What is Social Media?

Been thinking a lot lately about the whole social media (SM) movement and how it impacts the advertising biz. Also been trying to figure out the challenges SM faces in becoming part of the advertising mix. A lot of time when you hear about examples of companies doing it well, say Zappos.com, and yes, they're cool on Twitter and all, but is it because they're using social media that they're good or are they using whatever tools they can to connect to their audience because they're good.

This inner dialogue was moved along by a recent posting, Is it time for Social Media yet? - Search Engine Guide Blog, which talked about how SM was gaining traction. Here's what they had to say:

The corporate adoption of social networking sites increased from 27% to 49%, Online Video adoption rose from 24% to 45%, blogging more than doubled from 19% to 39%, wiki adoption rates increased from 17% to 27%, and podcasting almost doubled from 11% to 21%. The only technology asked about that didn't wildly increase was adoption rates for message / bulletin boards / forums, which increased from 33% to 35%, but I'd say that's because it lies more towards the mature end of the social media toolset.

And it frustrated me because they talked about things that seem not to be part of social media, like online video. I mean, how is that really different from broadcasting? Same things goes for podcasting, although I guess people do expect more feedback from a podcast. But is it really a social media? And I would have to argue that a lot of brands are using sites like Facebook and myspace to run ads, that they're not really doing anything social there.

I think one of the biggest challenges is that no one can really define it. At least, no one has defined it when I've asked. And any definition I've seen is so vague, that it pretty much covers everything you can do. Take a look at Social media - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

Social media is the use of electronic and Internet tools for the purpose of sharing and discussing information and experiences with other human beings.

Doesn't that kinda' sound like all media? I mean, everything we do in this business is about sharing and discussing information and experiences with other human beings. How does that help as a definition? Is it just that it's focused on electronic and internet? Would that make letters to the editor, which seem to be social media, not social media simply because they're not delivered through an electronic media? That doesn't seem right.

During a twitversation yesterday with Mack Collier (who I like, BTW!), he had two thoughts about what made something social media:

The ability to interact or give feedback

That monetization is not the primary objective

Well, again, the first one can really cover everything you do. By that definition, broadcast TV is social media. After all, look at how many people gave feedback during the famed Nipplegate fiasco? That fit both pieces of Mack's definition, since she certainly didn't expose her breast for money -- well, maybe she did!

But I can go back to my youth with some examples:

How about Soupy Sales and the famed New Year's Eve incident:

On New Year's Day 1965, miffed at having to work on the holiday, Sales ended his live broadcast by encouraging his young viewers to tiptoe into their still-sleeping parents' bedrooms and remove those "funny green pieces of paper with pictures of U.S. Presidents" from their pants and pocketbooks. "Put them in an envelope and mail them to me," Soupy instructed the children. "And you know what I'm going to send you?

A nice post card from Puerto Rico!" He was then hit with a pie.[4]

Several days later, a chagrined Soupy announced that money was unexpectedly being received in the mail. He explained that he had been joking and announced that unreturnable contributions would be donated to charity. As parents' complaints increased, WNEW's management felt compelled to suspend Sales for two weeks.

Certainly people both interacted (kids sent money) and gave feedback (parents complained a lot!), and monetization wasn't his first goal (he was actually pissed about working on New Year's Day), so this would fit the definition.

Or how about Winky Dink and You? During his show, viewers were encouraged to draw on the TV screen a missing item (say a bridge crossing a river), so the hero could get safely from one place to another. Winky Dink also left the airwaves because apparently lots of kids drew on the TV screen but not enough of them had purchased the special Winky Dink screen that went over your TV screen and they were drawing directly of their TV sets. According to Wikipedia, even Bill Gates called this the first interactive TV show. Learn more at Winky-Dink and You.

Lastly, what about Quisp vs. Quake back in the 70's? Probably not the first time it happened, but Quaker actually asked folks who should remain and the loser would stop being made. When Quake lost, it was actually pulled from the shelves for a while, although it did come back sort f redesigned. BTW, a grocery store in Wayne, NJ now sells Quisp for any of you boomers who really miss it!

You see, I think that once again, our inability to articulate what social media is makes it very hard for clients to figure out how to use it. Last August, I asked What Does It Mean to be Digital? because I felt we had the same problem with digital as we do with social media. If you either can't tell me what it means or it means everything, that how much value will it really have for me? While asking in the twitterverse a few weeks ago about this issue, buddy Tom Cunniff had this to say:

Anything that can be consumed by more than 1 person can be defined as "social media". But doesn't it dilute meaning to zero?

Yep, I agree. We really need to figure out what the hell we're calling social media and how it really fits into business planning. Too often it seems that we're really just renaming something to make it seem hipper & cooler then it really is. I know we're marketing folks, but we really can't just keep renaming things too much longer before people catch on!

So, what does social media really mean and can brands that aren't really all that social in the first place, use social media to open themselves up? And, what about Naomi? (See Love of Chair for that answer!)

Link: Twitter / TJCNYC.

Link: Twitter / MackCollier.

Link: Twitter / zappos.

Related links

Link: Experience Manifesto: Are Social Sites this Centuries Penny Press?.

Link: Experience Manifesto: The Measurement Excuse.

Link: Experience Manifesto: Why Advertising Will Destroy Social Media.

Link: Experience Manifesto: Prediction 8: Everyone's a Critic.

Comments

[Thomas Stack]

Hi David, thanks for taking your time to see us in May.

Great post with some very good questions! In Denmark we are struggling to find out if there is true value in the social media sites or if its mostly "hot air".

[mack collier]

Honestly to me, I don't really care about what falls under the 'social media' umbrella, and what doesn't. What I want to make sure that companies 'get' is WHY these tools, no matter what you call them, are important.

Like podcasting. You could make a case for it being social media, you could make a case that it's not. But the case I am interested in (from a consultant's POV) is can it help Client A grow itself? If it can, I want to explore using it as a tool to do just that. If it can't, then let's move down the list.

I always say it, but don't focus on the tools, focus on the connections that the tools help facilitate. What happens as a RESULT of social media is MUCH bigger and more important than blogs or Twitter or Friendfeed. Not even close.

[Peter Kim]

How can making money not be a company's primary objective? Monetization and direct marketing are not synonyms, but the purpose of marketing is to make money. If this is not true, please hook me up with a marketer that manages a P&L and got budget approved with this argument. (I would like to short the stock.)

[reggie velasco]

I think we shouldn't forget the word 'social' in helping limit this term -- what are the social aspects of digital media? Moreover, we should perhaps differentiate tools whose primary use is communication (e.g. email, chat, forums, etc.) when narrowing down a working definition for social media.

[Augie Ray]

Who says Social Media needs to be NEW? Your argument seems to be that we can't articulate what Social Media is or that we're articulating it wrong because Soupy Sales and Quisp did Social Media decades ago.

Social Media has existed since the beginning of time. Storytelling--the primary method for passing history from one generation to the next for millennia--was Social Media because it was participative. The story changed from one person to the next, and storytelling was less about talking and listening then about interacting.

My belief is that Social Media can be defined as two-way interactions between people or groups of people versus one-way communications from talker to listener. YouTube is Social; advertising on Facebook is not.

Rather than trying to convince others that Social Media is something new, we'd all be better of telling people it is old--very old. This isn't a new risky strategy; it's a millenias-old proven way for engaging consumers and encouraging them to care--whether that be for a political cause or a brand.

What is new is that the tools to be Social on the Internet are being put in the hands of people. For much of the last decade, control was in the hands of content owners and large organizations who could afford to develop the means to launch social tools (such as Tripadvisor, eBay, Amazon, etc.) Today, the tools are available to everyone.

Classic example: 10 years ago it would've cost millions of dollars to distribute a video to 1.3 million people. The cost of DVD reproduction, mailers, postage, and mailing lists meant that only big, established companies could have access to this sort of reach. But today, one disgruntled Comcast customer can post a video of a dozing Comcast tech and have it reach 1.3 million people, and the cost is absolutely nothing. YouTube made this possible.

It is the tools themselves that are new, but the desire for humans to be Social has existed for ages.

[David Polinchock]

Augie:

You've made my point better then I did! Yes, I agree, in fact, social media is probably among the oldest media's out there ( I know there's an "oldest profession" joke in there somewhere!). That challenge is we have a lot of shiny bauble syndrome (SBS) and so people are just jumping on the tactic without trying to figure out how to use SM to create compelling, authentic & relevant brand experiences.

[Augie Ray]

Thanks David. Like you, I've been in the marketing business a long time, and one of my gripes is when agencies and consultants try to sell something as new when it isn't. I understand how packaging it this way makes it seem like an SBS, but I feel we'd better serve clients and consumers by simply recognizing how an old strategy is changed by new tactics rather than reinventing the wheel all the time.

Your blog is one of my favorites. If you get a chance, check out mine. I'd love your input and recommendations: http://ExperienceTheBlog.com. (I think you've inspired me to write on this topic over the weekend!)

[Paul Chaney]

I think online video and podcasting falls under the "user generated content" plank of the "What comprises social media?" platform. Plus, most video/audio sharing sites provide some facility for feedback.

Personally, I've never really liked the term "social media," preferring rather to call it "conversational media." However, I never really like the term "blog" either, but we're stuck with it. I'm going to guess the same holds true here as well.

In terms of podcasting, video, blogs, etc...maybe the term should simply be "digital media." Or, heck, let's just stick with "Web 2.0" and be done with it. Ultimately, who cares what you call it so long as it works!

[Sytse]

I also think the difference between say the 'new' social media and the 'old' social media you mention is the possibility of interactivity. A letter to the editor has always been possible, but the chance of interactivity between the writer and the editor is far less than, say a message on a blog.

This fits with your statement of using electronics and the internet for the 'new' social media because the element of time isn't an issue anymore and there is far more possibility for interactivity because of that.

[Laurel Papworth]

Hi, I occasionally write about the difference between social and new media - this post might help. http://silkcharm.blogspot.com/2008/05/new-media-is-not-social-media.html - explains why new/interactive/digital media is not social media.

http://flickr.com/photos/silkcharm/2700455334/ is a diagram explaining a social media content portal and the need to split media into three - Content, Distribution and Conversation - so that patterns emerge that allow for identifying clearly the difference between social network marketing (viral, B2C with customer as distribution channel) VS social media engagement (C2C, with customer creating the content, distributing the content and discussing the content). A limitation of Web 2.0 is that most content is locked and asynchronous - perhaps Web 3.0/Live web will move us out of mimicking heritage media.

Most of the examples you have here are do not show the consumer interacting with each other. If it's not C2C it's not social media. And if the only C2C part is distribution - passing a funny ad on - then it's social network marketing, not social media. Viral ads are simply not social media.

[No Fax Payday Loans-David]

Based on my learning, social media is sharing and discussing information and experiences to the people and communities using Internet tools and technologies like Blogs. People are interacting with each other and are discussing important and particular topics. It is good for us to get involved and aware of this kind of online activity.

There are posted articles about some people reactions in the lending activity of No Fax Payday Loans in this site: http://personalmoneystore.com/moneyblog/
Will you believe to what they said or will not?

[Payday Loan Advocate]

Media has a great effect to viewers nowadays. Most people believe on what ever media would say, that’s why when endorsing a product the best way is to use the media-commercials ads. When it comes on commercial we should not easily jump into a conclusion that the product on a commercial ads is really effective. We should search for more information. It is just like in applying for payday loans. We must not be carried away by their ads.
Enough information is all a person need for him not to be victimized by other people who are opportunists.

Professional Blogging Team
Feed Back: 1-866-641-3406
Home: http://personalmoneystore.com/NoFaxPaydayLoans.html
Blog: http://personalmoneystore.com/moneyblog/

[social networking software]

i understand where your coming from, but, social means to interact with others, media can be video, audio, text, images..whatever...put them together..social media.

i do agree about the ads, but, you have to find a way to make a living online somehow.

[Payday loan bad credit]

Great post, out of all of the prediction posts, I think I agree with yours the most. We will see more useful start ups that will have better business models in 2009 which is a good thing. I also think we will see more talent moving into the industry from others due to layoffs.

In addition to your wants I would also love to see better mobile integration and more location aware apps that are helpful.
payday advance loans