

Why some of the worlds biggest brands still don't get Facebook - nchlswu
http://blogs.forbes.com/elainewong/2010/12/20/why-some-of-the-worlds-biggest-brands-still-dont-get-facebook/

======
bradleyland
I've gotta say, I strongly disagree with this assertion that a company _must_
participate in social media. I have to wonder if the author has spent much
time on the Facebook pages of brands that have made the jump. There _are_
serious control issues. The recent VW Jetta launch is a great example.

The new Jetta may sell great. It's cheaper, it's larger, and it has a more
"accessible" design for the general buying public, but the reception on the VW
Facebook page was absolutely brutal. Is that good for VW's brand?

Now, I'm not suggesting that VW should ignore their fans, but anyone who has
participated in an internet forum knows that the people who are vocal on the
internet aren't necessarily representative of the people you need to make
happy in order to build a solid revenue stream.

The author goes on to say, "but with social media, the objective is not to own
the consumer, but to be their friend." That is a really ridiculous goal. Just
as effective parenting is often served poorly by trying to be your kid's
friend first and parent second, being a great marketer has little to do with
catering to the social media set.

At the end of the day, social media is just another outlet through which you
can reach a set of consumers. Unfortunately, it also comes with some
expectations that don't really jive with the idea of a controlled media
presence. Some companies simply aren't going to take that option.

~~~
Ogre
I agree. The article goes into detail about various brands' social media
presences, and seems to take it as a given that they should all be doing more.
But it doesn't make any assertions as to why they should, much less evidence
to back it up.

So Budweiser is the only brand with an unfiltered Facebook wall... Great! What
benefits has that brought them? If there aren't hard numbers, what's the
perceived benefit from Budweiser's PR department?

How about comparing money spent on social media to money spent on traditional
advertising?

So many questions, so few answers.

And yeah, I don't need or want Coca-Cola to be my friend, I just want a damn
soda.

------
doron
... And rolls Royce does not put ads for the cars on TV, don't they get it???

Sorry, this blog post gets me down.

"the objective is not to own the consumer, but to be their friend" so brands
are my friends now? how charming, I wonder if somewhere someone gets a kick
out of the diluted effect all this has on a term that is one of humanity most
treasured experiences

I know. We live in a market reality, I get it, I embrace it. But when I read
this kind of tripe I can only think of the late bill hicks

"By the way, if anyone here is in marketing or advertising...kill yourself.
Thank you. Just planting seeds, planting seeds is all I'm doing. No joke here,
really. Seriously, kill yourself, you have no rationalisation for what you do,
you are Satan's little helpers. Kill yourself, kill yourself, kill yourself
now."

------
nkurz
We're certainly not one of "the world's biggest brands", but at a certain
level I just don't get Facebook either. We have a presence
(<http://www.facebook.com/pages/Scream-Sorbet/51993914102>) but I fear we're
not really making good use of it. Unfortunately, the article seems to presume
that one already knows the take-home message.

Could someone explain it more clearly? Is it just some form of "Facebook
should feature your customers" like it seems, or is it more nuanced? I'm
looking at the actual article now, and it seems a little better than the
summary: [http://www.atkearney.com/index.php/Publications/socially-
awk...](http://www.atkearney.com/index.php/Publications/socially-awkward-
media-volume-xiii-number-2-2010.html)

~~~
salemh
Interaction and Interesting Content seem to be a common theme.
[http://www.simplyzesty.com/brands/10-great-facebook-fan-
page...](http://www.simplyzesty.com/brands/10-great-facebook-fan-pages/)

I could not find the past link I was looking for which had the main points of:

Despite the amount of "fans" gained by brands (this was mostly centered on
mega-brands), these brands feared the dreaded "ignore" or X button, as most of
their "fans" were doing. Poor content, uninteresting streams, or just spammy
ads means many Fans are just "passive," having you as a "like" for more social
context (your friends "see" you like Starbucks) versus "interacting" with the
brand page to any degree past the initial like.

This goes all the way to specials, deals, etc. that MAY be of interest, but
could hardly be updated to a broad 100k+ "fan" base spectrum from the Brand
Pages individual stream.

(once again, paraphrased from memory, must get better book mark sorter).

------
jayzee
Remember the days when everybody was advertising AOL keywords? May be big
brands have been there and done that.

