Social media hits IS the headlines Part 2
Bebo bows out?
When Bebo briefly went offline due to a ‘technical cluster’ issue, confusion turned to annoyance and, in some instances, apathy.
The most popular social networking site until 2007, the site was overtaken and effectively displaced by the might of Facebook.
With numerous buyouts and a point of difference issue, it’s no wonder that users and spectators assumed the site outage signalled the beginning of the end for Bebo.
This was compounded by co-founder Michael Birch tweeting: “Am super sad that Bebo has actually gone. Some very fun times with very cool people” only to take back his comments within moments.
It’s difficult to think that a brand would undertake such a risky manoeuvre as a PR stunt as many have concluded. All it could serve to do would be to make users realise they need to safeguard content – ie remove it. Which is exactly what they did.
Other than it’s creator’s nostalgic sadness to see it go, the chief reaction to the rumoured demise of Bebo seems to be mild irritation at the thought of lost photos merging into indifference.
“Bebo: gone but not forgotten… oh wait it’s back? Time to forget it again,” wrote @aidankelly.
Two words spring to mind: uh oh.
The face of money
By far the biggest story on the topic of social media so far this year is Facebook preparing to become a public listed company (PLC).
It’s big news as this means that Facebook has, for the first time ever, been obliged to publicly declare its value. And, for those who like numbers, it’s a big one – hitting somewhere between 75 and 100 billion dollars.
Until now a private company, Facebook has not been obligated to publish its accounts – although documents released by Goldman Sachs last year indicated net profit levels of $355 million from the social media giant in the first nine months of 2010.
If everything goes to plan, the flotation of Facebook will raise circa. $10 billion, will be hailed as one of the biggest share sales ever seen on Wall Street and will make Facebook one of the world’s biggest companies via market capitalisation.
Anyone out there still think that Facebook’s a bit silly…?
But why is Facebook such big business?
Facebook has 800 million users worldwide, 50% of whom log onto the site daily to upload new photos, personal information and preferences.
Over a period of time this equates to users having told Facebook A LOT about themselves. And this data is invaluable to brands.
So when people talk about Facebook generating revenue through advertising (to the tune of $3.8 billion in 2011) it isn’t just to do with the number of users advertisers can reach, but the potential for detailed consumer profiling.
It’s not about selling advertising space. It’s about selling you, the Facebook user and all your quirks, likes and dislikes. And your mates too.
Liquid Graphic, understanding the in’s and out’s of social media, so that you don’t have to. Talk to us.
Social media hits IS the headlines – Part 1
Social media…what began as a platform to share photos, stay in touch with old friends and to organise Saturday night’s social agenda, has merged into mainstream media.
News stories more often feature social media than not. Journalists seem to be increasingly reliant on using Facebook and Twitter to access sources, capture quotes relating to a story and to gather a celebrity perspective on current events.
But as well as being the voice and commentator of the story, social media IS the news too.
The start of 2012 has seen social media dominate the headlines like never before. Here are a few of the stories that have piqued our interest at Liquid Graphic.
Sneaky Snickers tweets
Albeit naïve to think that social media channels are free from commercialisation, Twitter users were up in arms last month at cheeky celebrity product placement tweets.
Rio Ferdinand, Cher Lloyd, Katie Price and Ian Botham all tweeted followers posing with Snickers bars and quoting the strapline from Snickers recent advertising campaign: ‘You’re not you when you’re hungry’.
We’re not sure how successful Snickers found the activity, but it did succeed in re-raising debate on the labelling of advertising under existing fair trading laws. And advertisers should beware as the Advertising Standards Authority extended their remit last year to govern marketing communications via social networking sites.
Like us though, you may be less concerned about guerrilla marketing techniques and more concerned about the decidedly dodgy photos that accompanied the tweets. More than a few of Ferdinand’s followers lost respect for him that day…
Regarding compliance, a Snickers spokesperson released the following statement:
“To comply with social media regulations a reveal tweet was used and this went out within an hour and a half of the teaser tweets going live to ensure Twitter users knew they were enjoying promotional tweets.”
So Snickers, cheeky or sneaky? Our view: it’s all way too obvious to need a label, and way too dull to actually give it one. But compliance is king.
Faking it
The appetite for ‘celebrity’ has never been greater.
What began as us all being fans and the notion of being interested in a person who plays an inspiring character on TV, nowadays means complex socio-political issues.
In fact there’s a postmodern irony to the fact that issues such as phone hacking, super-injunctions, paparazzi and stalking dominate headlines in equal measure to the celebrity stories themselves. Stories… about making stories… about celebrities…
To some extent, social media has redressed the balance. Celebrities can now employ people to Twitter away about the mundane things they’re doing (cynical but probably true) and their PR-vetted views on current events (cynical but, again, probably true). This then feeds fans with details they crave while they get on with living their normal – forward-slash – fabulous lives.
The question we’re asking at Liquid Graphic this week is what do we really know when it comes to celebrities?
We know about the products celebrities like, because they’re paid to endorse them. By default, we know the story on the front of the weekly gossip magazine is almost certainly not true. We know about the material they’re bringing out, because they’re paid to promote it. And we might even know about the celebrities they rub shoulders with, because it reinforces their A-list standing. So, we actually know nothing that isn’t governed by some form of marketing.
And the boundaries between what’s real and what’s not when it comes to celebrities are becoming less clear all the time.
Case and point: fans of Japanese girl group AKB48 were recently surprised to learn that the girl band’s newest member, Aimi Eguchi, is in fact a computer generated avatar – she’s not real.
Japanese girl group AKB48
Graphic design has evolved beyond recognition with the development of sophisticated computer generated imagery (CGI) but this goes the next step. Aimi sings, she dances, she smiles sweetly while endorsing confectionary on national TV and she had a lot of people fooled.
Maybe there’s something in it for everyone. Cheaper and lower risk endorsement deals for brands, an even greater semblance of perfection for the public to idolise and celebrities may get some of their privacy back. Albeit, at a significant cost, as there would be less demand for them – ipso facto – privacy not a problem.
It’ll be interesting to look back in another 20 years to see whether, by then, CGI has displaced the current notion of celebrity (assuming that we’ll even realise this has happened). Or, whether Facebook has made mini celebrities of us all, and film actors, musicians, TV personalities and trust-fund socialites will return to their day jobs.
Keep watching.
A Twitter of the people, by the people, for the people…
Alas, politics is a much-altered game to that played by Abraham Lincoln.
Some rules remain. The road to party rule still relies on a manifesto that is relevant (of the people), borne out of meaningful contact with voters (by the people) and that will make a difference (for the people).
Others have changed. PR is now as powerful as policy on the campaign trail and political careers live or die by the effectiveness of communications strategies.
In an aim to stay relevant and to connect with individuals who have the potential to influence others, politicians have turned to Twitter.
Barack Obama has revealed that Twitter will feature as a significant part of his 2012 re-election campaign. He’ll even personally send some of the tweets, signing off with his initials “-BO” to distinguish them from those of his Obama for America Staff team.
No newcomer to social media, Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign is credited with being the first campaign to truly leverage the power of the web. Facebook, YouTube, blogs and discussion boards were cornerstones of the Obama campaign and using perceived modern mediums didn’t hurt Obama’s public perception as the young, in-touch candidate that would guide America into a brave new world, technologically if nowhere else.
But, using Twitter as an online soap box comes with a stark health warning for politicians. Twitter’s proposition is viral communication. Done right, and your message is disseminated again and again to like-minded individuals and constructive debate ensues. Done wrong, and there’s nowhere to hide your mistakes.
For more on ‘How Not to Use Twitter in Politics’ see Forbes’ article on Ed Miliband’s recent casualty of a Twitter campaign at forbes.com
Politicians should proceed with caution when it comes to social media. But proceed they must as another Lincoln soundbite resonates: “Things may come to those who wait, but only the things left by those who hustle.”
Liquid Graphic, doing right for its clients on Twitter.
