I get this question a lot, “what are some good and bad examples of social media?” It is a great question because the answer really requires some thought and a visit back to the traditional public relations/communication model. Most people expect the quick answer and many will give it to them, Skittles – Bad, Zappos – Good.
But those answers are short sighted. How do we know the Skittles effort didn’t support their overall strategy and objective and if they weren’t happy with the results it wasn’t just a flaw in the strategy? After all, when Modernista did it, they were applauded. We applaud Zappos’ usage of twitter but if their use doesn’t support their overarching strategy and objectives is it truly effective and would it qualify as good? Would it be effective to have all my employees at Dog Dish tweeting while at work? My point, if you haven’t figured it out yet, is, you have to first determine your objectives, then strategy (and a host of other elements important to any communication initiative) and then sprinkle in those tactics which support all the above. Let’s not forget, by the way, to do some research and measurement along the way.
This leads me to my final point and maybe the most important to those organizations looking to jump into the social media pool. If the person you are hiring offers up the quick answer, walk away. Depth is what you really want and what, when considering social media, you really need. Depth of knowledge, depth of experience, depth analytical, research and measurement ability, depth of strategic development. Anything short and you are selling your business short.
More on this to come. Me, I am off to lecture on audience analysis – something which should be done before determining what kind of strategy to follow and tactics to implement – social media or otherwise.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=454a0bf2-0d93-4d78-a74f-cfd42d140a4c)
Matt, as always, thanks for you comments. Regarding Motrin, I think the only mistake Motrin made was in their response to the outcry against the ad, primarily on twitter and youtube. If memory serves the original campaign didn’t incorporate any social media tactics.
Lesson here, of course, is even when you think you aren’t engaged in a social media tactic, you might just be. Any good PR person will incorporate listening into the evaluation phase of the campaign which is hopefully part of the larger strategy (research/evaluation/etc.).
Depth is certainly the jump off point but even if you have the depth of a well thought out social media plan, it can still go awry if it is not backed up and approved by its public. If they don’t buy into it then you’ve gained nothing and lost a lot.
With social media as strong as it is, one misstep can set you back a long way. It takes courage to put yourself out there and hope that as long as you can accomplish the objectives of the organization then maybe your public will come along for the ride.
Twitter Comment
Good vs. bad social media is a short sighted question [link to post] from: @billhandy #litms
– Posted using Chat Catcher
Sage as always. While I completely agree, I’d like to point out that even if a social media plan meets all of the business objectives (as the Skittles stunt may have, for example), the negative repercussions can easily overshadow any benefit of meeting that objective. Lots of people dabbling in social media have done more harm than good – Skittles perhaps is an example, Motrin Moms definitely is. I would assert that some of these tactics can be universally identified as “bad social media”.
The converse is not true for all of the reason you astutely described. In other words, no tactic (social media or otherwise) can be dubbed “good” until weighed against the strategist objective. This paradox is partially what makes “bad social media” so much easier to identify than “good social media”.
The solution, of course, is your prescribed action – hire depth.