The Misguided Rationale Behind Facebook "Likes"

The Need For A Paradigm Shift In Your Marketing Approach
If you follow Social Media and the conversations around it you will hear a common refrain that many, even most, brands/businesses are doing social media incorrectly. I believe there is a lot of truth in that statement and I think the underlying reason for that truth is that social media, really all digital media, requires a paradigm shift in the thinking behind how to build a brand vs. how marketers have traditionally used media vehicles to do so.

Since ages past the basic premise of marketing, in simplified terms, has been: define your target consumer, identify the media vehicles that consumer uses and craft your brand message so that it interrupts the content on those media vehicles and thus “reaches” your consumer. Over time as the types of available media expanded, the concept of “surrounding” your target consumer with your message, or of delivering an integrated message across different media types emerged, but the basic premise of reach and interruption remained unchanged.

The challenge with social and digital media is that the concepts of “reach” and “interruption” no longer hold true in the same manner as they do with more traditional media forms. The reason being is that in digital formats the consumer has infinitely more control over whether or not they wish to see your message. Yet many marketers still approach social and digital media through the same lens as they approach traditional media. They have not made the paradigm shift in thinking from reach based messaging to messaging that adds value to a community, which is what is required for effective digital programming. Facebook provides a convenient example to this point.

Facebook Example Of The Misguided Quest For Likes
In my experience most marketers approach their Facebook programming with the goal of gaining “likes”. Although “likes” can be a reasonable metric, unfortunately the motive behind acquiring “likes” is often to create as large a fan base as possible to deliver your marketing message to, or put another way, to create a large consumer population that you can easily reach with your ad message.

That rationale basically applies a traditional “reach” based approach to a social channel. However, the goal of putting your message in front of as many people as possible is not social, it is self serving, and doesn’t necessarily work in social channels.

Instead of thinking about how to acquire likes and thus expand your potential “reach”, you should be thinking about how you can develop something that people will want to discuss and share. The latter is a fundamentally different approach and necessitates the assumption that people are not automatically going to like your brand or message simply because you are on Facebook and saying something. Rather it requires you to think about how to earn their likes by creating content that provides genuine value to the people you want to follow your brand.

This thinking holds true for all types of social media vehicles, not just Facebook. Beyond evolving their approach to digital/social channels, marketers will also benefit from correctly defining their goals & adapting their message to the medium, both of which I will explore in future posts.

Use Protection: The Hidden Danger Behind Brand Relationships

I recently read an AdWeek article written by the Ad Contrarian which basically stated that the prevailing dogma around digital and social media providing an opportunity to finally meet the unfulfilled desire of people to form relationships with brands is bullshit.

I have high regard for the Ad Contrarian and I believe that If you had to read only one industry blog it should be the Ad Contrarian blog, as it is one of the most insightful commentaries on the business of marketing and advertising, period. I also generally agree with the article’s point of view. However I do believe, as is the nature of the Ad Contrarian (and honestly part of what makes the blog great), that the relationship dynamic depicted in the article was painted a bit too black & white.

And now my shades of grey...

I do think the notion that people have an overwhelming pent up need to form deep relationships with their denture cream and throat lozenges is completely ludicrous. That being said, we also have to acknowledge that the advent of digital media has altered the way in which people  interact with advertising, in that, interruption based messages (e.g. a TV commercial) now have a harder time breaking through than they did prior to the evolution of the digital space. This dynamic is particularly accentuated in environments that have only ever existed in a digital form (e.g. online), which is why banner ads are, in most cases, completely useless.  

The main driver behind this circumstance is the simple fact that digital platforms; whether they are computers, TiVo, tablets, Digital Video Recorders, etc., allow a greater ability for people to control whether or not they see advertising messages, and given that choice, most naturally opt not to. In order to counter this dynamic marketers are attempting to integrate their advertising into people’s media consumption in a way that compliments vs. interrupts the experience, and unfortunately in doing so, have created this distortion that people want to form relationships with brands the way they do with other human beings.  

There is a relationship people want with brands and its parameters are simple:

1. Provide me a quality product that meets the need it promises to meet (this includes appropriate levels of customer service based on the complexity of the product and/or category)
2. Provide it at a price that is competitive
3. In some instances, again depending on the product and/or category, provide me with a self-image boost derived from the cache the brand provides

For those two to three things, I the consumer will provide you with a limited amount of loyalty until you screw up.

That is it. What vehicles you use to communicate your part of the relationship does not change the parameters of the relationship, it merely changes the parameters of the communication. I will further extrapolate on this point in another post titled “The Stupid Shit Brands Do On Facebook”