible people were living in their house spreading dust. The craziness usually starts with a dominant person, called folie imposée, who begins imposing the delusions on others … until it becomes folie à plusieurs, the madness of many.

There are plenty of reasons to believe that the Renaissance in social media is coming. We’ll have to do better than regurgitated social media 101 posts, if we want it to arrive sooner.

We’re living in the Dark Ages of social media. That’s the truth.

Social Media and Ant Colonies

Dozens of articles are written daily about ways that businesses and individuals can leverage Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, LinkedIn, MySpace, and other social networks. Many of these articles assume that one-size-fits-all when marketing on social networks. But for every individual or company that has successfully marketed on social networks, numerous others fail – even when supported by vast marketing budgets and expensive consultants. For example, Cisco tried to imitate Old Spice’s viral social media campaign and nobody noticed.

Why? And what do ant colonies have to do with social media and social networks?

Ants are fascinating insects. E.O. Wilson and Bert Hölldobler, in their 1991 Pulitzer Winning book The Ants, described an ant colony as a superogranism – a vast social network. The ants in the colony communicate with each other by following chemical trails left by other ants.

(Photo by aristeos)

In one sense, the strategy for success on social networks is not vastly different from the chemical trails that ants leave to guide other ants. Companies can leave digital “trails” by connecting users with each other and by engaging users in a dialogue with and about the brand. Old Spice successfully did this in their recent campaign.

If people were like ants and followed “chemical” trails, it would be easy to predict the success or failure of marketing efforts.

People are not like ants. People aren’t “programmed” to follow digital “trails” in the same way that ants follow the chemical trail left by other ants.

There are vast opportunities on social networks. They don’t all revolve around widgets, fan pages and viral videos. If you’re developing strategies to market on social networks, consider how you can differentiate yourself from others, not just in form, but in substance. Bring something new to the conversation. Find a different way to engage your customers. Develop a unique voice. Challenge yourself and your consultants to build new “trails” – like Old Spice did in their campaign – and not to merely recycle those left by others. Don’t feel compelled to do something merely because others are doing it.

Startup Tip: Dealing With Customer Resistance To Change

Whether you are a small or a Fortune 50 company, customers typically resist attempts to change products or services they perceive work well. People prefer to deal with the things they already know rather than get used to something new. But innovative companies must constantly find ways to improve their products and services.

How can innovation and resistance to change be reconciled? In this short video, I talk about the lessons we’ve learned along the way in introducing changes to the crowdSPRING marketplace.

What have you done to help your customers or your community deal with change?

To Innovate, You Have To Stay Dissatisfied

Success makes some people complacent. Other people expect to continue to succeed by doing the things that made them successful. This is not always possible, however. To innovate, you have to stay dissatisfied. Here’s why:

Do you agree?

Startup Tip: Four Questions To Ask When Making Decisions Based On Metrics And Statistics

People are generally obsessed with metrics and statistics. Some on Twitter constantly talk about their number of followers or the number of lists on which they appear. Those on Facebook talk about how many friends they have. Bloggers talk about how many comments people have left in their blog or the number of times their posts have been tweeted. The media fixates on traffic to websites. Statistics and metrics are everywhere, and most people make decisions based, at least in part, on those statistics and metrics.

In an earlier video, I talked about the types of metrics and statistics that startups and small businesses should monitor. But statistics and metrics can be very misleading, and wrong. Here are four questions I always ask when making decisions based on metrics and statistics:

What questions do YOU ask before making decisions based on metrics and statistics?

Social Media Insiders Fiddle While Twitter Burns

Many have written about in-tweet (also called in-stream) advertising. Just in the past few days, among many posts on this topic, Mark Suster asks whether it’s a good idea to have ads in tweets and concludes that it is (Mark is an investor in Ad.ly – one of the companies making possible in-tweet ads). Robert Scoble is not a fan of in-tweet advertising but points out that “people who produce content should be able to make a living for producing that content.” Nick Halstead, CEO of tweetmeme, argues that companies should leverage re-tweets for in-stream advertising. Seth Simonds asks whether he is worth money to his followers/reader. The discussion has even moved into the mainstream media – The New York Times cautions that A Friend’s Tweet Could Be an Ad.

The discussions around in-stream advertising are intellectually interesting. However, they obfuscate a bigger problem: in-stream advertising can (and I believe, will) destroy Twitter.

Here’s why: imagine if Google allowed paid search listings within organic search results. Sure, paid listings could be clearly marked as paid. Why has Google not done so? Because including paid listings within organic search results would compromise search.

What if Google allowed another type of transaction: imagine if Google allowed pages that attained a high PR value to sell the title or description meta tags (or both) to a third party for advertising purposes. If this was done, search results would be far less meaningful.

In each of the above examples, there is a predictable outcome. People would search less often. Fewer people would click on adwords ads. And Google’s core business model would suffer.

The impact of in-stream ads is further complicated by the recent search deals that Twitter signed with Google and Bing. Both search engines are now indexing tweets and the organic search results will contain sponsored tweets – the equivalent of having paid search listings within organic search results. This is a disaster waiting to happen – it’s precisely what Google has worked hard, for ten years, to avoid.

[Read more...]

Startup Tip: Ignore Haters But Listen To Critics

It’s very important for startups to understand the difference between haters and critics. Haters will hate you personally, will have your business model, and will hate your business. They’ll say negative things regardless of what you do or say.

Ignore the haters – they live in a small echo chamber, provide no value to you or your business, and are merely a distraction. On the other hand, you should listen carefully to critics – people that offer meaningful advice about ways you can improve your company’s product or service. To learn more, watch this 3 minute video.

If you’re enjoying these videos, I ask for a small favor in return. Leave a comment with a suggestion or question or retweet this post (or both). And if there are particular topics you’d like to hear about – please let me know in the comments.

Is Telling The Truth Bragging?

I wrote nearly a year ago about personal brands and reputation - “Personal Brand” – An Exercise In Linguistic Olympics? That post briefly looked at the debates that were then raging about personal brands. For me – it’s all about reputation (as my post made clear).

Last week, I talked with someone about bragging – specifically, whether telling the truth was bragging. The other person suggested that telling the truth is not bragging. I think the answer depends on the source of the statement, the context, and the audience. Even telling the truth can be bragging.

Why should you care? Reputation is important. We constantly engage in conversations – in person and online. And we rarely wonder whether our truthful statements could harm our credibility. They can – especially if others think we’re bragging. Watch the 3 minute video and let me know what you think. Is telling the truth bragging?

Welcome To The Social Media Revolution

Did you know that it took television 13 years to reach 50 million users? Facebook reached 100 million users in only 9 months. And Facebook isn’t even the largest social network. QZone – a Chinese analog, has 300 million users.

If you still think social media is a fad – the following short video (4:22) offers some compelling arguments that could prompt you to reconsider your views.

Do We Hold Social Media To A Different Standard?

551725158_f7605d935e_b

I read an interesting post written by Lauren Fernandez a few days ago – “Social Media Hypocrites: How genuine is this platform?”

In her post, Lauren asks whether social media provides people with “too much leeway for hypocrisy” and whether some involved in social media abuse that medium. The post was written to spur conversation – and it has.  In her post, Lauren writes:

Question. Are we all social media hypocrites? Ok, not all of us, but definitely a few. How genuine is social media? I read blog posts of a stance someone holds, then they speak a different opinion if someone disagrees. They network with people based solely off their profession, not off what they stand for, like, etc. They tell me one thing to try to “build” or “connect” with me, but tell my friend Bob something else. Guess what? Bob and I talk.

The questions Lauren asks in her post are both appropriate and legitimate. Yet, I wonder whether as a group, we’re holding social media to a different standard than other forms of media – or better yet – other forms of communication.

Lauren’s post reminded me of an excellent panel at SXSW this past March led by Russ Unger and David Armano“Friendship Is Dead”. That panel explored “how the word ‘friendship’ came to be and … how our online social networks have begun to erode away at what friendship has meant.” I had the same reaction to Russ and David’s panel – that in assessing the purported erosion of “friendship”, we’re holding our online activities to a different standard than our offline activities (and friendships).

I suspect that many of us would agree that there are plenty of hypocrites in social media (starting with the so-called “experts”). But hypocrisy is hypocrisy – whether on Twitter or in a face-to-face conversation. There’s real value in exploring the questions such as those Lauren asks in her post. But in exploring such questions, shouldn’t we hold all of our relationships, interactions and communications to a common standard?

image credit: assbach