Is social media the same as marketing?
I’ve found as a blogger sometimes when I let something swim around in my head for a while, all the pieces I need to make a point or share my thoughts seem to come together like a puzzle. I’ve been pondering this post since early September, but yesterday and today it finally solidified (for me anyway).
I have said more than a few times that I am not a fan of the term “Social Media Marketing.” Maybe it’s just semantics. Maybe I am just being staunch in applying the marketing and communications definitions and principals that I learned long ago and have implemented for ages.
Here’s the reason why the term social media marketing is not working for me: social media is about sharing and discussing information. It’s communications, not marketing. And yes, of course, companies can indirectly market themselves through communications; we’ve been doing it for eons (at least one-way). 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.
After all these months, what is cementing this notion for me? Well, for one it was the comment that Eric Brown (@eric_urbane) left yesterday. He, and rightly so, is very upset about ‘social media marketers’ not delivering. Eric commented:
“… Social Media 101 tells us, as business owners we need to be transparent, we need to participate in the conversation and allow what we do right and do wrong to hang out there on rating sites, blogs, and forums for the whole world to evaluate, yet very few Social Media consultants or agencies are willing or have done the same, at least I don’t think so. So, after running around in my underwear for the last three years while practicing Social Media for all to see, I would like to see the same from the Social Media firm or consultant I am contemplating to hire.” He goes on to comment “…our small business paid out a lot of money to folks who didn’t know what they were doing, but claimed to. I see this forthcoming as a huge issue in our industry, and think a lot of money will be spent on the carpetbagger side of the fence, giving this Social Media space a black eye.”
The issue at hand, as I see it, is that a lot of people are adding Social Media Marketing as part of their service offerings, but they haven’t spent a day doing the marketing part and because of that they struggle with implementing social media as part of an overall marketing strategy. Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t consider a company being advised to set up a LinkedIn or Facebook group or to have a Twitter account marketing (and in some cases, it’s not social media either). There’s much more to marketing (like product, distribution, pricing).
The second thing was this video from Ogilvy PR Worldwide that I came across today (via Shel Holtz/Social Media Today):
Yes, I know. The video is about PR, not marketing (or is it?). But, last time I checked, PR fell under the ‘P’ in marketing that is ‘Promotion.’ Shel also included a link to John Bell’s (Ogilvy) post on The 13 Skills of the Public Relations Pro of the Future, which includes a link to a post discussing how PR folks need to understand Creating Integrated Marketing and Communications Strategy. (Integrated marketing communications [IMC] was introduced in the late 90s by Don Schultz, Clarke L. Caywood, et al–it’s not a new concept. It may be new to some or it could be, in some cases, that social media is finally forcing the implementation of it).
John writes:
“The walls between marketing and communications are dissolving. A new marcom organizational standard is already appearing where multiple disciplines, most notably public relations and advertising are rolling up to the same leader inside brands.”
Really. Huh. Really? I guess I am fortunate enough to have always had marketing (including product development/management/branding), communications and PR in one department (very small and very large companies). That said, I have heard from marketing friends who work for large companies and agencies that the brand managers don’t always report into marketing and that PR sometimes reports into the CEO, or horror…HR. No doubt these types of reporting structures always present communications challenges.
I am not beating up on Ogilvy or John Bell…not at all. It’s a great series that John has and given my recent rant about the PR industry, I think A LOT of PR folks need to listen to what John has to say. But, what all of this says to me is that this mashup of social media, communications (advertising, PR, WOM) and marketing is going to cause a lot of issues and people like Eric Brown (and his budget) will experience the brunt of it.
Why? Because the mashup will allow for people to offer services like Social Media Marketing or PR Communications or Marketing Relations or… (really, you don’t want me to go on right?) without having a firm grasp on any of the disciplines that they are trying to deliver or implement.
Trust me, I agree with John, the walls need to come down and the need for two-way communications is forcing a sledge hammer through the walls.
But at what cost?
Tags: communications, marketing, PR, social media
87 Responses to “Is social media the same as marketing?”
Leave a Reply
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.
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’.
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!
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
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
“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.
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
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]
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.
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
Hi Beth,
. Sure, he lived in a different time, but I always had a problem that such an important figure would mix his metaphors.
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
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
[...] Harte over at her blog has just posted an interesting notion of the term Social Media Marketing and how it’s become [...]
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
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
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.
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
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
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?
[...] Is social media the same as marketing? [...]
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
[...] 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 [...]
I want an aspirin count post conversation in most socnets after this one
[...] 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’ [...]
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
[...] 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 [...]
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!
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.
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.
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
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
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
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?
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
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!
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
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”
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
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.
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.
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.
[...] 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.” [...]
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’.
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
[...] reading: 1. Is social media the same as marketing?, Beth Harte 2. Online PR Vs Internet marketing, Jennifer Mattern Share [...]
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
[...] Beth Harte so rightly and effectively says ” social media is about sharing and discussing information. [...]
Thank you for starting this conversation. I’ve learned a lot and am full of gratitude.
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
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