It’s no stretch to say that twenty-first century communication represents a dramatic shift. Our primary means of communication have gone from face-to-face to the technologically-mediated in the blink of an eye.
Social Networking sites are at the heart of it all, representing a significant shift in the social habits of an entire generation. Aided by the rapid uptake of Web 2.0 technologies and advancements in telecommunications, twenty-first century communication is finally in line with the increasingly-demanding schedule of twenty-first century culture.
When we call, text, e-mail, blog or tweet, we aim, as with face-to-face communication, to effectively communicate with another party. The difference today is the speed at which it occurs.
Business should be no different, right? As millions around the world alter the way THEY communicate and embrace new-found efficiency, isn’t it time business did the same?
According to the Masses
Who uses Social Networking Sites?
According to the Consumer Internet Barometer and eMarketer.com, general use has nearly doubled from 2008-2009 (26% to 42%).Of that number:
48% of females are engaged regularly,compared to just 38% of males
As would be expected, nearly three quarters (72%) of people under the age of 35 use Social Networking sites
Surprisingly, nearly 42% of people between the ages of 35 and 54 are also connected
19% find no merit whatsoever in including
the micro-blogging phenomenon in their overall marketing strategy
How effective is Twitter for Advertising?
According to June 2009 data from LinkedIn Research Network and Harris Interactive:
Only 8% of both advertisers and consumers believe the technology is a viable marketing tool
42% believe the technology has potential
19% find no merit whatsoever in including the micro-blogging phenomenon in their overall marketing strategy
What it all means:
While public use of Twitter expanded by nearly 100% from ’08 to ’09, advertising, consumer interaction and revenue have been slow to follow. Unless consumers begin to view Twitter as a platform for brand engagement, as much as an avenue for social networking, marketing and advertising heads worldwide may be re-considering their use of the technology.
The Big Three:
Where MySpace began the revolution, Facebook and Twitter have followed suit. But while all three fall under the ‘social networking’ banner, each fit a different market, have their own purpose and offer a unique style.
On MySpace, backgrounds, personalised music tracks and slideshows meant communication took a back seat. Facebook, cashing in (well, not literally) on MySpace’s narcissistic extravagance, re-established communication and contact as the most important elements for social networking sites to succeed. Facebook’s simple, user-friendly layout played a huge role in affording the networking giant the market share of users.
Then Twitter came along. Like Facebook before it, the micro-blogging phenomenon found a niche. Where other networking sites consume valuable time as you update, browse, tag and comment, to ‘tweet’ takes only moments. In 140 characters or less, a message, reminder, update or promotion can be forwarded to the masses. It’s this function; Twitter’s succinct updating capacity, that not only has users engaged, but businesses, too.
The Marketing Hype:
While Facebook and MySpace succeeded in supplying a service to the masses, and still succeed individually, neither has yet discovered the elusive ingredient to blend social networking, advertising and marketing.
The hype surrounding Twitter as a marketing phenomenon, however, has been huge. Nielsen reports indicate that from February 2008 to February 2009, Twitter experienced a growth of 1,382%. The audience is there. But MySpace and Facebook had the audience, too, so what’s the difference from a business point of view?
Positives for Business:
Twitter presents opportunities for consumer engagement, and the connection between advertising and social networking has seemingly unlimited potential. While time will reveal Twitter’s true worth as an online marketing tool, companies are cashing in right now. Here’s why:
Immediacy: The speed of Twitter’s messaging system allows for the fastest possible transfer of information. As CNN, The New York Times and many other news organisations prove, immediacy is key.
Convenience: The avenue for information transfer, from business to consumer, has potentially never been more cost-effective or convenient. Because Twitter demands little reciprocity, ‘followers’ can be up-to-date with a brand or organisation’s latest message, hassle-free, in seconds.
Conversational: Twitter makes the case that conversation has ousted content as King. Where alternative marketing tools can be invasive, Twitter demands little from its audience. Because followers ‘volunteer’ their attention on Twitter, organisations can curb their call to action in favour of a conversational approach. In doing so, businesses establish an all-important, real-life brand presence. Dialogue, it appears, could be the most powerful tool of all.
So who’s benefiting? CNN, as mentioned above, has jumped on the Twitter bandwagon with positive results.
CNN has been a Twitter advocate for some time now, and the results are astounding. Accumulating a massive following on the social networking site since joining, Ted Turner’s boys are obviously doing something right. By tweeting news updates as they occur (or near enough), rather than in an hourly report, CNN has applied a simple business model: find a niche and exploit it. By taking the immediacy of an event from the scene to the reader, they’ve turned a negative aspect of traditional news in their favour. At the same time, they’ve also promoted a real-life brand presence to a committed, active readership.
Because CNN use Twitter as a low-cost, supplementary source of information and contact for their brand and business, rather than a primary source, the benefits incurred are ultimately a bonus.
The notoriously experimental Richard Branson has, of course, also become involved, with great success. By capitalising on the advancements in technology, Branson exploited unconventional methods to promote his own brand of ‘relationship marketing’ to a loyal consumer base.
While Twitter shows promise, the question begs; are we getting ahead of ourselves applying an all-encompassing, utopian perspective to Twitter’s marketing nous?
It seems so.
It’s not for everyone:
Of importance with the two examples above, is that CNN and Virgin are the exception, NOT the rule. The immediacy and frequency Twitter allows suit a news organisation like CNN to a tee. For Virgin, the interactive platform that Twitter promotes caters uniquely to a very specific type of fan-base, one which views the Virgin CEO as celebrity and his radical communication strategies as cutting-edge. Because Virgin’s marketing campaigns depend on their brand being ‘top of mind’, Twitter naturally fits.
But, what about less-established organisations, with fewer followers or a customer base that doesn’t need to be constantly engaged? For smaller businesses, where similar marketing falls on deaf ears?
For most businesses, the fact remains that Twitter serves little purpose. While including it in the overall marketing strategy is cost-effective, it won’t necessarily reap rewards and may result in a less efficient business; the opposite of what the tactic is meant to produce.
Unless your company is in the business of fast moving consumer goods, entertainment, celebrities, news and media, don’t bother. Niche industries simply don’t have the following and don’t require an avenue for such frequent consumer interaction. But if you are in any of the aforementioned industries, jump on board without delay!
While some would argue that Twitter is a marketer’s friend – and as highlighted above, there are reasons to believe this notion – a simple contradiction seems to continually stand in the way:
At the core of both the social networking and business worlds are contrasting values – one is passive and one is active. While social networking sites promote active involvement, the nature of the relationship between business and customer has always been one-way.
Time will tell how Twitter alters the business-consumer relationship. The sceptics will be ever-present, regardless of the outcome. But if you choose to follow the hype, do so with humble expectations. It simply may not deliver what you anticipate.
