The Bolin Marketing Blog

As experts in digital marketing, we often find ourselves talking a lot among peers about social media – what it is, the  value it provides, how we leverage it for our clients, and so on. And we find ourselves (generally) nodding in agreement.

But that’s not always the case with people outside the realm of the social media industry, practice or study.

We firmly believe that social media strategies and tactics can have huge impact for specific clients. But we also erroneously assume that everyone around us also understands the imputed or explicit value it can provide. It goes without saying that many marketers are skeptical about social media, especially when they’ve grown accustomed to traditional measures for marketing activities in the mix.

After all, it all comes down to dollars, comfort with what people know, and discomfort with what they don’t know.

Definitions like reach, awareness, frequency, preference, recognition and recall are generally understood by seasoned marketing folks. Social media, however, requires new definitions and new measures, like conversation, sentiment, velocity and online share of voice. These new definitions need to be matched against old ones and compared and contrasted regarding their value. Social media has the ability to take customers deeper into the product, service and brand experience. There are varying discussions on how to measure it objectively and subjectively, too. We’re finding that comparing the value of traditional media and social media is an apple-versus-orange argument.

We are not only talking about different types of measures for different types of consumer activities, however. In true Gerald Zaltman fashion, I came up with another metaphor (a little more elaborate than apples and oranges) to explain what I think is also happening with social media. For instance, consider the effect the alternative fuel car (social media) will have (or, is having) on the infrastructure and market for gasoline and gas-powered cars (traditional media and marketing).

For example (here’s just one), the electric car will soon make up a significant mix of all road-bound vehicles. Why? The very existence of the electric car challenges the infrastructure of gasoline distribution, not to mention the market for oil itself, by reducing demand for gasoline and the need for gas stations (presumptively, because people are more carbon-footprint conscious and are coming to terms with the inefficiencies of the gas-powered car). There’s a (presumptive) growing demand for alternatively fueled vehicles which is fundamentally changing the way we perceive and measure value in our commuting and consuming lives. (Reference what’s happened in Detroit).

Let me take that same paragraph and substitute some language:

Social media will soon make up a significant mix of all media spends for many marketing initiatives. Why? The very existence of social media challenges the infrastructure for media distribution, not to mention the market for traditional media itself, by reducing demand for traditional media and the need for media placement (presumptively, because more people are understanding the benefits of social media’s efficiency in connecting with consumers, dollar for dollar). There’s a growing demand for social media which is fundamentally changing the way we perceive and measure value in our marketing mixes. (Just look at this tiny example of efficient local marketing).

I’m not saying traditional media (on and offline) and gas stations will go away entirely. And I’m not saying social media has evolved as much as the alt-fuel car. There is a lot of change happening, however. And this is just one metaphor to help explain it.

What do you think?