Mack,

Yes, in social media we focus on the word social (to interact with others) not media (tools). Interacting means placing the importance of what we have to say on those reading, hearing and viewing our ideas and thoughts. The hope and desirable outcome is that they will interact with us and/or others on the subject discussed.

Social media is sharing, not selling, not marketing, not dictating, although strong opinions are welcome and appreciated.

As always, Mack, good story.

Notice that Gaurav found Chris' post and followed the thread of people that were linking to his post, and linked to all of them:
http://www.gauravonomics.com/blog/when-should-marketers-use-social-media/

Valuable ideas spread, sales pitches, not so much.

And Lewis, thanks for the comment!

And the fact that you wrote even more around it, and gave it wings, and brought it around... that makes it the proof in the pudding of the medium.

You're a superstar, Mack. Thanks for being part of that post's "life."

Thanks Chris but you were the inspiration that got it all started. I'll remind everyone to click over and read Chris' post, which has some amazing comments.

The first issue is about what is marketing. That's one of the main problems surrounding social media and everything. Everyone thinks marketing is communication, advertising, convincing, persuation and so on.

And everyone creating social media tools is focused on selling marketers tools to communicate to their customers. I don't remember seeing an offer from social media sites: marketers, find out what's the price sensitivity of your customers. Or: marketers, develop your products through our services.

No, it's all about advertising and communication.

Social media and other stuff is indeed changing things arround, as email once did. As first websites once did. Yet, poor website is not interesting and turns people away. Amazing site keeps them there and motivates them to come again. Get something, give something.

So it is with social media and any other amazing tech-stuff that will come out. Technology helps distribute things faster and more efficient. Yet alone it does not mean anything and cannot be (and will not be) a competitive advantage. You can be the first blogger in the world or the first company having a website, but there will come an artist 10 years after you and have an effect that will outreach anything you do. If you do it bad.

Technology and methods (how to do it on social-media) can be copied, creativity can't. So yes, fingers up for Mac today. :-) Sorry for a tooo-big comment, but you got me in the right mood and with an excellent content. :-)

Mack-

Thanks for your insightful post. I work for a major social networking site that is up and coming and I talk with marketing professionals every day about using the social media environment to introduce their brand through the medium.

You're right about companies needing to approach this more as a way to add value for the consumer and less as a way to create a direct sale. Social media offers the opportunity for a brand to introduce itself on a more personal level and create a value adding, ongoing relationship. Your post will be linked to our site through an upcoming blog on SMO and creating/ maintaining the brand relationship within social media. Thanks again!

Chris Brogan's post is hardly "excellent". His disclaimer should be instructive.

"Marketing" is a huge field, encompassing strategies, methods, tools, and every paraphernalia you can imagine. Anyone who has worked in meaningful (i.e., significant) marketing roles knows that marketing is not all about one-sided messaging. The idea of "seeding" and propaganda long precedes--by centuries--these clever new bloggers with their macbook pro.

Social media is a small gnat in the world of marketing. An important one, but one that has been around since BBS and forums. People with shared affinities could find each other even 15 years ago, even if the new folks don't quite get it.

Yes, the new SNS websites have a better interface, but they're a progressive step that would have happened one way or another. Don't go around toting as a huge new thing. As always, there are savvy marketers and there are regular marketers.

Erick: my facebook (or any other) finger up for you! :-) Web 2.0 is mostly just new outfit on old things. Yet, it really brings some amazing expansion through user-friendly interfaces.

I don't see much functional difference between this blog and one forum I used to write to. And there was also a group of like-minded people talking to each other.

So why is this blog "web 2.0" and that forum was "web 1.0"?

Erick: but right there in your response is the part you don't get. I say "conversation" and you say "seeding." I talk about using these tools for marketing, but things other than marketing, you say that it's silly that social media types are out there as a small gnat.

You misunderstand. Those using social media tools don't all want to be marketers. Further, we don't want to market the way you have in the past with your significant roles. You can keep those. Perfectly fine.

There's something new in the air, and it's not going to replace marketing. It's going to have a different influence.

Talking about how amazing traditional marketing is smacks to me of telling me why the fax works great.

"Erick: but right there in your response is the part you don't get. I say "conversation" and you say "seeding." I talk about using these tools for marketing, but things other than marketing, you say that it's silly that social media types are out there as a small gnat.

You misunderstand. Those using social media tools don't all want to be marketers. Further, we don't want to market the way you have in the past with your significant roles. You can keep those. Perfectly fine.

There's something new in the air, and it's not going to replace marketing. It's going to have a different influence.

Talking about how amazing traditional marketing is smacks to me of telling me why the fax works great."

Chris stole my thunder. We are talking about communication and understanding, about creating value. We are talking about what marketing could be with these tools. About joining communities, not 'seeding' them.

Just curious Erick, do you have a blog?

Chris: but do you really find these things new? I find social media and stuff that belongs to "web 2.0" very interesting for marketing and yes, it will make some influence.

On the other hand, I cannot see so much difference between these things and some very old stuff. Take RSS for example. IE 3.0 had channels. Perhaps this is not the same, yet not much different?

I think that changes in the past years are mostly on infrastructure (more people have good internet access) which drives more possibility for user-friendly applications and as a result we got very interesting products (services) on the net.

Yet alone this won't change the marketing in its core. Yes, we are moving towards more 1-1 relationship marketing. Still, there are a lot of past CRM projects that didn't work even tough technology was very good. Why?

Also, I meet a lot of people everyday. I think that about 3% are perhaps as net-tech-lovers as me. Then there's some 10% that use internet more hours daily. And then comes the rest that care about something else much more. They work without computer for 8 hours, drive home, have a lunch, take a rest or a beer with friends and in the evening go to bed. Perhaps they watch a movie or daily news on tv.

These people have children. They sometimes care about social networking, but mostly they like their closed circle of friends.

What is my point here is most probably very obvious. Yes, social media as well as other stuff is highly interesting and must be considered in marketing. Especially if you're targeting hi-speed people or some other specific target group. And it will grow even more in years to come (with integration of some mind-blow tech gadgets and infiltration into other media channels).

Yet marketing is not just this. It's much much more. So it would be nice to talk more on other stuff again. :-)

"Yet marketing is not just this. It's much much more. So it would be nice to talk more on other stuff again. :-)"

Says who? I'll have to ask you the same question I asked Erick, do you have a blog? I ask both of you, because I sense the same 'I don't really see what the big deal is about this blogging stuff' mindset. And ironically, it's the same mindset I had before I started blogging, so that's why I ask.

And the great thing about blogging is, if you don't like talking about all this social media stuff, you can start a blog to talk about traditional marketing.

Which would be quite ironic, no?

I have blog, I blog, I have tried almost every social media. Well, I was even almost addicted to one forum once upon a time. No, it's not about me being not-tech, not-new, not-developing.

Quite opposite. I think that if you would ask 100 people that know me to name 3 people that are allways in front of new technologies and internet, I would be on that list in 95% of cases. :-)

But being so experienced in this and trying to educate everyone arround me about it, got me to reality. There's a huge huge huge mass out there that actually don't care about it.

Yes, they almost all like Youtube. Most of them like to read some famous blogs.

But giving their personal data to some social network? Sit behind keyboard for more then 1 hour per day and "see what a friend of a friend of a friend is up to"? Or reading a post about politics from some fanatic individual they don't know? Nope. Almost noone would think of it. Some would try it. And after 30 minutes call me and ask me for a beer. Go for a real company. See some real people.

I'm not saying this is the rule. It depends on the size of the city (town) as well. :-)

As for my quote... I'm just saying that lately I see 50% of blog posts are about some "amazing new network stuff". It gets kinda borring. I'm just fighting for some more "traditional" themes from authors. :-)

What is ironic? That programmers have made a new version of software and are selling it as almost perfect marketing tools. I don't know, but am trying to guess if cars were once (when they have been developed for masses) sold to companies as:

"Your sales personell will be able to reach more customers in shorter time. You will earn more and with just one car per sales person you will achieve hundreds of new clients each day."

And then everyone got a car for a salesman. What next?

That's the same question I have been asking many professionals in SEO and "web 2.0" lately. What will be the benefit of a specific company when 100 of their competitors get 100 of SEO professionals and they all start to target the top 10 list of Google? Who wins? Any idea?

Or if you want it the other way:

What happens when 100 companies with 100 professionals start to make a value-driven brand developing project in social media portals? I don't have an anwser on that... yet. :-)

"But being so experienced in this and trying to educate everyone around me about it, got me to reality. There's a huge huge huge mass out there that actually don't care about it."

Oh now this I agree with completely.

"As for my quote... I'm just saying that lately I see 50% of blog posts are about some "amazing new network stuff". It gets kinda borring. I'm just fighting for some more "traditional" themes from authors. :-)"

So why not just blog about that at YOUR blog? Are you doing that now? I mean it doesn't make sense to come to a blog and say 'well I am bored with what you are talking about, why not talk about this instead?' See what I mean?

"So why not just blog about that at YOUR blog? Are you doing that now? I mean it doesn't make sense to come to a blog and say 'well I am bored with what you are talking about, why not talk about this instead?' See what I mean?"

Yes, I do. But I like to read posts here (a lot of very good authors that actually think), so I'm in a mood to get something else out of you. :-)

Yet I wonder, what was my comment actually about. Oh, I see... I think my point was more to get focus on where the social media and "web 2.0" are actually standing in marketing field.

For example: if i'm a marketing manager, where to put this in my marketing strategy? Perhaps I'm just missing this in all the posts. For now, all I have read was: social media is "in" and you should do as much as you can about it. Should I? Or should I do more? Or should I do less with it? Is it worth 10% of my budget? What impact will it actually have on brand image, sales and other marketing important stuff? Has someone measure the impact of social media campaign on their image in target market?

"For now, all I have read was: social media is "in" and you should do as much as you can about it. Should I? Or should I do more? Or should I do less with it? Is it worth 10% of my budget? What impact will it actually have on brand image, sales and other marketing important stuff? Has someone measure the impact of social media campaign on their image in target market?"

I think you (as a business), should be familiar with these tools, and understand what their capabilities are.

But that doesn't mean that just because a company knows what a blog is, that they should, or can start one. Maybe they don't have the people to devote to posting on a consistent basis. But even if they don't, they can still monitor the blogosphere and 'talk' to their current and potential customers that are talking about them on their blogs.

Social media isn't the marketing silver bullet. But it does offer incredible value, if utilized correctly. Businesses owe it to themselves to understand this area, so that they can use these tools when applicable.