Comments on: Busting The Social Media Marketing Myth

By: Dawn Groves

Dawn Groves — Fri, 02 Sep 2011 22:35:40 +0000

Good points all, Jonathan.
Human beings respond to the same things we’ve always responded to. Sure, we’re more jaded, worldly, and–for those of us online a lot–impatient, but we still salivate when we think about food, hang around folks like ourselves, and steal glances at cute butts.
Direct Response 2.0 is a sexy box with the same contents.

By: Lori Taylor

Lori Taylor — Tue, 02 Nov 2010 23:17:12 +0000

Jonathan, I couldn’t agree more. Social media is a medium. If you use it for brand awareness only, that’s fine. But you should understand that internally and put it in the “marketing black hole”, look your boss in the eye and take the Sally Fields (relation? lol) approach…”but they like us, they really like us!” Even if you measure, mentions, reach, comments, click through on links, etc–if it is not tied to revenue somewhere, then you have to be honest with yourself why you are doing it. Fans are vanity, sales are sanity. (Unless you have a budget just for branding. But even then, you leave money on the table by not offering products or services of VALUE if you have them.) It’s about understanding the audience, their pain and providing a solution. I always ask my clients to get clear on their outcomes. As we’ve discussed, more times than not I hear crickets when asked “what’s the light at the end of the funnel.” (My favorite is “I want a viral campaign.” Going viral is a happening, not a promised outcome!) Direct marketing does NOT have to be spammy–so your point of “done right” is right one. Another high 5 for Mr. Fields (still wishing that was the cookie family )

By: Lori Taylor

Lori Taylor — Tue, 02 Nov 2010 23:10:04 +0000

Love your point on this. One thing I find with larger clients is they are running multiple channels independently. For example, email is not really supporting direct mail or connected correctly. Many times they cancel each other out. Too many communications with various outcomes confuse end users and makes a brand feel spammy. The left and and right hand don’t talk enough–social media supported by direct response can transform your business offline and online.

By: Using New Media to Fill Your Funnel « Maverick Mind Online

Using New Media to Fill Your Funnel « Maverick Mind Online — Thu, 09 Sep 2010 12:43:07 +0000

[...] social media marketing and it’s applications for selling offline. Today, I read a great article on that very subject. It seems there are people in marketing that believe social media should be [...]

By: Steve Evans

Steve Evans — Sat, 26 Jun 2010 20:15:33 +0000

I think that the average person, who once had no choice but to accept whatever advertising was put in front of them in the days before the web and PCs, is coming to realize that they do have the power to begin to control how intrusive the advertising is in the places they choose to visit. They are also realizing that there will also be times when they just want to find a product they need fast – and that advertising can help there too.

So, yes big obtrusive banners will, I think get the cold shoulder increasingly, replaced by ads in the margin, for example “Facebook style”.

By: Chris

Chris — Sat, 22 May 2010 14:11:59 +0000

Earlier you said “I still dont understand why people buy TV”

Disclaimer – I do not sell TV Advertising

Response – The majority of the Billions spent on TV are for one simple fact, It works better than everything else. And its been measured time and time again, it simply works better for all aspects of the purchase cycle. Fortune 100′s are built on this simple fact alone. Its the lifeblood to every major DR company. CMO’s have been schooled in this for decades. Create compelling measurement to prove your case, and you will slowly see the tide shift. Marketers want proof, not promises, its how their dollars are spent.

Social unarguably builds trust and identity for your Brand, figure out activation please tell us all how to do it!

By: Social-media rockstars’ best practices: Part 3 — Creating connections | SmartBlog On Social Media

Mon, 22 Mar 2010 19:06:24 +0000

[...] Fields: Not too long ago, I raised some eyebrows when I wrote a post called “Busting The Social Media Marketing Myth” that came out [and] said the people and companies I know making real, measurable ROI with [...]

By: Stella

Stella — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 17:27:06 +0000

Again, why do folks view everything as “either/or”? There is still plenty of room for both (including, in some cases, the use of TV, Jonathan, which is not as dead as you may think. It’s just been wasted for the most part.)

Companies, and individuals, can and should use both traditional marketing methods and social media IF they are relevant to their audiences of current and potential followers, AKA customers (yes, we need to use that word folks, not all the euphemisms, because whether a product or service, most are indeed looking to sell something and there should be no problem with that provided you have a product or service that has value and is of possible interest to a targeted audience.)

This constant need to automatically go for social media today, without even thinking about its value and relevance in an overall marketing program, is what is making so many resistant to its use. (No, it’s NOT about how old you are or how long you have or have not been marketing. It’s about paying attention to your audience, being willing to test new media and then also accept that it may not in fact be the best way to reach/influence your targeted “tribe” to act.)

Just because Twitter exists doesn’t mean you can use it to successfully market a product. In fact, far too many folks, who really do not think or understand how it works, end up wasting time/resources on this and other new media that do nothing to enhance saleability or build a brand– and may even be counterproductive.

By the way, love your articles and some of the comments, although frankly, the use of jargon by many commentors gets in the way of actual communication. I have to laugh. So many of us opted out of corporations where so much of life was about corporate speak. Now, it’s the same thing with all the social and new media speak. The apparent need to be “cute” and entertaining sometimes limits real conversation.

FYI: From my experience, most Tweets are a total waste of time. I can count on one hand the stuff that appeals to me as either a consumer or a business professional. I don’t think that “less is more” in any conversation but then I don’t believe life can be lived in 140 characters.

By: Nadira Jamal

Nadira Jamal — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 21:32:10 +0000

Maybe I just got lucky with good training early on, but your description of “leveraging social media with a direct response sensibility” is exactly what I would describe if someone asked me to define “social media marketing”.

If you’re just having conversations, you’re not marketing, just socializing.

I think what the “organic conversation” argument is missing is that the “direct 2.0″ process you described doesn’t have to be self-serving and abusive. When it’s done well and with integrity, it’s like dating. It gives a prospective client the chance to get to know you and what you have to offer before they commit their time and money to the relationship.

I think the big difference between “direct 1.0″ and “direct 2.0″ is that social media makes it easier to tell who is interested in you and what you need, and who just wants to get what they want and run.

By: Claire Covington

Claire Covington — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 17:45:03 +0000

Taking care of business today is key–regardless of what will be happening in 20 years. Knowing how to do direct marketing skillfully makes all the difference.