Comments on: Missing the Mark on Social Media http://www.lotame.com/blog/missing-the-mark-on-social-media/ Lotame leads the market in understanding, interpreting, and activating social data. Sun, 14 Mar 2010 14:42:37 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: Rubicon Project On Q1 Survey Results; PubMatic Debugs; Agencies On Ad Networks Video http://www.lotame.com/blog/missing-the-mark-on-social-media/comment-page-1/#comment-251 Rubicon Project On Q1 Survey Results; PubMatic Debugs; Agencies On Ad Networks Video Thu, 04 Jun 2009 01:42:16 +0000 http://www.lotame.com/blog/?p=1010#comment-251 [...] Lotame crunches the social media numbers on its blog and outlines the social advertising opportunity while weeding through recent industry news releases [...] [...] Lotame crunches the social media numbers on its blog and outlines the social advertising opportunity while weeding through recent industry news releases [...]

]]> By: Tom Hespos http://www.lotame.com/blog/missing-the-mark-on-social-media/comment-page-1/#comment-249 Tom Hespos Wed, 03 Jun 2009 15:53:20 +0000 http://www.lotame.com/blog/?p=1010#comment-249 My biggest problem with this study was that it was stuck in the old media world, where researchers can't learn to de-couple the medium from the message. It used to be that media vehicles were often rated on their trustworthiness, and you'd hear sweeping statements to the effect of "people believe more of what they read in special interest magazines than they see on network television" and such. Curiously, the interactive media of the day never made it into the consideration set, so you'd not hear things like "people trust more of what they hear on the telephone than what they see on TV."<br><br>Of course, such a statement is ridiculous, because we're talking about people learning not from information disseminated one-way via a medium, but from information delivered interactively (one-to-one) facilitated by the medium. The trust doesn't come from the medium, but from the person you're connecting with.<br><br>If I'm looking for advice from my friends on a lawnmower purchase, to suggest there's a significant difference in the trust factor, depending on whether I connect in person, on the phone or via a social network is just ludicrous. The Knowledge Networks thing seemed to suggest that, but it's just an old research paradigm crammed into a new medium. It doesn't quite translate. My biggest problem with this study was that it was stuck in the old media world, where researchers can't learn to de-couple the medium from the message. It used to be that media vehicles were often rated on their trustworthiness, and you'd hear sweeping statements to the effect of “people believe more of what they read in special interest magazines than they see on network television” and such. Curiously, the interactive media of the day never made it into the consideration set, so you'd not hear things like “people trust more of what they hear on the telephone than what they see on TV.”

Of course, such a statement is ridiculous, because we're talking about people learning not from information disseminated one-way via a medium, but from information delivered interactively (one-to-one) facilitated by the medium. The trust doesn't come from the medium, but from the person you're connecting with.

If I'm looking for advice from my friends on a lawnmower purchase, to suggest there's a significant difference in the trust factor, depending on whether I connect in person, on the phone or via a social network is just ludicrous. The Knowledge Networks thing seemed to suggest that, but it's just an old research paradigm crammed into a new medium. It doesn't quite translate.

]]> By: greghills http://www.lotame.com/blog/missing-the-mark-on-social-media/comment-page-1/#comment-247 greghills Wed, 03 Jun 2009 03:40:58 +0000 http://www.lotame.com/blog/?p=1010#comment-247 It seems logical that people visit social networks mainly to connect with friends. But that doesn't limit the marketing potential of social networks. After all, people watch television for programming, not for the sake of ads, and it still receives the most spend of any channel.<br><br>Social networks offer the opportunity to integrate brand interactions with peer to peer interactions. Facebook's Engagement Ads insert the brand into the same peer to peer conversations that draw people to Facebook in the first place. If this advertising model can scale, so that social networks' share of advertising budget are in line with the amount of time consumer spend there, it will be a win for advertisers and consumers alike. It seems logical that people visit social networks mainly to connect with friends. But that doesn't limit the marketing potential of social networks. After all, people watch television for programming, not for the sake of ads, and it still receives the most spend of any channel.

Social networks offer the opportunity to integrate brand interactions with peer to peer interactions. Facebook's Engagement Ads insert the brand into the same peer to peer conversations that draw people to Facebook in the first place. If this advertising model can scale, so that social networks' share of advertising budget are in line with the amount of time consumer spend there, it will be a win for advertisers and consumers alike.

]]>