Web clicks and website traffic used to announce that you had a lot of customers and people involved with your company and its products. These were valued as much as a Facebook user’s thousands of friends and ‘likes’ are now. However, it has since been determined that none of these are an indication of consumer loyalty. Debra Aho Williamson notes that “Likes are not a gauge of consumer involvement with your company or brand. But companies still insist on touting their total just like they touted ‘hits’ back in the early days of the web” http://bit.ly/ilKSqU . Votes of interest like these are merely starting points for consumer interaction and engagement. In other words, social engagement is not that simple. It takes a lot of work, a lot of listening and a lot of conversation and conversion to build loyalty. A few weeks ago I touched extensively on this in my Engagement Matters Most post. This trend is already branching out to mimic this social engagement through other platforms. The CW is working on closing the gap from commercial viewing to point of purchase by rewarding viewers for watching commercials http://bit.ly/lAli0H. Capitalizing on research that shows viewers always have their cell phone nearby when watching TV, they are utilizing cell phones to offer rewards. It works like this. Viewers download the shopping app Shopkick and let the app listen to CW commercials, much like using the Shazam app to listen to music in order to identify its title and artist. When a Shopkick-enabled commercial airs the viewer receives an “unobtrusive on-screen alert” prompting them to open the app to receive discounts for use inside the advertiser’s stores. By measuring how many people use the coupons they gain insight into how many people purchase their products as a result of watching their commercials.
In addition to being extended to cell phones, Pepsi-Co has extended social engagement to vending machines. With the launch of PepsiCo’s social vending machine prototype comes another platform for social engagement http://bit.ly/kjOSAa . A unique touchscreen allows consumers to buy a drink and gift one to a friend at the same time. Sound familiar? Reminds me of the advent of gifts on Facebook. Consumers can also record a short video message to go along with their gift. Additionally, ‘Random Acts of Refreshment’ allows the consumer to gift a drink to a stranger. An interesting concept indeed. Perhaps that could be an extension to our shopping and gifting someday. Kiosks at grocery stores that allow you to select a gift or gift card, send it, and personalize it with a short video message delivered to the recipient. Regardless, the point is that social engagement is venturing beyond the confines of social networking much like advertising advanced beyond television and print. Another way that we could see social engagement brought to other platforms would be to incorporate the iPad. Before long we may be able to stream television through iPads to have true on-demand viewing wherever we go. If or when that happens we could see deals worked into commercials there with a direct link to the website for engagement purposes. My prediction is that social engagement will become the norm for all types of interaction with consumers at all points of interaction with consumers. If it can happen in these examples, just think of the possibilities that are still untapped. The only limit is your imagination.
Mainstream News vs. Social Media News
Tags: citizen journalism, Facebook as a news source, mainstream media and social media work together in news cycle, mainstream media as news source, mainstream media news, mainstream media vs social media, Obama speech about bin Laden death, osama bin Laden, social media and breaking news, social media and mainstream media create ultimate news cycle, social media as a news source, social media credibility, social media news, social media prompts action, Twitter as a news source, unreliability of social media in news, use of social media to report on Osama bin Laden
There is a lot of discussion going on about how news breaks on social media and on mainstream media and about the merits of each. According to Brian Stelter and Jennifer Preston’s “Turning to Social Networks for News” http://nyti.ms/iTDDcQ, social media news tends to start out as speculation and gossip and breaks fast. Mainstream media is slower but more reliable in terms of the facts. Each has their cycles and speeds but which is more trustworthy? Are we really ready to declare that we do not need traditional media anymore? That everything we need to know we can learn from social media? I think not. There is evidence amidst the analysis that follows suggesting mainstream news is still an essential news source. One particularly interesting piece of evidence can be found in Stacey Higginbotham’s discussion of “The 7 Stages of News in a Twitter and Facebook Era” http://bit.ly/mHEl2a. Applying it to the context of the news of Osama bin Laden’s death, a pattern emerges. According to Higginbotham it begins with excitement, there is excitement about the news but also the thrill of being the first to report this news. Then there is uncertainty as the validity of the news is questioned. Here she says that “some were waiting for the news venue of their choice to weigh in, while others were waiting for the coming statement from the President.” Social media news, or citizen journalism, is not self-reliant. People still look to a source of authority for confirmation. I am not saying that citizen journalism is bad, because it has its place and it is an essential component for keeping people informed and engaged with news. I am merely stating that this is an indication that people cannot go off of social media news alone. This is echoed in the next stage of the cycle, ‘searching for validation.’ People simultaneously want the news to be true and fear being wrong. They are quick to praise those reporting details as well as scorn those who should have exercised more caution than haste. Only after confirmation by mainstream media and other authorities, does the cycle continue.
Confirmation cues the ‘jokes, profits and platitudes’ stage, where clichés, jokes, and attempts to profit from the event via clever Twitter account names are the norm. However, there is also action that springs from social media news and this is its most valuable merit. The action stage is where people seek more information and act in groups, such as the White House assembly on the lawn the night of Obama’s speech. The cycle concludes with real analysis, which mainly happens in discussion offline unless it occurs through blog or news article links on social media. Note again that news article links are a representation of mainstream media in the social media sphere, and that again calls attention to the need for these sources to work in tandem with social media to break and circulate news. What they have is more of a partnership than a competition. Social media starts it off with all of the drama, it builds excitement, tension and speculation. There is also uncertainty as people are apprehensive to claim allegiance to one side or the other until news is confirmed. Then the news breaks on mainstream media and people make light of it, which guarantees it will be circulated and given everyone’s attention. At the same time, social media does something traditional news does not and that is to provide space for interaction that prompts action. Then the real analysis takes place with reference to traditional media as well as social media in the form of blogs. Hence, one cannot exist without the other. At the same time, this also means that social media news is not going to kill traditional or mainstream news. Mainstream news has been around longer and has already taken the most important step by placing itself in the online arena, where it can be utilized alongside social media to create a more complete news cycle. Yet to have one without the other would be like having peanut butter without the jelly, mainstream media and social media work best together and both deserve to be present within the ultimate news cycle.