Conference: Social Fresh

One of the folks from class had asked about getting info on any upcoming conferences on social media. Here's one in St. Louis: Social Fresh.

Andy Warhol's Social Media (and not the 15 minutes of fame)

Andy Warhol was a true innovator and bizarre genius. Sure, his idea of 15 minutes of fame is so close to a reality through the social web, but beyond the ’15 minutes’ idea, Andy may have hit on a couple of the most appealing aspects of social media: Passive socializing and vicarious experience.

In The Philosophy of Andy Warhol: From A to B and Back Again Andy talked about how he would most prefer to spend his free time. Aside from watching multiple televisions and reading every magazine sprawled out on his bed, he would continually ask his friends what’s on TV, what’s been on, what’s going to be on. Essentially using them as proxies for the TV Guide, but getting so much more than just flat descriptions and star ratings. He got personal perspective. He got a peek into the minds and hearts of his friends via their preferences for what they wanted to watch while getting helpful information along the way.

But even more than this, he borrowed entertainment from his friends through continuous check-ins. “I love to while away the hours while other people do their meanwhiles, as long as they call in to report.”

This was written in 1975, so I can only imagine some of the types of updates Andy’s friends would have at check-in time.

But, isn’t this why we love our status updates? What did I do that would be entertaining to you? We hope the content of our experiences are interesting enough for someone we know to be entertained by it. We want to give all the Andy’s sitting in their beds watching TV get a taste of our lives to hopefully enrich theirs.

I actually like to think of social media used in this regard. It turns what could otherwise be a solipsistic motivation for broadcasting the minutiae of our lives into an altruistic purpose for all of us to entertain, enlighten and enrich each other.

Can we always count on the social graph for true perspectives

As a marketer and someone who truly values unbiased and raw consumer perspectives, it used to be the case that I could count on the social graph to provide just that. People would post their uncensored and pure perspectives not just in general, but specifically on brands. From these postings and dialogues, we could find out what people REALLY thought, and not in some isolated controlled environment like a focus group. In fact, it was this very behavior that simultaneously drew in and repelled companies when it came to social media marketing. Uncensored perspectives are both valuable and frightening.

But, are we starting to censor ourselves some? In just the last year or so, participation in the space has grown exponentially so that more and more people who may not be used to this kind of behavior are taking up a greater portion of the digitally active. Couple this with tendencies for companies to use social networks to keep track of their employees, vendors, and prospective talent (we’ve all heard the stories of job candidates who were shoe ins suddenly get the cold shoulder due to their would-be employer discovering some misbehavior of the candidate via social networks) and people begin to think twice about what they post. After all, most of us are accountable to someone.

Personally, I’ve become much more sensitive about what I post, knowing full well how easily a comment could get into the hands of someone I wouldn’t necessarily want it to. I’ve seen prolific posters curb their comments as well for fear of a quick status update coming back to haunt them.

Certainly, there will always be people commenting about products, companies, and brands, and doing so in an honest and intelligent way. This won’t go away. But, I am curious about what this will look like in the future. Will people always tell their full story? Will it be more thoughtful? And what will this mean for companies and individuals like myself who rely on honest perspectives to understand how best to develop brands that can actually affect people’s lives (hopefully in a good way)? My worry is that we’ll start to experience what we’ve already gone through with traditional research which is watered down perspectives biased by real or perceived group pressures.

To be honest, if things get too tame, I would be one of the first to miss some of the stronger more vehement harangues in the social space. They’re what makes the space fun to begin with.

Some Links

Here are links from our class. Enjoy!

Facebook in Real Life

Twitter Spoof


A Beautiful Mind Game Theory

Augmented Reality Clips
1
2
3

Kutiman’s Thru You

Oasis Case

Did you know – social media

Navy For Moms (didn’t show this, but a good case)

What Does Activity vs Number of Followers Look Like?

I just read a great article from Wired about how there comes a point when you have too many people following, in your community, etc. and the conversation essentially shuts down due to lack of intimacy, beginning to second guess posts, etc. But, then, with a much larger number, there’s no conversation to spoil so there remains value. Basically, the middle ground with tens of thousands followers is not a great place to be.

Being the nerd I am, I thought I’d try to graph this. Not sure it helps, but certainly worth the discussion.

The Advocacy Curve

We can generally break down people who interact with us, our company, or our brand, into three groups: Antagonists, Apathetics, and Advocates. These three groups can be plotted on a bell curve with normal distribution. While the actual percentage differs depending on the category, the topic/issue, or the brand/company, they roughly fall out the following way.

70-80% Apathatic: The vast majority falls into the Apathetic group since these are the people who have no real strong feelings one way or another. In an acquisition strategy, they may be the ones most easily brought into the Advocacy group.

10-15% Advocates: These are the people who love you! They use you regularly and talk about you to other people. In social media marketing, consider these the potential Influencers (or at least a subset of this group). Help them spread your word!

10-15% Antagonists: These are the people who actively don’t like you. They are the Bizarro version of Advocates, who will go out of their way to criticize and spread the bad word about you. In social media marketing, consider them the ones you are least likely to convert. However, this does not mean they should be ignored. Often, their perspectives are valid and you can learn a lot from them. Plus, they are often the foil for Advocates. They should be embraced (within reason).

Personality Profiling in Social Media

There’s a great quote in High Fidelity (the movie and the book) where the main character Rob says (something along the lines of) “It’s not what you ARE like, it’s what you LIKE that matters.” Books, movies, music, essentially our interests and passions define us. This point was made even further in a book based on a somewhat similar premise titled Snoop: What Your Stuff Says About You by Sam Gosling.

I got to thinking about these ideas as I was coming through several Twitter feeds to see what people were talking about and linking to. It’s a quick way to understand what people are interested in because when someone posts a link, for example, they are telling us that they have taken the time to look for, find, read, and SHARE a piece of content. This is essentially shorthand for saying “this is what I am in to.”

As we think about using social media as a research tool, it becomes a great way to get a deep profile of the people we are interested in connecting with. What they talk about is, at least in part, who they are.