The Harte of Marketing

86 responses so far ↓

• 1 Lucretia Pruitt // Jan 7, 2009 at 1:48 am

  Very thought provoking post Beth… I’m sure no few folks would see themselves somewhere therein and turn away from it rather than acknowledge the issues.

  I get unpopular a lot when I bring up that “social media” are the tools, not the field. Just like “broadcast media” and “print media” are tools. The problem with those of us working with social media is that we have yet to agree on terminology for certain aspects of it. We certainly haven’t made the distinctions between different groups using it for different purposes.

  Social Media Marketing? are we talking about the marketing department of a company? Not always. Sometimes we’re trying to put PR or Sales or Self-Promotion under the same banner. What about realtors? Are they using it to market? Seems that way.

  I kind of like the term “Social Media Practitioners” when it comes to those using social media tools to achieve their business ends. But who knows if that will catch on or not.

  The thing is - when was the last time you heard someone refer to him or herself as a “social media consumer” or “social media customer” or even more absurd “social media audience”?

  If you’re in marketing, and you want to implement a social media strategy, it needs to be *part* of your strategy. If you’re in PR, likewise. If you’re in sales…

  But not everyone using social media is here for business reasons. In fact, the majority are actually here to be social. They build their communities and networks not to “be sold to” or “marketed to” but to interact with each other.

  Anyone that thinks that knowing the tools is knowing the business use for them doesn’t have a clue about business. That’s like saying that the guys down in IT should be able to take over sales, marketing, customer service, HR and accounting - because after all, those all use computers.

  Lucretia Pruitt’s last blog post..SSDD? No, Different Day, Different Stuff.

• 2 PRJack // Jan 7, 2009 at 9:39 am

  Part of the crux is the semantics surrounding the very word “marketing”. In some cases it means sales, in others distribution, in others promotion, and in still others communication… with all of the gray areas between those.

  But the bottom line is that SM is not marketing ‘per se’.

• 3 Steve Woodruff // Jan 7, 2009 at 9:40 am

  We’re going to continue to see collisions and mashups for quite a while as these various disciplines and approaches try to find a way to coalesce. I think it’s going to take a bit of time to see new models emerge that are both sensible and effective. Lots to chew on here!

• 4 Sarah Hamilton // Jan 7, 2009 at 9:46 am

  I’m glad you chose this topic. It really is thought-provoking, and it is easy to become confused by our own terminology.

  My two-cents: It all comes down to how you choose to define “marketing” and “social media.” I’ve always considered advertising, PR, MarCom, lead generation, demand generation, etc to be facets under the marketing umbrella, and marketing to be a process for relating with (not “to”) customers.

  The tools, techniques and media are enablers and should be selected and applied to foster the best interactive experience possible with a given company’s markets.

  So whether you use the newer term “social media” or the more traditional “marketing” or even “new marketing” (or all of these), it all boils down to the common idea of an interactive relationship with customers and non-customers fostered on community and involvement, stemming from a foundation of listening.

  Sarah Hamilton’s last blog post..Everything I Needed to Know, I Learned in a Social Media Community

• 5 Gabriel Rossi // Jan 7, 2009 at 9:47 am

  Beth,

  I think whenever social media is used for business reasons, it’s Marketing. Marketing is everything a company does because its mission is to fill consumers wants and needs.

  HR, PR, Sales, Financial Department, IT , name it. Everybody in business is a marketer at the end of the day. Marketing is a philosophy rather than a department or a set of tools. Marketing is watching and being your clients outside the office, then organizing every aspect of your business (Price, Positioning, People, Product, Promotion, Place, Post-place etc…) according to the market environment.

  Great article. I’m getting addicted to your blog!

  Gabriel Rossi- Brazil

  Gabriel Rossi’s last blog post..GabrielRossi: @themarketingguy Gosh, they wrote Positioning and Marketing Warfare! No one can ever count them out

• 6 Walter Pike // Jan 7, 2009 at 9:51 am

  “The aim of marketing is to know and understand the customer so well the product or service fits him and sells itself” Peter Drucker said that not me.

  I think that we often totally confuse the term marketing with sales promotion.

  “Knowing and understanding” is what marketing is about and Social Media is a stunning tool to use.

  And when we engage with our customers and develop what they want, hard sell, sales promotion etc are redundant.

  What we often call marketing is actually the cost - the price we pay for not really doing marketing.

  Social media is communications, communications is all you need if you have done your marketing right.

  Thanks for the Blog Post.

• 7 Arik Hanson // Jan 7, 2009 at 9:54 am

  Wow, Beth. That’s a lot you’ve been stewing on since Sept. Agree completely with the fact that social media needs to be a part of any company’s integrated marketing and communications plan. It’s just not a silver bullet for marketers or PR practitioners.

  What is interesting to me is your first quote. This gentleman was clearly burned by a shop who didn’t have the talent or experience to help his brand and company achieve its goals through marketing and PR. However, you think the same would hold true for Jason Falls agency? What about Dave Mullen? Danny Brown? We’re obviously going to see this kind of reaction from clients–we see it now with PR firms that still don’t get and understand traditional media. The trick is, as it always has, is to find the folks who really know their stuff. The Mack Colliers, Chris Brogans and David Armano’s of the world. To boot, I also see social media programs and practices falling more out of PR shops than marketing firms. Just aligns more tightly with the PR principles and best practices we’ve spent our lives embracing. Just my take.

  Also, your discussion about mktg/comm/pr all being under one roof: I worked in a “horror” example you list above. That’s right, PR reported in through HR. Needless to say, that was a struggle. That said, most orgs I’ve worked for over the years do meld the three together–at least to some extent. Man, if organizations don’t understand the benefit to facilitating that basic structure by now, we’re all in trouble. Good post!

  Arik Hanson’s last blog post..Don’t ignore your "offline" networks

• 8 Seth Goldstein // Jan 7, 2009 at 9:54 am

  Beth,

  Great piece. I do agree with you that many people who use one part of social media have decided that they want to add it to their skill-set to pitch to clients. Is this wrong? No. Is it wrong to boast a skill that you really don’t have yes.

  I completely agree and I know that when I got into the realm of “Social Media Marketing” I decided that I needed to know as much about the inner workings of these social media sites as possible so that I could explain them to my clients in simple terms that they could understand.

  I think “Social Media Marketing” is becoming a buzz term that is popular because it has a good ring to it.

  What bugs me are those Twitter users or Facebook users that say they’re Social Media Gurus but have no website with examples of how they’ve applied it to their own company. Why would you hire someone to grow your company if they haven’t even tried to do it for themselves first.

  The best test-subject is yourself. Before you go to market with a product try it out on yourself first.

  Great post!

  - Seth Goldstein
  Goldstein Media LLC
  http://www.goldsteinmedia.com - Corporate Site
  http://www.sethgoldstein.net - Blog
  http://www.twitter.com - Twitter Feed

  Seth Goldstein’s last blog post..Links for 2009-01-05 [del.icio.us]

• 9 Shannon Cherry // Jan 7, 2009 at 9:57 am

  Great post, Beth. Very thought provoking. I do believe the lines of all aspects of marketing are blurring.

  But like Lucretia, social media is a tool or tactic, like a press release, an advertisement, etc. Such tools should only be used when needed, not just because they are there.

  Like the press release, I see many people jumping onto social media and blasting people with irrelevant messages. Unless they understand how to use the tool, the right message won’t get to the right target.

• 10 Gabriel Rossi // Jan 7, 2009 at 9:59 am

  I couldn’t agree more Walter!

  “Because the purpose of business is to create a customer, the business enterprise has two–and only two–basic functions: marketing and innovation. Marketing and innovation produce results; all the rest are costs. Marketing is the distinguishing, unique function of the business.”
  Peter Drucker- The Practice of Management- chap 5- 1954)

  The book above started what we call Modern Marketing today.

  Cheers

  Gabriel Rossi- Brazil

  Gabriel Rossi’s last blog post..GabrielRossi: @themarketingguy Gosh, they wrote Positioning and Marketing Warfare! No one can ever count them out

• 11 Neal Wiser // Jan 7, 2009 at 10:04 am

  Hi Beth,
  I agree, SM is NOT the same as marketing. SM is a collection of tools to connect people. Marketing is a function of transmitting a message. That’s why I never agreed with the old Marshall McLuhan quote, “The Medium is the Message.” By definition, Medium is an instrument by which something is conveyed or accomplished; i.e.; a Tool. A Tool cannot be a message (unless it’s a hammer to your head :). Sure, he lived in a different time, but I always had a problem that such an important figure would mix his metaphors.

• 12 Mark Silver // Jan 7, 2009 at 10:10 am

  Too true! I like the bit you say about “But a good communicator does not always make a good marketer nor does a good marketer always make a good communicator. They are two different disciplines.”

  I’ve noticed there are some very popular social media players who aren’t actually making a full-time living from their business, and there are lots of people who are doing well, but are just poking along at social media.

  It’s all too easy to get absorbed by the tools, and forget the underlying fundamental principles business and communication- things that haven’t changed from thousands of years, because the human heart hasn’t changed, and what we need in order to feel trust with another human being hasn’t changed- although the tools have changed dramatically.

  Loved it- and thanks for the references you put in- really rich!

  Mark Silver’s last blog post..When Innocent Questions Turn Into Hours of Unpaid Time

• 13 Social Media Marketing. Are you really and expert? | Seth Goldstein Online // Jan 7, 2009 at 10:11 am

  [...] Harte over at her blog has just posted an interesting notion of the term Social Media Marketing and how it’s become [...]

• 14 Mike Gero // Jan 7, 2009 at 10:14 am

  I think you’ve hit on a great topic. In addition to the points on whether Social media and Marketing go together, there’s the concern about the “cottage industry” that social media is creating- one where folks take advantage of the very platform they preach about to pitch themselves as experts.

  Mitch Joel wrote a very interesting post recently titled “Who Isn’t A New Media Strategist?”, which provides some interesting food for thought on this topic - http://www.twistimage.com/blog/archives/who-isnt-a-new-media-strategist/

  Thanks for the post

  Mike

  Mike Gero’s last blog post..mikegero: Retweeting @chrisbrogan with an interesting post from @mackcollier for anyone getting started blogging or on Twitter http://is.gd/dbQO

• 15 Heidi Strom Moon // Jan 7, 2009 at 10:59 am

  Great fodder for discussion — thanks, Beth.

  I agree with the comments made by several others above: that although PR, sales, advertising and marketing are different disciplines, and often completely separated in large enterprises, ultimately the goal of all is to communicate to current and potential customers the value of the company and its products. In other words, they use various methods to tell people why to buy stuff. Social media is (are?) simply another method for doing this.

  Heidi Strom Moon’s last blog post..CDG Gets Fresh for the Holidays

• 16 Star Aasved // Jan 7, 2009 at 11:02 am

  From my perspective, and in agreement with you, Beth, I see social media as a sophisticated tool kit for dialog between company and consumer for gathering opinion/comment/suggestion. In that way, the tools can become part of the marketing component, as the information gathered in the dialog can be used to shape product and promotion.

  As Mark noted, above, the potential downfall is getting absorbed by the tools — and losing sight of company overall objectives.

  Just as with any PR/marketing campaign, social media can and should be part of an overall plan on how to advance the company and company’s business moving forward.

• 17 Shaun Dakin // Jan 7, 2009 at 11:27 am

  Beth,

  I, like you - I think - came from the world of traditional marketing as defined by Kolter et al with the 4 P’s: Pricing, Promotion, Place, Product.

  I was with FedEx for 6 years. It was, as you explain, a place where all marketing functions reported into the CMO (marketing, sales, product, pricing, etc..).

  It was a wonderful place for a marketer. Particularly straight out of Business School full of ideas and wanting to change the world.

  Then I left FedEx and went into the real world. The real world being most every other company where marketing = marcom and pr.

  What a shock it was. I went from being at the table (leading meetings and driving the ball game) to being told what to do by sales, finance, and pretty much everyone else except for HR.

  So, my thoughts?

  This SM world we are living is much like any time there is a new tool that captures the imagination of the world. In this case “Social Media”.

  When something captures the world’s attention people look for guides to help them understand what is going on.

  Some people try to become those guides and make $$$ doing it.

  I remember the 90’s. I was working in the “eCommerce” department at FedEx. IBM had a huge “eBusiness” ad campaign. We talked of cyber this and that, the Internet, the web, www, dot com, dot this and do that.

  I managed a product called, get this: PowerPartner, BusinessLink, and finally, FedEx VirtualOrder.

  1000’s of people made tons of money being “experts” in the web. (Remember the books and mags)

  Few of them really knew a thing about it (including me).

  But, it all worked out and now people actually have track records and results to point to and those people get hired and there are few people that are “eCommerce” experts any longer.

  The best book / article on marketing is the famous “Marketing Myopia” by Levitt. Written in 1964 it is a timeless piece (at Harvard) about how business must focus on solving customer problems rather than inward.

  Here is a summary:

  http://tinyurl.com/ay76wo

  Thanks again.

  Regards,

  Shaun Dakin
  StopPoliticalCalls.org
  @EndTheRobocalls (biz)
  @IsCool (personal)

  Shaun Dakin’s last blog post..The Robos Are Here: The Worst Political Robocall (and Weirdest) of The Year

• 18 Andre Natta // Jan 7, 2009 at 11:30 am

  I think that’s why when we talked recently I liked the idea of being called a conversationalist more than a social media marketer, borrowing from Chris Brogan’s post.

  I’d agree with you and with Neal’s comments above suggesting that it’s how the tools are used to connect people that’s most important.

  Andre Natta’s last blog post..Checking out the Local scene in Philly

• 19 Susan // Jan 7, 2009 at 12:18 pm

  Beth, I agree that social media is another tool to be used as appropriate for a business marketing communication plan.

  I wonder, though, how many people in large companies get caught up in selling social media as the new marketing just to get a foot in the door with leadership? This is assuming that leadership is not as knowledgeable or is nervous about entering the world of social media. And this question would be appropriate for internal communications as well.

  Example: They make their pitch, persuade leadership, make promises they cannot know if they can keep or not, just to be able to check social media off their list. Do they then get caught up in the hype of their own pitch and forget there is more to a successful strategy and plan than “just” social media?

• 20 SOB Business Cafe 01-09-09 - Liz Strauss at Successful Blog - Thinking, writing, business ideas . . . You’re only a stranger once. // Jan 7, 2009 at 3:25 pm

  [...] Is social media the same as marketing? [...]

• 21 Brandon Carlos // Jan 7, 2009 at 3:26 pm

  I’m with you, Beth, in that I really hate the term social media marketing. Here’s why:

  1. Social media is, by definition, collaborative and TWO-WAY

  2. Two-way communication is far differenct from one-way, which is largely an information push

  3. Those who use social media tools like Twitter, for example, solely as another platform to market material (blog posts, products, etc) are completely disregarding the purpose of this space– to collaborate, learn, share, connect.

  On PR: one of the most plaguing issues in our profession is the inability to agree on universal definitions (of which communications, mar comm, et al are all part of).

  Brandon Carlos’s last blog post..The Power of Organic Searchability

• 22 Social Media Tools: Evolutionary or Revolutionary? « Charlie Four Whiskey // Jan 7, 2009 at 4:16 pm

  [...] No!‘, which in turn was building and expanding upon Beth Harte’s earlier post ‘Is Social Media the Same As Marketing?‘. I found both posts fascinating, and ended up posting a long comment in response to [...]

• 23 Geoff Livingston // Jan 7, 2009 at 4:26 pm

  I want an aspirin count post conversation in most socnets after this one

• 24 PR, marketing, social media - spot the difference | Facttactic's online journal // Jan 7, 2009 at 5:53 pm

  [...] good thoughts here from Beth Harte on the links and separations between PR and marketing; and where social media fits into the mix; and why the term ’social media marketing’ [...]

• 25 DaveMurr // Jan 7, 2009 at 6:06 pm

  I’ve never liked the term social media marketing either…

  And as your post points out - they have two very different voices.

  That said, I don’t see either one of them being able to stand on their own… for now. Their strength is in combining their unique qualities into one ….. something… the word hasn’t been invented yet.

  I wonder if one day we will use either term - social media or marketing. Maybe it will just be called marketing… or social media.

  DaveMurr’s last blog post..Shannon Paul and The Hockey Mafia

• 26 A Big Thumbs Up for Dave Armano » The Buzz Bin // Jan 7, 2009 at 8:39 pm

  [...] blogger who also cares about using social media for social good. Needless to say, there is much more to social media than marketing products, services and [...]

• 27 The Virtual Consulting Firm // Jan 7, 2009 at 10:03 pm

  Excellent Article, Beth, Thank You for sharing these various opinions and perspectives on this question with us all!

  Sounds like this warrants further thought and discussion, huh?

  Thank you again for the Great Article, Beth, and Everyone Have a Great Day!

• 28 leslie carothers // Jan 7, 2009 at 10:07 pm

  Beth:

  Just for the record, I call myself a social media strategist. That’s what I do-listen, question, define audience and set strategy.I also like Lucretia’s word, practitioner.

  Thanks for a thoughtful post.

• 29 dawn // Jan 7, 2009 at 10:29 pm

  This is a wonderful topic you brought up, it seems lately everyone knows about social media, networking etc. but when asked more deeply can’t seem to truely explain it. We are moving into a time where relationship building and communicating is neccesary for the success of any business, people that try to cut that out and move to just making the next sale will lose in the long run.

• 30 Michelle Kostya // Jan 7, 2009 at 10:38 pm

  Beth,
  Fantastic and thought provoking post. I too am of the belief that marketing/communication/pr and the like all fall under the Promotion “p” - but that is likely due to the fact that this is what I learned in school. And, like you I have always worked for companies that were structured in this way.
  Social Media seems to me to be a tool that Marketing may choose to use based on the strategy. The team using it will be varied depending on the company - it could fall under marketing, communication, PR, Digital, customer service, …However, in my mind ALL of these are under the umbrella of Marketing. The tough part will be ensuring that the tools used in Social Media are integrated into the marketing strategy - not stand-alone. If they are a tactic all to itself - the company will be called on it!

  Michelle Kostya’s last blog post..If You Are Into Marketing You Should Be Reading AND Listening: Great Podcasts

• 31 Dave Evans // Jan 8, 2009 at 12:26 am

  I agree wholeheartedly with the general discussion here. “Social Media Marketing” isn’t a perfect term, but then neither are “New media” or “Traditional Media” (As they both age, does one just sort of become the other?). Instead, what I find of value in the combined terms is that “social media” — take Wikipedia’s definition for this — is being fused with “Marketing,” where the term remains defined in the the classic “strategically going to market” sense.

  Doing this allows a somewhat different perspective, and in particular the one I take in my book “Social Media Marketing: An Hour a Day.” Looked at this way, “social media” isn’t a “marketing channel.” I don’t at all presume, for example, that I as a marketer have the right to interrupt anyone on the Social Web in the same way that we all expect in a channel like TV, where the content is paid for through an exchange of personal attention given over through regular interruptions to the core content.

  Instead, by juxtaposing social media and marketing, we are confronted with the reality that marketing is being defined more and more by what consumers experience and translate into shared content than it is by what a marketer has to say directly. This does NOT change the strategic challenge of marketing: It is still the challenge for the marketer, as it has always been, to sort out how to best take a brand, product, or service to market. What does change are the tactical aspects of the campaigns, and it is here that required change in agencies, PR firms, and similar disciplines is most pronounced. One cannot apply control in social media in the same way that it is applied in traditional media: one cannot apply control to a medium over which one has none. Advertisers can tell an actor what to say, or a copyrighter what to write: No one can control what a consumer thinks. Consumers arrive at purchase decisions on their own, and more and more they are doing so after consulting the types of shared media that capture and convey the actual experiences of others. It is in this context that social media is exerting its influence, and it is therefore in this context that marketing is evolving. Hence, “social media marketing.”

  Peeling this back another layer, the implication is clear, and it is profound: Marketing and Operations are now joined. Consider Home Depot ( a case I cite in my book) and its charge to its CMO for increased floor traffic. Floor traffic in Home Depot is driven not so much by competitive pricing–can you name, beyond Lowes, the next largest players in Home Depot’s competitive space?–but rather largely by store conditions, whether or not what you need is in stock, and the knowledge of the Associate you speak with. These are all Operations issues, and it is these factors that drive the conversations that occur over glasses of wine when people invite friends over to see the new deck or paint job in the kid’s room.

  As a direct result of social media (or digital word of mouth or whatever) the role of the agency and PR firm is shifting from an inventor or pusher of the message to a facilitator in the understanding of the messages being generated by consumers, and the development of a reasoned response. This response can be such that it amplifies the consumer message when it is positive, or alternatively manifests itself as a change order directed to Operations that drives a product reformulation so that the next round of conversations are more in line with what the product and brand managers would like to be reading.

  Great conversation — let’s all keep it going and bring this emerging practice area to the table.

  Dave Evans’s last blog post..Tell The World Who You Are

• 32 Jason Baer // Jan 8, 2009 at 12:36 am

  There’s a huge difference between social media, which is rooted in the philosophy of brand humanization and creating a true dialog between company and customer; and social media marketing, which is using social media tools and constructs to promote and sell.

  The problem is, it’s all being lumped under “social media” and it ain’t the same thing. Neither is “right” or “better” but they are inherently different, and vastly so.

  Jason Baer’s last blog post..Strategy Destroys Social Media Tools

• 33 Jaculynn Peterson // Jan 8, 2009 at 12:39 am

  Beth,

  I love this piece. Thanks. I’ve been simmering on a post about the future of Marcom’s role and saw this float by on Twitter earlier. Glad you are starting this convo because I believe 2009 is going to be a year of shifting roles that’s for sure!

  I’m with you – part of problem is the use of word Social Media. I think you can do Social Web marketing, use Social Media tools, engage in (practice) Social Communications, and conduct Social Media research, and include Social Media as part of an overall strategy. But to create a Social Media Strategy? Become a Social Media Strategist?…uh, no. [Christopher Penn also talked about this odd usage at NMS08. heh]

  And, yes, the term Social-Media Marketing bugs me. It’s almost an oxymoron. Actually, there is an instance where you could use Social Media Marketing…as an industry phrase just like you do Tech Marketing or Healthcare Marketing, but you would be marketing a specific SocMed product like LinkedIn to prospective advertisers, funders, partners, etc.

  I believe the Marcom role will become much more refined and community based or simply die (with functions moving off to newly created roles). I also disagree that PR needs to become well versed in IMC strategy to survive. PR’s role will only expand into new territory and will position practitioners in a much more influential and powerful role – the likes of which the industry hasn’t seen since the 80s. I see Marcom and PR with different roles than they have today but remaining separate with collaboration being greater than ever before. Anyway, now I have even more food for thought for my own post, thanks to all of you.

  Lucretia Pruitt – good point

  Sarah Hamilton – great comment

  Gabriel Rossi – Agree with that (your first comment) in theory (everyone in biz a Marketer, however in practice rarely came to be — at least in my experience) Think we’ll see that change now with Social Media though. Has to. Every dept will be connecting out. Don’t think will be owned by Mktg specifically either.

  Walter Pike - you are correct and I was wondering same: What will become of Sales (if SocMed was leveraged to nth degree? Not that it would go away, but role different yes.
  “And when we engage with our customers and develop what they want, hard sell, sales promotion etc are redundant.” (or just plain unnecessary!) Super comment. Thanks

  Gabriel Rossi – re: your second comment – Although I love that quote too, I think the time’s are a changing. “…purpose of business is to create a customer.” Customers are already there. Just need to talk with them now, find out what they want and give it to them.

  Shaun Dakin – You rock. Thanks for sharing. Lucky you, with your experience at FedEx.

  Everyone – your comments were all Fab.
  Enjoyed reading. Thanks

  Jaculynn Peterson’s last blog post..It’s 2009: Got Plans?

• 34 Jason Falls // Jan 8, 2009 at 2:17 am

  Excellent discussion as always Beth. I think Eric is chapped at agencies and firms, many large ones in fact, that claim to have such great social media experience and resources but don’t have real people out there doing it. I would hope for Doe-Anderson’s part, myself, Kat French, David Finch and the folks with the agency that at least blog on our blog are some proof to the pudding for us. But he has every right to point his criticism. The simple fact of the matter is to compete in today’s marketplace the big shops have to sell social media marketing, even if there’s no substance to their claims of expertise. What Eric has hit on, though, is how you differentiate. Big-shot Madison Avenue firms may have conducted a video contest or built a corporate blog, but do you trust them with your social media strategy or perhaps a less sexy agency or firm that has someone real out there doing it? Surprisingly for some businesses, it’s not an easy call.

  Whenever they get around to the realization, though, folks like me will be here … with considerably more experience than the big shots of the ad world.

  Thanks for tolerating a little rant.

  Jason Falls’s last blog post..Why Integration Is Critical For Internet Marketing

• 35 Evelyn So // Jan 8, 2009 at 3:07 am

  I was so glad that you mentioned there are 4 Ps in marketing. For some reasons, “Marketing” sometimes become synomymous with ‘Marcomm”. So wrong.

  Social Media is just another tool for communication. It is not even new - online communities, online chats etc have existed for a very long time. But when something is hot, you bet lots of new buzzwords appear. And buzzwords become “service offering”.

  Evelyn So’s last blog post..Calling Call Centre Experts!

• 36 Walter Pike // Jan 8, 2009 at 3:41 am

  I cant help but respond to this last post reagrding the four P’s. Marketing is not the four P’s at all. Its only a part of it viz some of the tools a marketer uses.

  To think about social media as “just another tool” for communication is also incorrect and minimises its impact.

  Social media in fact is a technology that empowers conversations, and so is more a relationship building tool, an R&D lab, a crystal ball.

  It has also shifted the power in the transaction because it has provided access to information, that is not defendant on the company. Which is where traditional brands get their power.

  The role of business is to create a customer that is its only productive function.

  Best wishes

• 37 Walter Pike // Jan 8, 2009 at 3:59 am

  KOTLER

  I also had to respond to the Kotler comments as a separate post:

  Kotler defines marketing management as “The art and science of choosing target markets and getting, keeping and growing customers through creating, delivering and communicating superior customer value”

  This whole 4 P’s discussion is a gross over simplification of his teaching.

  The key thing to examine in the social media world is that it has caused a shift in the control of information and therefore a shift in the power structure in the customer relationship.

  Think about that, because when you do you will realise that its a fundamental not a trivial shift.

  “To find something comparable, you have to go back 500 years to the printing press, the birth of mass media – which, incidentally, is what really destroyed the old world of kings and aristocracies.

  Technology is shifting power away from the editors, the publishers, the establishment, the media elite. Now it’s the people who are taking control.” Rupert Murdoch.

  The problem is that many in social media don’t understand this so manage it as “just another communication channel”

• 38 Kristofer Mencák // Jan 8, 2009 at 4:28 am

  Hi,

  nice post!

  I totally agree that the first thing to check up when considering a consulting firm to help with social media is if they are “living it” themselves! If not, there’s no way they can know enough to give valuable advice.

  Kristofer

  Kristofer Mencák’s last blog post..Focus on the feeling

• 39 Brand4profit // Jan 8, 2009 at 5:48 am

  The old method of advertising is interactive marketing. The term is misleading. Most people think it means that there is some type of interaction on the part of the person advertised to, and there is. But, it is not conversational. Instead, the advertiser wants you to interact with their campaign in a specific set of steps. Following the call to action and visiting a website for instance. It’s the push to make you do something. Live this image. Buy this now.

  Social Media Marketing is just the opposite. It’s the pull of the tribe. The tribe already has your trust so the actions they take are ones you align with. On a larger scale, it’s the allure of belonging in the group as you take action together. “I am doing this so why don’t you do it with me?” On an individual level, the attraction is to behave the same way to get the same results that benefits your fellow tribeswoman or tribesman. “She looks hot! I want to look hot too. I want to go to her hairstylist” and you do. Social Media Marketing uses the power of attraction.

  While advertising tries to use the same tactic, with a billboard for instance, of a gorgeous woman telling you the benefits of the salon, it doesn’t have the same impact because it’s pushing you to go. It is not pulling you in as a trusted friend. Your friends have your best interests at heart and advertisers do not. Social Media Marketing is based on building trust and that foundation will make Social Media a dominant player in Marketing.

  Brand4profit’s last blog post..Push buttons and pull customers. Obama knows it’s what you do after the sale that counts.

• 40 Kelly // Jan 8, 2009 at 8:15 am

  Thanks for this very though-provoking post and resultant comment thread. It’s true - the jury’s still out with respect to the ROI on marketing activities that (1) leverage “social media tools” and (2) are focused at demographics categorized by their participation in particular online communities. However, social media certainly enables many more options for participation with others in discussion, and contribution of thoughtful, relevant information - and there’s very few instances where this participation and contribution isn’t, at the end, marketing *something* - yourself, your business, your view, your social status, etc.

• 41 Eric Brown // Jan 8, 2009 at 8:27 am

  Yikes Beth, We have caused a firestorm here!

  First, thank you for the discussion, there are some excellent points herein and a great conversation going. Hopefully, conversation can be transitioned to Action. A couple of clarifications for me, I am not mad at anyone, and do not have an ax to grind with agencies, or anyone for that matter, this is all meant in the spirit of long term improvement of this space we are referring to as Social Media. I believe in it to the core center of my being, and have immersed myself for a better understanding, (thanks to Mack Collier’s recommendation) as we continue to experiment in our business. Too, I am a big boy and expect the lumps that come along with doing business, I have only pointed out our first hand experience, as it was real.

  We could all debate endlessly on semantics, but for us, in our small business, everything we do is Marketing, at least that what we call it. But the real point here is if Social Media is about Transparency and Participating in the Conversation, it just seems right and logical that marketers, selling the Social Media concept (which we be a huge and hot product in 2009) should also Walk the Walk.

  I get the all the arguments from Corporate America on why “Sharing” may be a good idea, as long as it isn’t them. But Jason Falls and his agency don’t subscribe to that. I applaud those guys. They are an excellent example. I do not know Jason personally, but feel I have an excellent idea of who he is, what he and his agency have done or not done and could make a pretty well informed “Buying Decision” about his agency and him personally. The same rings true with Shannon Paul, which I sort of do know her because she is here locally, but she is another great example of someone doing it right. And, there are many, many others that are doing this right too, just those two are great Social Media Leaders, although they may not view themselves as such.

  So, in closing, thanks again for the opportunity to speak, and may some great strides be made from the discussion.

• 42 Five in the Morning 010809 « StickyFigure // Jan 8, 2009 at 8:48 am

  [...] Is Social Media the same as Marketing? Beth Harte’s asking - what do you think? I’m guessing most of us have had this discussion, at least in our own heads. “…a good communicator does not always make a good marketer nor does a good marketer always make a good communicator. They are two different disciplines.” [...]

• 43 Gabriel Rossi // Jan 8, 2009 at 9:01 am

  Walter, you’re right again. ‘P’s” are just part of Marketing. I couldn’t agree more!

  In order to understand the real meaning of Modern Marketing, I recommend Drucker on “Practice of Management” (1954). Chapter 5 is the key. There’s also the case of GM to look at as it was the first company to apply Drucker’s theory in the fifties…

  In addition, Kotler did not invent the 4 P’s. Jerome McCarthy invented in 1960.

  Cheers

  Gabriel

  Gabriel Rossi’s last blog post..GabrielRossi: Cool old-school storytelling via @lindsaydavies : http://tinyurl.com/7avfhx I do believe good narratives take branding to the ‘next-step’.

• 44 Amber Naslund // Jan 8, 2009 at 2:31 pm

  Why’m I always so late to the smart people party, dammit?

  Beth, I’m glad you finally kicked out this post as I know you and I have chucked it around a bit and I know you’ve been thinking about it a great deal.

  I think what frustrates me - and perhaps people like Eric - is that some of us are trying to treat social media as the same set of guidelines as we have every other communications mechanism that we’ve used for decades. I don’t think in part we’ve really grasped how upending this stuff really can be.

  Because it’s not just about communications anymore. Social media doesn’t just need to fit into marketing or public relations or other disciplines that are used to communicate. It’s also about customer service, technology and user experience, client relationship management, product and service innovation. It’s an undercurrent of so many more business touchpoints than we’ve ever seen, and I think that’s causing some consternation. In a good way, but it’s still hard.

  When we encounter something “new”, we try our best to relate it to things we already know. And since by its nature social media is facilitating customer communication, folks who do traditional corporate communication automatically think all they need to do is adapt to the tools instead of adopting a new mindset altogether.

  Now you know I’m levelheaded enough to insist that turning the world on its head isn’t the right approach for every business, but I can’t help but think our obsession with putting social media and marketing and communications all in a big mashed up bucket is because we just can’t reconcile that it might be a hybrid of tons of other things entirely.

  Agencies and practitioners like Eric talked about are the ones who are adopting social media as a mechanism, not a practice or a discipline. And there is a big, big difference between the two.

  Amber Naslund’s last blog post..The Social Media Blueprint

• 45 Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal » Blog Archive » Social Media PR Vs Social Media Marketing // Jan 8, 2009 at 2:50 pm

  [...] reading: 1. Is social media the same as marketing?, Beth Harte 2. Online PR Vs Internet marketing, Jennifer Mattern Share [...]

• 46 Giles Crouch (Webconomist) // Jan 8, 2009 at 2:52 pm

  Wow. Wow. Wow.

  You just nailed this so well and congealed what has been bothering me as well. Thanks!

  I think it helps to understand Social Media by also understanding Social Anthropology - since it’s about a zero transaction cost enabling “participants” (not Users) to come together in varying ways.

  I’ve used the IMC model for years as well…SMedia is about to re-write that model in some ways.

  Giles Crouch (Webconomist)’s last blog post..Ghost Writing for A Client in the Social Mediasphere

• 47 Twitter: Is Not a A Marketing Channel // Jan 8, 2009 at 3:40 pm

  [...] Beth Harte so rightly and effectively says ” social media is about sharing and discussing information. [...]

• 48 John Michael Cannon // Jan 8, 2009 at 3:44 pm

  Thank you for starting this conversation. I’ve learned a lot and am full of gratitude.

• 49 Francois Gossieaux // Jan 8, 2009 at 4:30 pm

  While I am not crazy about the term either I would disagree that it is because social media is communications more than marketing.

  First off, for me communications should be part of marketing (as should customer service and all customer touch points that a company has).

  But secondly I think that social media marketing is about enabling the social in marketing, not doing marketing or communications using social media tools.

  Francois Gossieaux’s last blog post..Our next CMO 2.0 Conversation - a conversation with Kodak’s CMO Jeff Hayzlett

• 50 Brett Duncan, MarketingInProgress.com // Jan 8, 2009 at 6:04 pm

  Good stuff here. Like you, similar thoughts and frustrations have been swimming in my head for months and months. You’ve clarified some of them wonderfully.

  Even if marketing and communications has been separated departmentally in the past, they’ve never been separated in practice. Great marketers need great communication.

  However, great communicators need something great to communicate. A great product or service with a great message. Some communicators can come up with it on their own. Others can’t.

  At the end of the day, marketing can be summarized as creating a message or promise and finding ways to make it accessible. Social media is only one more (OK, maybe a thousand more) way to distribute that message, but the message still needs to be a good one to have influence.

  So, maybe “social media marketing” is a bit of a misnomer. Maybe it’s simply marketers who specialize in using social media to spread their messages.

  Brett Duncan, MarketingInProgress.com’s last blog post..Failing is not Failure

• 51 Laurie Broderick // Jan 8, 2009 at 6:29 pm

  Great subject Beth and lots of good posts. What I’m about to say isn’t original. I’m pulling from a variety of classical marketing resources to try and simplify the relationship between marketing and social media.

  Firstly - the 4 Ps (product, price, promotion, place) are parts of the Marketing Mix identified by EJ McCarthy in/around 1960 with his book “Basic Marketing”.

  (P)romotion stands for the various communication techniques such as advertising, personal selling, sales promotion and public relations/product publicity available to marketers that are combined to achieve specific goals (this definition was taken from the American Marketing Association’s Directory)

  The definition of Marketing from the AMA is:
  Marketing is an organizational function and a set of processes for creating, communicating and delivering value to customers and for managing customer relationships in ways that benefit the organization and its stakeholders.

  I know several people have said the 4Ps are no longer relevant or are over-simplified but I disagree. I think the terms and their basic definitions are still very relevant, it’s how we apply them that may be different.

  What if we say marketing is marketing and social media is part of our promotional tool kit and should be considered based upon its effectiveness against a specific business goal?

  Thanks for giving us all something to really think about Beth!

  Laurie Broderick’s last blog post..laurieab: So still trying to determine if the only real value of twitter comes if you have your own blog? Thoughts?

• 52 Dave Evans // Jan 8, 2009 at 6:48 pm

  Francois, I think you have stated it perfectly: “Social media marketing is about enabling the social in marketing, not doing marketing or communications using social media tools.” Thanks.

  Dave Evans’s last blog post..Tell The World Who You Are

• 53 Chris // Jan 9, 2009 at 1:55 am

  Beth, great post, also love how the comments thus far cover a huge spectrum of solid points. Anyone here remember eMarketing? eBusiness? My bold prognostication is “social media marketing” is heading to the buzzword retirement home. As so many of your readers have pointed out the skills and knowledge many are now associating with a social media practice are simply becoming core to anyone with marketing responsibilities. Think you can be an effective marketer without knowing how to navigate and utilize social media?

  Chris’s last blog post..Half-full with a twist please…

• 54 Karthik S // Jan 9, 2009 at 3:25 am

  Very good post, Beth - thanks for this! I was interested in this topic enough to pen my own thoughts, specifically on the differences between social media PR and social media marketing, given my PR background and the social media practice at my work.

  http://itwofs.com/beastoftraal/2009/01/09/social-media-pr-vs-social-media-marketing/

• 55 Stuart // Jan 9, 2009 at 7:51 am

  For me it’s quite simple, Social Media Marketing is like saying Television Marketing or Billboard Marketing… Silly really when you think about it unless you market TV or Billboards that is. Social Media is a medium through which one can engage a number of the marketing mix categories like research, sales, branding, advertising, PR, Promotion etc as parts of the whole marketing mix. Social Media Marketing in my mind is the act of using the Social Media environment for want of another word to market and when Social Media Marketing is used together, then in my mind it would suggest the “rules of engagement” in that regard or maybe how-too’s etc. The reality is that Social Media is a massively untapped and highly energised medium and to market through it makes sense and cents IMHO…Obviously there are some thingsorganisations need to consider when engaging this medium to enhance a brand ort a product and Social Media Marketing in my mind is the how too of this environment in terms of marketing therein.

• 56 Stuart // Jan 9, 2009 at 8:03 am

  I think this link explains it…

  http://from.simontsmall.com/2009/01/09/social-media-specialists-are-public-relations-consultants-20/

• 57 Alan Wolk // Jan 9, 2009 at 8:56 pm

  And I’m even later than you Amber.

  Social media is a series of behaviors that involve two-way communication with a web site (more or less) Which is why it will still be with us even if Facebook and Twitter never develop viable business plans.

  That said, it is how most people refer to it, so why fight the crowd? Sort of the same way a video is only “viral” if people make it viral, but everyone seems to call web videos “viral” anyway.

  The problem that your friend Eric encountered is not uncommon. There are a lot of people with zero experience in marketing brands calling themselves “Social Media Specialists” or whatnot. The same thing happened during 1.0 - lots of people who had not a clue what they were doing hung out shingles and proclaimed “everything is different on the internet.”

  It ain’t.

  And as for silos: I’d have been glad to find a client who had just broken up their marketing efforts into PR and All The Rest. Most have separate agencies for Traditional Advertising, Digital Advertising, Website Building, Sales Promotion, Direct Response Advertising, CRM and even Strategy. All of whom constantly fight each other for control of the main message and for a bigger share of the marketing dollars. Clients claim they’re getting “best in breed” in every category.

  Only the end result looks an awful lot like a mutt.

  Alan Wolk’s last blog post..Social Media In The Real World

• 58 Gabriel Rossi- Branding // Jan 9, 2009 at 10:09 pm

  If anything, social media proved that the primary principles of Marketing are immutable and vital. They were magnified by social media actually! For example, it’s always been a truism that great brands are close to their customers. In today’s digital world, searching platforms such as technorati, blogsearch and so on, enable us not only to listen to our consumers, but also watch them and get much more qualified insights than ever before. Isn’t it Marketing just like Drucker, Kotler, Levitt and many others have taught us?

  Social media Marketing is absolutely fine with me.

  By the way, Marketing can not be limited to promoting.

  Cheers

  Gabriel Rossi- Brazil

  Gabriel Rossi- Branding’s last blog post..GabrielRossi: @StevenMatsumoto The principles we believed from Drucker have shown to be immutable. They were magnified by social media.

• 59 Yes, Virginia, It’s Okay to Market via Social Media » Media Emerging // Jan 10, 2009 at 12:28 am

  [...] Harte kicks it off by asking “Is social media the same as marketing?” Social media is about sharing and discussing information. It’s communications, not [...]

• 60 Jon McLeod // Jan 10, 2009 at 8:12 am

  Great post! From what I have been able to find, too many people and organizations are trying to wrap-up SM into this neat little package. Firms are offering menu-driven SM choices as part of their services. SM is way more complicated than that and yes - SM will get a “black eye” from these practices. What separates SM from any other type of marketing in the past is it is truly multi-directional. The potential for a CEO to be transparent and at the same time, get real-life, real-time feedback from the customer is far greater than any “survey of 597 adults with a margin of error of +/-3%”

  The SM phenomena is ever-growing, ever-changing and most of all, should never be put in a box…

  Jon McLeod’s last blog post..4 levels of competency

• 61 Beth Harte // Jan 11, 2009 at 10:47 pm

  Wow! Thank you so much everyone for having a very lively discussion on this topic. I for one am grateful for your insights and time! I thought I’d either tick people off or people would think I was off my rocker for going against the status quo. Glad to know that I am not the only one questioning this term. What I found really interesting and totally didn’t expect was the conversation around the definition of marketing. There are a lot of marketing definitions being tossed around, so it’s interesting to add in social media (also not completely or clearly defined just yet) to the mix. I also am appreciative that you all felt comfortable enough to keep up the conversation with each other and without me.

  @ LucretiaPruitt “Anyone that thinks that knowing the tools is knowing the business use for them doesn’t have a clue about business. That’s like saying that the guys down in IT should be able to take over sales, marketing, customer service, HR and accounting - because after all, those all use computers.”
  The perfect analogy! So, for the folks who aren’t utilizing social media tools for business how do you think they’d feel having someone who is coming into their community and being promotional?

  @GabrielRossi, thank you, thank you, thank you! You have added so much to this post and I really appreciate it. Thanks for all the great references. And, I especially love that you are also adding an international perspective. And please, don’t become addicted…otherwise you may need to go to rehab and they won’t let you come back!

  @WalterPike, I appreciate your persistence with clarifying what marketing is. I agree with what you are saying. And yes, perhaps stating marketing as the 4 Ps is simplifying it, but doing so reminds people that there is more to marketing than just being promotional.

  “And when we engage with our customers and develop what they want, hard sell, sales promotion etc are redundant.”

  Indeed! The build it and they will come mentality is what, to some extent, keeps the need for promotions and the hard sell alive and well. I really think that social media, when done right, will help those companies not used to having conversations with their customers and reduce the need for the marketing push and hard sell. I have a technology marketing background and talking to customers and implementing what customers want is the norm. Here’s what I commented on @KyleFlaherty’s post on this topic (in relation to us being tech marketers and the reason why conversation is the norm): “How could a company ever create a new product without them? How could alpha/beta testing be done without having a trusting relationship. How could distribution channels be [built] without having a solid reputation? How else could a company know if a customer would speak positively/honestly to the media?”

  @ShaunDakin, thank you for sharing your experience with us. I used to think that because sales was “on the frontline” (and part of marketing) I could trust what they said about customer needs/wants until it dawned on me that everything sales does is directly related to their comp plan and has nothing to do with the customer. Do I blame sales people, no of course not, I blame management. I think you are right…in the end SM will just be a normal function and there won’t be so many experts. Thanks for the “Marketing Myopia” link, I will check it out.

  @AndreNatta, Conversationalist is a good place to start. But would you say “conversational marketing?” Okay, okay…I’ll stop.
  @Susan, good question. I have wondered that myself from time-to-time. But given that a lot of companies aren’t moving full steam ahead, I wonder if it’s happening or working…

  @GeoffLivingston, some Motrin perhaps?

  @DaveEvans, I am so glad that you came by to comment! I appreciate your insights on social media marketing, after all you wrote the book on it. The Home Depot example is a very pertinent one because it proves that social media will force more internal communication strategies, walls to come down and the need for every employee to be focused on the customer.

  @JaculynnPeterson, I am not understanding why PR and marketing need to be separate. PR falls under marketing (in the 4 Ps sense) even though some PR folks never seem themselves as part of marketing. As well, it’s about the “publics” and I think social media provides the tools for PR folks to move into a role that allows them to engage way beyond the media. I will need to check out your blog post for clarification.

  @JasonFalls, rant away! I ranted a bit with the Ogilvy video… (not sure people caught on to that though.)

  @Brand4Profit, so I am not sure how what you described is social media or social media marketing…people have been doing that for years (making recommendations and following like lemmings) without interaction from companies…right? You only need to look at The Purse Forum to see that. There are over 150K people talking about luxury brands, with no interaction from the brands. And yet those brands have evangelists who spend money on their products and their evangelism gets others to do the same (She has a Gucci, I need a Gucci…).

  @EricBrown, thanks for letting me use your example…hope you didn’t mind.

  @AmberNaslund, you are totally right (as per usual) and @DaveEvans’ Home Depot example is an eye-opener on how social media will force companies to change, but I am a marketer and look at all things through that lens (for better or worse). As for implementing social media as a business discipline across the board, sure I could make best practices recommendations…but as it affects each department, I wouldn’t feel comfortable. I wish I knew more about customer service or operations or engineering or HR, but I haven’t worked in those departments and I don’t think it’s appropriate for me to address social media and how it relates/affects those areas of a business.

  @GilesCrouch, yep, IMC is about to get a face lift and I am wondering what Mr. Schultz thinks of it all…

  @FrancoisGossieaux, for years I have thought customer service should fall under marketing (and not in a marketing needs to take over the world sense), but it often falls under operations or sales. I think customer service should fall under marketing because I think a lot of marketers/communicators/PR folks could learn a thing or two from customer service folks. ‘The social in marketing’…I like that.

  @LaurieBroderick, people have been changing the 4 Ps for years…I think it’s up to 7 now, plus 4 Ps for just Web 2.0! I wonder who is working on all these Ps?! Thanks for bringing up the AMA’s definition, I know some people use that definition alone, but as you can see from the conversation here, there are others too. I think this is a great time to be in marketing, because 10 years from now we’ll all be saying “remember when…”

  @AlanWolk, I am sure I am the voice of the minority. And not trying to fight the crowd, heck @DaveEvans and @PaulGillan have books out about SMM, it’s just my nature to ask questions. You are the only one who picked up on the crux of my post. It wasn’t about social media vs. marketing…it was about all marketers/communicators/PR folks trying to be all things to all clients/customers and not having the experience/expertise to do any of it (under the guise of social media marketing). It amazes me that companies spend all those dollars looking for the ‘best-in-breed’ solution to their problems. But, I would ask…isn’t it the marketing department’s responsibility to make sure that all those agencies follow brand guidelines or standards to make sure they don’t look like a mutt?! Who’s running the show at a company like that?

• 62 Mark Juleen // Jan 12, 2009 at 2:28 am

  Beth-

  Thanks for the post. Kyle Lacy and I were having a similar discussion a few weeks ago. http://kylelacy.com/social-media-marketing-and-the-advancement-of-word-of-mouth/

  It may be that putting “marketing” at the end of social media is just not appropriate, but from my perspective it may just be that social media is just the evolution or a new term for word-of-mouth.

  Whether it’s called SM or WOM, putting “marketing” at the end is just a way of saying that as a company you are making an effort to create or participate in conversation that helps to market your business.

  In small businesses (like Eric and I market for) it can be easy for all PR, marketing, WOM, etc. to be controlled in one place. Are large companies feeling the need to focus more resources on WOM or non-interruption marketing? If this is the case, I have to agree with you that the walls do need to come down as WOM crosses many boundaries.

  Mark Juleen’s last blog post..I No Longer Give a #&%! About Your Closing Ratio

• 63 Alan Wolk // Jan 12, 2009 at 12:05 pm

  @Beth: People say I’m clever like that
  As for who is running the show, the short answer is no one. Marketing is regarded as a necessary evil and everything is silo’d. Consistency is seen as less important than making everyone (internally) feel heard.

  Alan Wolk’s last blog post..More Outside Reading

• 64 sawinkler // Jan 12, 2009 at 1:34 pm

  Great conversation, all. I like Erik’s point about how he bought into the whole transparency thing, but that so-called SM experts he dealt with, hadn’t. Guess that should have been a tip-off.

  Anyone else notice that the Heinz guy was so obviously reading his lines? On “fostering real dialogue,” in “personal relations?” Oh, the irony.

  And I don’t know about anyone else, but can we lose this “cool chick” image of the PR Pro of the Future with the cape and the garters? What, no corset? Seriously, this is just part of Erik’s larger point about some companies promoting image over substance.

  sawinkler’s last blog post..I am the Mob

• 65 Evelyn So // Jan 13, 2009 at 1:13 am

  To Walter Pike,

  Let me clarify my original post.

  By “Social media is just another communication tool”, I was not referring to it just being another marketing channel, or that it does not have a huge impact in marketing and business communication.

  I was referring to Social Media being NOT new for USERS. As in, Facebook, Twitter, etc. are new ways - enabled by tech - for people to connect. For sure it has changed the landscape of how businesses approach and understand their customers.

  Evelyn So’s last blog post..3 Things That Drive Adoption of Innovations

• 66 Laurie Broderick // Jan 13, 2009 at 11:57 am

  I think Mark Juleen nailed it. Social Media is a form of word of mouth. It can be used to encourage, or discourage, the trial or use of products and services. Remember how MySpace started? It was a way for new artists to get themselves and their music known. Also think adding the word marketing to social media is redundant. Social Media should be considered part of the marketing mix. Thanks Mark!

• 67 Gabriel Rossi- Branding // Jan 13, 2009 at 7:31 pm

  My pleasure Beth! Thank you and everybody for the opportunity to express my ideas and beliefs.

  Gabriel

  Gabriel Rossi- Branding’s last blog post..GabrielRossi: @brandingexpert tell me about it Rob! Cheers mate

• 68 Maria Colacurcio // Jan 13, 2009 at 8:04 pm

  Thanks for the post. I agree with many of your statements. Social media (marketing) is a convoluted term to be sure. From my perspective, the best social media experts will encourage their clients and/or CEOs to involve themselves in the discussion and perhaps narrow down the blogs/forums that are applicable. If someone is merely creating fake ‘personas’ on Facebook and making one-off generic comments here and there, the brand will most likely suffer vs. flourish. I think this becomes even more difficult in the B2B space.

  Maria Colacurcio’s last blog post..Social Media Targeting Experiment

• 69 Gabriel Rossi- Branding // Jan 13, 2009 at 8:49 pm

  Alan,

  I actually tend not to aggree with your point in great extent.

  Good Marketing makes sure every signal sent is consistent. Without paranoid consistency, positioning never connects with customers and all other stakeholders. In fact, the brand or company end up busted in front of the world (thanx to social media) and looking like an schizophrenic body. Marketing job is to avoid it.

  In addition, in a time of continuous change, winning companies will be those that can keep up with the speed of the market. We can only make sure this will happen if we apply the seminal concept of ‘windows instead of mirrors’. In other words, Missions, Visions or whatever, gotta be based on consumer’s insights. (This is Marketing philosophy in its true essence).

  How could any effort to fulfill genuine wants and needs of our customers be an evil? Maybe, some “promotional efforts” or other applications can be related to it, but it’s perhaps too narrow to simplify the meaning of a whole discipline.

  Marketing today (as always) has proved to be all about breaking illusions of separation between companies/brands and their consumers/all other stakeholders. Wouldn’t that be directly related to allying internal efforts as well as creating meaningful relationships across social media channels?

  To finish with, perhaps not everyone who is “running the show” may agree with “no one”. In order to add value to our outstanding conversation , i’d like to give some examples:

  Allen Adamson (Brand Digital author)

  Gary Grates (Edelman Employee Change CEO )

  Francisco Madia (Brazilian most recognized Marketing authority and professor). My long time tutor

  I could name many. The world is wide

  Thank you.

  Gabriel Rossi- Brazil

  Gabriel Rossi- Branding’s last blog post..GabrielRossi: @brandingexpert tell me about it Rob! Cheers mate

• 70 Beth Harte // Jan 13, 2009 at 9:24 pm

  @MarkJuleen, @LaurieBroderick, I don’t consider SM to be the same as WOM. Why? Because you need to do (A) to get to (B). Meaning to get people to be your evangelists and to evangelize your company (B) to their community, they need interaction from the company (A). And that interaction could be a great buying experience, great customer support, a good experience with the product, etc. Social media can help enhance those initial interactions as well as the interactions after a customer decides to share with others via WOM.

  @GabrielRossi, I think you misunderstood Alan’s point and example. Having experienced first-hand what Alan is describing he is correct. In some very large companies (think Fortune 500), marketing is very silo’d (meaning PR, marcom, digital marketing, product marketing, etc. might have their own teams, budgets, and management) and politics and making people feel heard VERY often outweighs doing great and consistent marketing (and branding).

  Does that mean it’s right? No, of course not…but it does exist in a lot of companies.

• 71 Gabriel Rossi- Branding // Jan 13, 2009 at 9:41 pm

  I get you Beth, but still, what i’m grappling with mostly is exactly the fact we maybe should consider what the discipline really is rather than what companies and some professionals want it to be . It maybe would change the whole direction of our conversation since the beggining…

  I’d like to invite everybody to call me when in Brazil, so we can have some beers together and have great fun in São Paulo

  Cheers

  Gabriel

  Gabriel Rossi- Branding’s last blog post..GabrielRossi: Guys, i’ve been invited to take a session on corporate reputation with professor Paul Argenti. Some info about his style and program?

• 72 Beth Harte // Jan 13, 2009 at 9:47 pm

  @GabrielRossi, my friend…unfortunately, you are going to be grappling for a long time to come. There are lots of great marketers who totally understand your point…and they usually move on from companies that don’t harness the power of, shall I say, proper marketing until they find one that “gets it.”

  And yes, next time I am in Brazil (hopefully someday!!), I will join you for some beers!

• 73 Gabriel Rossi- Branding // Jan 13, 2009 at 10:02 pm

  Beth,

  I feel like David against Goliath lol

  Join me for some beers or even if you ‘re interested in giving seminars/workshops here. Count on me.

  Cheers

  Gabriel Rossi- Branding’s last blog post..GabrielRossi: Guys, i’ve been invited to take a session on corporate reputation with professor Paul Argenti. Some info about his style and program?

• 74 Gennefer Snowfield // Jan 14, 2009 at 12:17 am

  I don’t know how I missed this post, Beth, but you’ve sparked an interesting discussion, and one that I find myself pondering often.

  Like Lucretia (@geekmommy), I also become unpopular when I continue to remind people that social media is just one set of tools in a fully integrated marketing mix. It is not the only tool for reaching — and engaging — customers, nor is it necessarily the best tool for all verticals, products and services. Like any tactic, it should be utilized when appropriate in support of an overarching strategy.

  I also have trouble with social media as a lone discipline for the same reason I have issues with the silo-ed approach of Corporate America that Alan (@awolk) pointed out. All of those functions are core components of Marketing and breaking them out only serves to isolate the brand instead of integrate it.

  So, I differ slightly from Amber (@ambercadabra) re:

  “Social media doesn’t just need to fit into marketing or public relations or other disciplines that are used to communicate. It’s also about customer service, technology and user experience, client relationship management, product and service innovation.”

  in that I believe all of those things do — and should — fall under the rubric of Marketing, not Social Media. Marketing has always been about reaching, connecting, evoking and building relationships with customers. And if customer service isn’t part of your brand strategy, you’ve already missed the mark and a social media outreach won’t save you.

  Your brand strategy, customer service strategy, communications strategy, CRM, product experience, pricing, etc. all fall under Marketing. Or more aptly, effective marketing.

  Marketing may be a dirty word, and people may not like to admit that that’s at the heart of what we’re doing, but social media channels are just another [albeit more meaningful] vehicle through which to do so.

  I consulted for, what was at that time, the newly formed eMarketing groups of several Fortune 500 companies back in 2000, where our programs were developed in a vacuum, completely disconnected from traditonal marketing activities and brand position. By 2002, most (but not all) of those companies had decided to fold e-related activities back into the product management teams, recognizing that it was merely another tactic that should be consistent and synergistic across all marketing efforts.

  My hope would be that the same would happen with social media as more come to realize that these powerful tools work best in concert with other tactics in support of a finely tuned strategy that takes all aspects of the customer engagement into consideration, and turn their focus toward how to extend these tools to maximize the lifetime value of the relationships they spark.

• 75 Beth Harte // Jan 16, 2009 at 9:03 pm

  @GenneferSnowfield, as a marketer I am with you in most regards (as in DO NOT create the social media or SMM department).

  And yes, social media is about tools used for sharing and discussion. And it’s that discussion that gives social media a new conversational dimension that most marketing tools do not. So from that regard, I don’t think of SM as only tools. I think of it as tools that lead to conversations that indirectly lead to business (or, potentially, not given how the tools are used and if the conversations are working for the community members…As we know, some people are just bad at communicating.).

  The problem is, or what I am seeing, is that marketers aren’t accustom to having conversations with customers/prospects/partners. The only industry where this seems to be the norm is tech (if anyone can give me other examples, I’d appreciate it). So when it comes to social media they create things like “social media marketing” so that they can continue having one-way conversations using social media tools. In that regard, sometimes I think people that work in customer service, sales and business development might be more successful at using social media tools because they already know how to carry on a dialogue. To Amber’s point, I think from an internal-to-external perspective, social media can be used by other departments such as HR. So in that regard, it’s not marketing at all.

  Overall, if it needs to be placed somewhere, I think social media naturally fits into marketing communications. But then again, I am a marcom person and have (luckily) never experienced the great divides that Alan speaks of.

• 76 Roger, Founder, Online PR Agency, C&M // Jan 17, 2009 at 3:31 am

  Nice one Beth. I agree, but I’m torn. I think the problem may be more with the term ‘media’… in that all this new-fangled stuff isn’t *really* media at all. It’s just a bunch of tools that let us communicate in new ways…. we can all generate content (UGC is a good term) but does that make it ‘media’ in the Madison Ave sense of the word….? That’s the misleading bit.

  Meantime, I’m happy for clients to get excited about marketing on these platforms… they should be thinking in these terms. The problems start when that go al ‘media-ry’ and start getting into broadcast mode. That stuff doesn’t work on Twitter, etc….

  Roger, Founder, Online PR Agency, C&M’s last blog post..The C&M Guide to Twittiquette (or Online PR vs Twitter)

• 77 Online Marketing Blog » Blog Archive » Just Call It Marketing // Jan 18, 2009 at 3:12 am

  [...] Social Media and how to Market your Small Business. Apparently, we can’t yet even figure out what to call all this stuff, as Beth Harte logged almost eighty comments on her blog when she posed the question. While the [...]

• 78 Just Call It Marketing | Seo Services, LLC - Indiana based search engine optimization consultant // Jan 18, 2009 at 5:01 am

  [...] Social Media and how to Market your Small Business. Apparently, we can’t yet even figure out what to call all this stuff, as Beth Harte logged almost eighty comments on her blog when she posed the question. While the [...]

• 79 Just Call It Marketing | Trinitude Network // Jan 18, 2009 at 8:29 pm

  [...] Social Media and how to Market your Small Business. Apparently, we can’t yet even figure out what to call all this stuff, as Beth Harte logged almost eighty comments on her blog when she posed the question. While the [...]

• 80 Gennefer Snowfield // Jan 18, 2009 at 9:11 pm

  @BethHarte Thanks for the response! More good food for thought, and I would take it one step further to say that *everything* a company does has some underlying Marketing element.

  You bring up Human Resources, but one of the core functions of HR is to market the company to attract top notch candidates — they market culture, advancement, benefits etc. to position themselves as the best choice for prospects.

  So, while social media tools may lend themselves better (in some ways) to functions like HR, who spend a majority of their time engaging in conversation with candidates, I still believe that they are simply Marketing tools that, like Marketing itself, touch nearly every facet of the business.

  Additionally, having cut my teeth in traditional marketing, I’d also go so far as to say that Marketing has always been about the conversation. It was always about trying to strike a chord and spark a dialogue with *customers.* And even though the one-way channels didn’t allow for the back and forth that social media vehicles do, they were still aimed at making a connection and triggering some type of interaction.

  So, I’d say that across all company functions (Tech included, save for Help Desk scenarios that impact brand experience), marketers should be one of the primary roles in knowing how to converse — relevantly and meaningfully — with end users. After all, they are the closest to the market with a keen understanding of the subtleties and nuances of their audience and key behavior drivers. What better indicators are there for knowing how to reach and engage them accordingly?

  All the tools really do is give you a deeper understanding of your audience so that you can communicate in ways that best resonate with them to stimulate action, which is not new, or particularly, all that groundbreaking.

  In light of that, I still contend that we’ve found additional marketing tools for our arsenal that are effective and compelling, but it’s a new route-not a new invention.

  Metaphorically speaking, social media hasn’t re-invented the wheel; it’s just put a jet pack under the vehicle to help us move faster and get to our destination quicker and easier, but we’re still ultimately driving to the same place. And, like it or not, we’re still just marketing.

• 81 Beth Harte // Jan 18, 2009 at 9:38 pm

  @GenneferSnowfield, Thanks for stopping by again! Just to clarify a few things…when I said the “tech,” I didn’t mean the help desk, IT or the network folks. I meant the high-tech industry like: semiconductor, electronics, IT network/security equipment & S/W, computer, etc. companies. Tech industry companies have always had two-way conversations with their customers–including the marketing folks–but NOT via traditional marketing tactics (they were used too, of course). I mean literal conversations by either picking up the phone to talk, setting up customer committees, conversations at events, conversations in demo centers, etc. I’ve ended up having really good personal relationships with customers because we were allowed to speak with them directly…and I think that’s pretty cool.

  As for mentioning HR, when I said “it’s not marketing at all” I meant it’s not the marketing department speaking for them. But, of course, you are right…they typically use marketing messages but they also have their own messaging that is determined by that department. I think it would be naive for any of us to think that marketing could/would control every single message and discussion that any other department could/would have. (I have been in companies that try this…and because of politics, it never works. i.e. Alan’s example - - and that was only a segmented marketing dept. Can you imagine the rest of the political battles?!)

  And as for traditional marketing, I, too, cut my teeth there and those tools/tactics rarely elicited a conversation between marketing (unless it was telemarketing) or PR and customers. Most conversations took place between the sales team (or customer service) and the potential customer.

  As well, I don’t dispute that social media isn’t a marketing tool. I just don’t like the term social media marketing for the reasons I stated.

  I think we are on the same page and semantics are at play here…as well as different vertical industry experience.

• 82 Just Call It Marketing : SEO Pixels // Jan 22, 2009 at 8:28 am

  [...] Social Media and how to Market your Small Business. Apparently, we can’t yet even figure out what to call all this stuff, as Beth Harte logged almost eighty comments on her blog when she posed the question. While the [...]

• 83 Kathy // Jan 28, 2009 at 9:46 am

  I got through about 50 of the comments before I decided to give me poor brain a rest!

  This post and all the comments afterward sure stopped me in my tracks. I recently left a job - or should I say the job left me - to start up my business again. I have been designing and developing websites for small business for nearly 12 years now. I’m in the process of rethinking my own services and how I will present them. In addition to design & development, I also offer SEO services, and now (dare I say) Social Media Marketing.

  Hi. My name is Kathy, and I am not a “Marketing Professional.”

  In reading the posts I needed to stop, step back and think for a moment as to whether I wanted to continue with that description for what it is that I offer. In a nutshell, I help the businesses I work with to develop a plan using a combination of onsite and offsite methods for promoting their website and their business via their website and the internet.

  SEO starts with the basics - a well designed and optimized site with copy that is readable, relative and keyword balanced. There are additional steps including article writing and submission. The next step is to incorporate viral marketing (there’s that word again) using a variety of (what is referred to these days as) Social Media tools.

  I am not a big company serving big companies. Some of my clients generally do not have a marketing budget or any other marketing plan except for their business cards and brochures. Some barely have a budget for a website, let alone a huge marketing effort. So in their case what I do for them IS their marketing effort. Its not media, or marketing, in the “Madison Ave. sense of the word” as Roger from C&M put it. But what it does do for very small businesses is get the word out - or market - them to people trying to find their types of good and services.

  I’m not going to argue with the buzz words of “social media.” As we all know vocabulary and the semantics change so often these days its hard to keep up with it all. (Just the other day someone called me Phat and I just about punched them in the nose!) I like those terms - social media - together, from a techie’s point of view, they really get the meaning across - today’s meaning. And they have a sexy sorta sound to it that people like. And I like the very basic sense of the word “market” - Mar”ket, v. t. To expose for sale in a market; to traffic in; to sell in a market, and in an extended sense, to sell in any manner; as, most of the farmers have marketed their crops (especially the ‘traffic in’ part).

  I am not a MarCom person. I am a very intuitive and savvy tech person. And I am great at understanding people and how they understand - social media. It works for me!

  For us non-Madison Ave types, or professional MarCom folks, marketing just means getting the word out and selling our stuff. Our goal is not to diminish your profession or skills. So, no offense, but I think I’ll keep the word ‘marketing’ in there. still, I might modify it to say “Social Media Strategy and Marketing”. (I liked what Leslie Carothers said).

• 84 Beth Harte // Jan 28, 2009 at 2:58 pm

  Kathy, thank you so much for dropping by and offering your viewpoint to the conversation here, it’s very refreshing and insightful to get a comment from a self-proclaimed non-marketing professional. That said, you do market your business, so I think we can safely say you are indeed a marketer!

  I had a professor once ask me for the definition of marketing (BTW, he was hiring me for my first teaching gig ever…a grad. level marketing class and I was nervous as all get out!) and as I stammered for a super smart response he said “Beth, you know the answer. It’s simple. It’s the exchange of goods/services for money/barter. That’s it.”

  Why do I mention this? Because you brought it all back home… sometimes as “professional” marketers we forget this simple definition and try to convolute it instead of just offering value.

• 85 Social Media & The Problem with The Renegade University // Feb 10, 2009 at 4:14 pm

  [...] But Beth Harte is and I highly recommend her blog The Harte of Marketing and this post “Is social media the same as marketing?” I also highy recommend the expert blog, The Viral Garden. The author, Mack Collier, replied to Beth [...]

• 86 SOBCON Presentation: Narrative Version » The Buzz Bin // May 4, 2009 at 12:21 am

  [...] social media has arisen, we’ve come across the strange duopoly of social media experts who are tactically proficient and corporate communicators who don’t [...]

Leave a Comment

Name

Mail

Website

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail