Editorial Articles

Social media isn’t a new phenomenon. The hype around the technology and its power as a networking tool and content distributor has been steadily building. What is new is the discussion surrounding its potential as an advertising platform. At the recent Cannes Lions International Advertising Festival, report after report detailed how mega brands (Coca Cola, Unilever and Procter & Gamble) were taking advantage of social media as an advertising platform. Advertising Grand Master, Sir Martin Sorrell was quoted in the Financial Times saying "Every CMO and CEO is saying, ‘I want a piece of that."

They may want a piece of it, but I’d suggest some level of caution. I’m not about to join the naysayers and suggest that social media is a mere fad, but I do worry about the impact of such hype on 'regular' businesses that don't have the kind of brand muscle that Coca Cola et al have. When Mike Read, MD of Comscore said recently, “With eight billion more ads on the site versus last year, there is a clear willingness to test Facebook’s ability to drive brand engagement", potential advertisers should pay close attention to the words "willingness to test" and not just the numbers "eight billion". It’s true that Facebook is the biggest online advertising platform in the country serving almost four times more ads than second place Microsoft Sites. It is also true that the number of ads on Facebook has rocketed by a third in the last year – 19.7 billion ads in the UK during Mary 2010, up from 11.8 billion a year before (according to Comscore.) What isn’t necessarily clear is the effectiveness of those 19.7 billion ads.

We have found huge variations in the success rates of advertising efforts using social media. Some products work, others just don’t. And it’s not just about how relevant the product is to the user, it is also about the ease of tailoring, targeting and reporting on the platform as well as the transparency of pricing for advertisers to help support ROI modelling.

Comparing Google with Facebook, Facebook may have the reach but Google is head and shoulders above Facebook as a platform in terms of providing insight and control for advertisers. It is clear that user generated content (UGC) is becoming increasingly important within the buying process so it would be wrong to say that people can’t be influenced when they’re on sites like Facebook or Twitter. However, being able to capture users in buying mode isn’t as straight forward within Facebook or Twitter as it is with Google. In search engines, users provide specific keywords that give marketers a very clear picture of what they want as well as the stage of the buying process they are at. Google will not only tell you how many searches there are for that keyword (impressions), they'll also tell you how popular your ad is (CTR), how well your advert compares to other advertisers (Quality Score) how many people click and how many people buy. Right now Facebook provides some useful targeting around demographics (age, gender, interests, sexual orientation) but there is still some way to go to match Google.

It is also worth noting that whilst Facebook certainly is a vehicle for sharing your passions, Twitter arguable is a vehicle for sharing your frustrations. It may not remain the case forever but the most successful commercial adoptions of Twitter have been in the area of customer service (that great euphemism for complaint department), not in the area of advertising.

So where does this leave brands? In simple terms, make sure you exploit the easy channels before you tackle the difficult ones. Make sure you have your product in places where people are in buying mode. Make sure you match the resourcing of channels with the measurable results they generate. Maybe it's time to review that corporate Facebook page and ask yourself why anyone would really care.

Martin McNulty
GM, Forward 3D
Forward 3D Blog
Twitter: martinmcnulty