Less Media: Social is Strategy Behind It

In social media, the emphasis is on ’social’ not the ‘media.’ Your social strategy, whether it’s for clients or yourself, is dependent on that word in the public eye – not about the publicity you receive.

It’s not about an online portal touting that you’re bringing social to a client/convention - it’s about how you’re executing on a daily basis. Laying out the foundation of awareness will later enable you to broadcast and balance between the two.

For presentations and with clients embracing this enhancement of traditional PR and marketing, saying the words together is fine. Buzz words are something that everyone understands.

Your overall goal, strategies and objectives behind it? Those 2-4 main points you present as the meat of your strategy? Should be all about the social.

But, shouldn’t we be wanting to get publicity for our clients?

Sure – but social is a TOOL of the overall strategy, it’s not a band-aid solution. Blanket approaches never work in this field. It’s just one piece of the puzzle. Creating awareness for your brands should be your overall goal in social – it’s all dependent on how you achieve that. Are you building community? Are you addressing concerns? What steps are you taking on a daily basis to ensure that your brand is the forefront? Social is measurable – show that to the client. ROI doesn’t just have to be hard numbers – if you have strategy behind the objectives? Make it measurable.

It might be easier for bigger brands (those that are easily talkable) or for those with causes. But brand and cause marketing have never been easy – it’s about how you approach the table, the ideas you bring and the strategies you execute. I respect those that can take a smaller brand and have brand recognition among consumers. It’s a lot more creative and takes a bit more without the automatic buy in.

The media part is an effect of your social efforts. What do you think? Is there more emphasis on social or media? What is best for the client? For you?

Picture used from photobucket.com.

Dig what you read? Share with others:

Andrew Swenson

First, I'm in total agreement about the pairing of the words "social" and "media." Recently I wrote that the words "social media" make me gag on my own blog [ http://bit.ly/4HTRPm ].

The scary part about our obsession with "social media" is that, according to a study by the Econsultancy, [ http://bit.ly/8NsOoy ] only about 25% of companies have been able to demonstrate tangible returns on their social media investments. This leads me to believe that our initial obsession with the media led us to pass over the importance of bottom line measurement, at least for a time.

Thank goodness we've put the final nails in the "there is no social media ROI" coffin.

I think though, we have to be very careful in distinguishing social measurement with actual ROI.

After reading a recent article by Katie Paine entitled, "Stop confusing ROI with results, and measurement with counting," [ http://ow.ly/TLpa ] I've been looking at how we measure results differently. Paine's main point was that ROI is a cold financial analysis not synonymous with "whatever results."

It doesn't mean that the measurement for "whatever results" isn't as valuable as true ROI, it just means that the tasks are fundamentally different.

The second point of the article is that measurement isn't just a count of followers, fans, etc. but takes benchmarking (I think this is also relevant to this conversation).

So my question for you is, how are you measuring the social as opposed to the media? I'm not trying to be crass here; I would really like your insight.
laurenfernandez

I do think there is a difference between social measurement and ROI, but I also think that with the C-suite, all of it falls under the ROI umbrella. Its just like saying social media v social strategy, etc. It's what words will register with them. If you confuse people from the start, then you won't get anywhere. Lay the foundation of knowledge, then educate and explain the difference once basic concepts are understood.

You're not crass at all - you bring up great points!
GoKTGo

I think this post is great and goes beyond just thinking about clients - I think that it's a good strategy to take for personal social media accounts as well!

It's important to share information and get messaging out there (ie. as a PR pro, I try to share PR links, posts, stories, etc.) but I think it's also important to be engaging with your community and having real (sometimes silly) conversations!

I get frustrated when I follow PR pros, etc. and all they do is link share - I want to see what they're thinking, I want to see them talking to other people, heck, sometimes I even want to know what they are eating for lunch :)

But as far as clients I really like what you said here >> "but social is a TOOL of the overall strategy, it’s not a band-aid solution."

Being the "popular kid" because you're always engaging in conversation or are quick with a response isn't good enough if you're not sharing valuable information and utilizing the "media" side of things as well :)

idk if any of this makes sense...haha! :)
laurenfernandez

Of course it makes sense. So much of what you do for a professional brand can go over to how you build up your own strategy - whatever that may be. You provide a good point with the balance - engage but ALSO provide information that is interesting for the industry and your followers.
Danny Prager

Lauren, I love this post. As someone who grapples with social strategy for small and larger brands on a daily basis this really hits home.

As a social media strategist the most difficult part of my job is selling a social culture to clients. Social media only works if it is genuine, transparent, and adds value to consumers on social media channels.

So my goal, at the end of the day, is to make clients believe in the power of social media for their business. Then, once they embrace social media, I show them their steady progress through measurement. Then we tweak the campaign to improve both their presence and their bottom line.

This is not a quick process, and, like you said, it's not a band-aid. Focusing on, and implementing an overall social philosophy is the first and the most important step in eventual social media marketing success.

The difficulty is in instilling patience and showing value to the client when making their business social can take months, rather than weeks or days as major media outlets or many social media snake oil salesmen would have you believe. An emphasis on "social" should always come before the emphasis on media.
laurenfernandez

Thanks, Danny! And no, your comment wasn't too long. I think one of the hardest things is patience - but I think you can show the long term value. Who doesn't want to be able to communicate to consumers directly? Who doesn't want to control the effect of the conversation?

I like your steps for how you show it to clients - it's giving them bit by bit so you don't overwhelm.
Alexia Harris

Great conversations happening this morning.

Lauren, I totally understand your point. When you focus more on the "socia" aspect of social media, you're more concerned with the relationships being built rather than what media channel or news outlet picks up on you having a Twitter account or Facebook page. It's deeper than just slapping together a profile using a networking platform and claiming your organization is involved in social media... which makes me cringe, and reminds me of the self-proclaimed "social media gurus."

Although this should be the one of the main reasons organizations use SM, it should be tied to an objective and have measurable goals. Yes, it should be a mix of both relationships and goals, but if you don't connect with your audiences, how will you get them to make moves or support your organization and brand?
laurenfernandez

Thanks, Alexia. You hit it right on the head again when you talk about how awareness should be tied to measurable objectives. Your point about connecting audiences is the foundation - and something brands can't forget.
mikeschaffer

Great stuff on a Monday morning, LAF!

This new cottage industry sure is BIG on those buzz words. They mean nothing, but they can actually mean everything. Call it what you will, but it truly is "Word of Mouth 2.0."

At the end of the day, it's about achieving results, whether it's measured on increased sales or rising brand affinity.

Just this weekend at CES for the YoGen, we used Twitter and YouTube for very different purposes at different times. From driving booth traffic for a specific time period, to distributing video of our news conference for the thousands of media at the show, it was a terrific tool.

One fun example is that we sent one message on Twitter to a guy we didn't know, which has led to two celebrity endorsement leads!

Compared to the major brands, this was like a fly matching up with an elephant, but by having a good message spread across many distribution channels, "social media" created a lot of interest.

Without having a plan for what we wanted to accomplish, we would have fell flat on our face.

(PS - Client was named Best in Show! I'm sure the online outreach played a part.)
laurenfernandez

Ive noticed many depending on either a.) hard numbers or b.) shouting from the rooftops. People aren't focusing on metrics/objectives/strategy - and its why some brands are rocking it, and others just aren't. Its a puzzle - and all are pieces.

I like your point about specific campaigns - definitely something we should chat about soon.
Chuck Hemann

Kasey kind of stole my thunder with his comment, but in addition to being social tools, they are also broadcast ones as well. Should you be 100% broadcast? No. Should you be 100% social? No. Should it be a mix of broadcast, social and sharing other industry-related content? I think so.
laurenfernandez

Right, but the focus? More on social, less on media. Should it be a mix of the two? Absolutely. If it's not, you don't ever find a balance between the two.
Chuck Hemann

No disagreement here, but I think demonstrating how being social leads to something tangible is important. They've seen (in a lot of instances) how broadcasting (PR or marketing) has given them something they can touch and feel. Engaging customers through social media doesn't mean a heck of a lot unless it leads to something - whether that's improved brand reputation, sales, decrease in costs, improved customer satisfaction scores, etc...
laurenfernandez

Hit it on the nose here: Engaging customers through social media doesn't mean a heck of a lot unless it leads to something - whether that's improved brand reputation, sales, decrease in costs, improved customer satisfaction scores, etc...

But that foundation? That's what I was talking about. If you don't lay it down, you're not going to get to those results. Those results are what the client asks you to do. At the end of the day, you want to make more money for your client - but how do you do that? Awareness. :)
kmskala

The problem here is if it's solely on "social", where's the ROI and are you measuring what you should be? "Social" comes off as it's simply about being out there and talking/networking with folks (customers or potential customers). Sure you can measure that, but what good does it do?

While it is important to get your brand out there and make yourself known on various platforms, it's more important that what you're doing is strategic and useful. Are those customers you're interacting with have any chance of purchasing your product? Do they have any chance of becoming evangelists for you?

The old saying "chicken with it's head off" comes to mind when I think of the statement: it's about social.
laurenfernandez

If you have strategy behind the the objective? It's measurable. ROI isn't just about numbers - and social just isn't about communication. It's about metrics, strategy and objective. I agree that its more about being strategic - hence all the chatter in the post about it. :)

I think people are focusing too much on the negativity that "social" has outside the PR/marketing world - it's not a bad thing to build awareness.
kmskala

Absolutely, you can measure all of that. I think the problem lies in the fact that a majority of social campaigns are about the chatter and attempt to get their name in every channel. A lot of what's going on in the social space for brands is creating an account for every single platform and claiming they're social.

In the end, I guess what I'm trying to get at is that social media is about both - social & media. It's about media, not in the traditional sense, but in terms of those who are doing it well are creating their own media. It's about social, but not in the traditional sense of simply getting out to as many platforms, shaking as many hands, etc.
laurenfernandez

LOVED your first paragraph. Exactly what I was trying to get at - and the problem that I see non-stop in this space.

I like the idea of a combination - can there be a perfect balance though? Isn't there emphasis on one or the other? And why I think its social, some other brands might find more emphasis in the media.