Inevitably, as soon as something becomes popular it has about 25 minutes to enjoy its time in the sun before the view is clouded by one too many people joining the party late, and then finally there's a hissy fit and someone pisses all over the parade.
Social media was asking for an online beating. Or, rather, all the analysis surrounding it has been. In many ways, the detractors are 100% right. There is no need to take the very simple, basic, fundamental marketing idea of finding out where the people hang out and talking to them there and creating a mystical glow around it.
There's nothing overly complicated about the idea of using whatever the prominent communication medium of the day is effectively. And it is undoubtedly wanky, obnoxious and frustrating when at the same time as claiming you totally get this social phenomenon you're effectively spamming the world with the cleverness (so you think) of you.
Now, I don't agree with everything Katherine Hannaford (second link) says, because as someone who is the virtual 'face' of a charity online I do follow all the people who follow me and make an effort to reply to them all. In other words, all the things that those SEO-twitter-web 2.0-social-media-aren't-I -marvelous people following Kat don't seem to be doing.
The daily work of using communications channels for marketing properly and effectively, with respect for the consumer and the right way to approach people online, isn’t always being carried out. I'm not going to suggest that it's equivalent to heavy lifting or I'm not lucky to live on the Internet all day, but making sure that thousands of people get an authentic, accurate and positive view of the company you're fronting is careful, more intelligent work than it appears. Honest.
Still, Kat isn't really talking about charities, and I do think that charities have more to gain from social media marketing than commercial organisations. After all, a charity has a story its supporters actually seek out and has more genuine interest than most commercial concerns in the stories it receives in return.
What Kat, Bobbie Johnson and a few thoughtful others have got to the heart of is how few people realise that if you really understand how to use these things, you should keep the talking about them down to a minimum when you're in that conversation. Yes, it's fine to go to “tweetups” and conferences and the lark. And yes it's very valuable when someone takes the time to explain to organisations how to go about in the online space without looking like total losers or using Twitter as a way to announce endless dull press releases.
It's a wonderful, flattering feeling to be asked to offer guidance based on your experiences to those who want to wade into the waters but are hesitant. But – above link notwithstanding - you don't need to wear that on your sleeve or get all self-congratulatory about it (I won’t mention it ever again, promise!). Being able to communicate honestly online should be the norm, not the exception held up to great wonderment.
As weird and self-loathing as it sounds coming from someone whose job is all about social media and communities, I do wish people would shut up about social media and communities. If you understand the basic principle of marketing through storytelling and sitting down over a virtual cuppa to have a chat and listen in return to those who usually make up your audience, you don't really need to analyse it.
If you can't 'get' social media by using it personally, you probably shouldn't use it professionally. And please, for the good of the rest of us who just want to get on with it, don't tar us all with the Nathan Barley brush.
Image via Francis Anderson