Using Social Media to Build Meaningful Relationships
Based on Authenticity, Character and Integrity<

 

Facebook Is a Trophy Wife and You’re Not the Dude

Filed under: Social Media Strategy — Tags: , , — David Passiak @ 11:54 pm

I’ve worked in social media since before Facebook was introduced to Harvard undergraduates and the term “social media” existed.  Now a 50 billion dollar company, I’m consistently struck by the disruptive impact of Facebook’s executive decisions that force developers, advertisers, and corporate partners to rethink and adapt well-planned business strategies.

Privacy settings, API changes, terms of service, user interface design—all of these core aspects of the platform must be carefully evaluated when multi-million dollar brands make decisions on how to build and engage their communities.  And they change unannounced, fan pages become deleted without notice, forcing seasoned executives, developers and legal teams into crisis mode.

There is a consensus of opinion between almost everyone I know that the industry is hostage to Facebook because the platform is gatekeeper to 500 million+ consumers.  But as a long-term life partner, the relationship is one sided.  There’s no listening, no feedback, you shower it with money and get no reciprocal love back.  It’s like the young trophy wife Bunny in the Big Lebowski—pretty, attractive, and enticing, a status symbol that ultimately doesn’t listen to your needs.

The initial appeal of Facebook to early adopters was its open platform, which spawned a literal gold rush of innovation in applications fueled by eager investors and marketers.  The symbiotic relationship that once drove the meteoric growth was exciting as new romances often are, but now that mature businesses have to plan for the future, raising the communities we helped give birth to into mature children looks like a one-sided picture.

The truth is, corporate partners want to appear like The Dude, care free and easy going, but the reality is they are more like Mr. Lebowski—the other Jeffrey Lebowski, disabled, unable to adjust so easily because some Chinaman took his legs in Korea.  They want Facebook to be at the center of their marketing strategy, to have fun working together and nurture a relationship with millions of people that visit the platform every day.  But look at a pattern of erratic behavior and your gut instinct tells you that Facebook married you for your money.

Like being married to a young trophy wife owing money all over town, companies spend millions in unnecessary staffing and development costs attending to details and last-minute changes.  It’s akin to the scene in the Big Lebowski when Bunny returns at the end and—oops!—she just forgot to tell everyone that she was leaving for a while.  There was no kidnapping after all, but we have to act like there was one—always, because unfortunately we just can’t plan that far ahead.

Let’s hope with a $50 billion dollar valuation and investors like Goldman Sachs that Facebook will grow up a bit.  Enough building new features and making decisions that leave us frantic, take some time to think about your corporate partners, who would love to hop in the convertible and head to Malibu on a moment’s notice but unfortunately have infrastructures more akin to a wheel chair.  If not, perhaps it’s time to file for a divorce, and reluctantly pay alimony but shift your marketing dollars towards building a lifelong partnership with a platform more reliable—a social media partner that really wants to raise a little Lebowski.

RIP Big Investments from People who Don’t Understand “The Internet”

totentanz1488_033_crop1 The Wallstreet Journal recently published an article proclaiming the end of internet investing. Author James Altucher’s wholesale dismissal of “the internet,” from MySpace to Time Warner’s selling of AOL to the troubles of Facebook and Twitter to monetize their platforms, is both alarming and interesting.

I would agree with Altucher that “the internet” is dead as destination websites are suffering due to decreases in advertising revenue across the board, but Marketing across social media has skyrocketed at a meteoric rate and offers the best opportunity to reach consumers. I would go so far as to say that most brands waste millions of dollars designing and driving traffic to fancy destination home pages when they could invest significantly less to reach consumers in the communities where they “live” online such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, forums, and across the blogosphere.

The truth is, there is no “internet,” there is a vast ecosystem of billions of people connecting with one another and contributing to a radical de-centralization of media publishing.  Recognition that consumers are now content creators helps contextualize the reasons why properties such as MySpace and AOL have failed. MySpace ran itself into the ground by not protecting the privacy of its users from SPAM and has effectively become little more than a default homepage for musicians and artists, with little semblance of a real online community.  AOL similarly ran into the ground because, after being acquired, it did little to add value to its members. Both properties along with numerous others proved to be unprofitable in the long run because short-term gains of expensive advertising were not balanced with long-term commitments to producing quality content and adding value to their audience.

Most “internet” acquisitions are based on traffic volume, reach, and other performance-driven metrics which do not take into account that quantitative analytics are a measure of strong commitments to qualitatively pleasing their consumers. In contrast, online properties, like nightclubs or fashion brands, cycle and burn out.  They’re usually “hot” among tastemakers and influencers and once they get on an investor’s radar most likely they have already peaked.

As the “cool kids” – broadly speaking – move on to other things, masses flood in and owners need to cash out. The continual impulse to squeeze every dollar out of an online community in the form of advertising across internet properties needs to be tempered by respect and ongoing effort to add value and retain users.  Blanket dismissals of “the internet” in publications like the Wall Street Journal are unfortunate, because they place an overly simplistic set of assumptions on something they do not understand.

I for one, will not be a hypocrite, though I would like to know from the Wall Street Journal and writers like Altucher whether I should abandon equally dismissive assumptions about the financial industry and investment bankers.

As of now, it seems to me like they’re a bunch of greedy and manipulative bastards who set the country on a disastrous course for their own personal gain.  I’d like to think finance is more comlex than “the internet,” but perhaps it’s not if we look at short-term botton line and disregard the interests of consumers and share holders. corporate-greed_27-06-1882

Social Meditate:
Home
About
Email
Connect:
Facebook
Twitter
Youtube
Share/Save/Bookmark
 
 
 
© 2010 socialmeditate.com
RSS feed RSS Feeds