Comments on: Sheeple: Everything Old is New (Media) Again.

By: Beef Recipes

Beef Recipes — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 04:34:17 +0000

The twitter phenomenon is quite amazing when you think about how many people see what a single person writes. It becomes a very powerful tool, we’re always hungry for more! I am stunned by how powerful some websites became lately. Great observation in the article, it’s all very good food for though!

By: Paul Gillin

Paul Gillin — Tue, 19 May 2009 13:56:56 +0000

Very interesting observation about the democratization of media leading back to the old star system. We assume that centers of influence will deteriorate in a world in which everyone can publish, but the Kutcher story as well as the flurry of publicity over Opera’s entrance to the Twittersphere, would indicate otherwise. I also like your reality check on the value of mainstream media, which will always have a place in popularizing grassroots phenomena. It is not an either/or proposition, but rather a rebalancing of influence.

By: Matthew T. Grant

Matthew T. Grant — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 19:03:07 +0000

CK – Just saw this very thoughtful, thought-out, and thought-provoking post. Thanks!
You mention that a company would need a good (charismatic/famous) spokesperson to draw implementable lessons from these recent events and I think that this points to the triumph of personality (or cult there-of) over brand on the social media front.
In other words, Andy Warhol could make hay with Twitter, but Campbell’s Soup can’t, knowumsayin’?
Also, to your point of new media needing old media, etc., Marshall McLuhan said that the primary content of any new medium are old/aging media. Television combined film, radio, and, print media; the computer contains all (transmittable) media (ie, sculpture is hard to get across on the web). Yes, to Mack’s point, this means that the interweb CAN be used to broadcast, just like the media it has absorbed, but there is a MORE to the interweb – which is where its true promise and potential lie.

By: CK

CK — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 18:27:29 +0000

@TC: thanks. yep, they helped promote Susan Boyle… as did zillions of ppl, tweeters, bloggers, media. Such an astonishing story and blitz to watch unfold
@Dusan: Great to hear from you pal. No queen here–too many queens get beheaded anyhow (eek!). Yes, it’s hard to swallow that the majority do act like sheep (no fan of groupthink am I) but, objectively, marketers have leveraged it and it works. Like I wrote, while I didn’t personally like this promotion, I’d be myopic to not see its success–and the lessons have been fascinating to watch from my front-row seat on twitter. Funny how new media is confirming age-old lessons, eh?

By: Alan Wolk

Alan Wolk — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 03:17:01 +0000

What this also proves, CK, is something you and I have been railing against for a good year or so:
Most people don’t have “personal brands”
Most people don’t want to “create relevant content”
Most people don’t want to “add value”
Most people don’t want to “share insights”
All they want to do is hang around and gawk at celebrities.
It’s that simple. Tor read the Twitterati, there were 3 billion social media experts in the making, all just waiting to jump on to Twitter, write blogs and have a go at it.
This might actually get them to realize that they are but a segment of the greater population
Agree though that everyone benefitted from this: Oprah, Ashton, Demi, CNN, Ev, Biz, even Britney and Shaq.
Oh, and as Aly pointed out, the Malaria No More people too.

By: CK

CK — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 19:48:26 +0000

@Aly: Thanks, I included the charitable component at the end of the 5th para–mentioned how I was relieved to see a charitable component included (as it wasn’t in the initial video and I was glad when I heard the interview w/Ted Turner’s daughter on having it be a part). I will admit that it would have been even better had it been a promotion that got 1 million followers for malaria no more… but that’s my personal take and, objectively, the promo was a smash and helpful to money/awareness/relief efforts of the charity (which is at: http://www.malarianomore.org/)
On that note, a charity push that’s also been happening this month and I’ve been following & promoting–as they’ve let everyone watch their progress through daily web videos–is through http://www.charitywater.org, another very worthy organization that dug wells (for clean drinking water)in Ethiopia this month from their “Twestival” efforts. Check it out!

By: Aly

Aly — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 19:20:59 +0000

What you seem to have omitted from this otherwise intelligent expose is the fact that Ashton Kutcher’s challenge to reach 1million followers included the fact that he then DONATED $100,000 to Malaria No More. This was not, in my assessment, an ego race but one for a good cause that ultimately served to promote Twitter and no particular individuals.

By: Jeff Julian

Jeff Julian — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 18:48:27 +0000

Solid post. Well done. I firmly believe in the concept that social media is a tool. Mastering social media only means you’ve mastered another tool in an arsenal of many.

By: gianandrea facchini

gianandrea facchini — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 07:36:23 +0000

I’m with Gavin. Even if this move could mean: market twitter as a marketing vehicle to launch, say, a movie. Revenue can come a pay per performance model: a cpf (cost per follower).

By: Dusan Vrban

Dusan Vrban — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 05:16:00 +0000

CK, you might not like it, but I’m your sheep. Really happy to see you arround here again. Yes, you just might be the queen of MProfs.
I like Mack’s comment here, yet it’s again one of those idealistic. Unfortenatly, CK is totally right. People are sheeps and most of them PREFER to be. Majority of people don’t want to think too much and communicate with a company too much.
Yes, “social media” (I hate this phrase since it’s totally not correct) can get you a lot of information about the market (hey, you can talk directly to the customer) and in some cases make you a star. Yet these are still just cases. The main play hasn’t changed.
I always like to get back to 90’s when many were predicting stores to vanish due to internet stores. Why would someone bother going to the store when they have all they need on 1 click? Because we’re sheeps.

By: TC

TC — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 02:07:18 +0000

1st: most excellent post. IMO, this smelled of a combined marketing effort from day 1, but like you say–it’s how the market responded that counts.
2nd: regarding Susan Boyle, but doncha know that she made ashton and demi cry? And they made her the queen of the week? Just food for thought.

By: CK

CK — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 21:11:08 +0000

@Gavin: Hmmm, neat idea. I think the stunt was promoted by shared parties… (see the point before sheeple). And Kutcher was lead Ego, I mean spokesperson.
But I’m not sure if it originated with Kutcher or by all parties, wouldn’t be surprised by anything–so you may well be right. And if you are, I’d sure love to see the look on the sheeps faces if it does come to pass that it was 100% contrived (vs. the movement they’ve signed-up for). But would they stop following him if that were the case? Some, but not most I bet.

By: Gavin Heaton

Gavin Heaton — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 20:02:28 +0000

So, you don’t think this whole thing was a ploy by @Ev and the team to drive up both user numbers and awareness ahead of discussions with Google?

By: hdbbstephen on Twitter

hdbbstephen on Twitter — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 17:59:21 +0000

Thoughtful post. I watched the story unfold on Twitter and on TV and thought to myself “I’d never follow either of them on Twitter”. Don’t follow Oprah either.
I think that there is a disconnect where people read more into the power of celebrity than there really is. Context remains very important.

By: Mack Collier

Mack Collier — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 17:54:06 +0000

The biggest fear I have is that this is going to revert companies back to using social media as a broadcast medium. I think most companies WANT to use social media to broadcast (since that’s what most are more comfortable doing), but for years we have been trying to tell them to instead think of social media as COMMUNICATION tools.
Then Ashton and Oprah swoop in and get a million or so followers in a few days/weeks, and suddenly companies could be thinking that if the broadcasting model works for celebs, why not them as well?!?
Oh well. I guess the good news is, this just gives smart companies that are using social media for the right reason any even bigger lead over broadcasting competitors.

By: CK

CK — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 17:49:59 +0000

Thanks all, glad you enjoyed the lessons (and letting me rant a bit, too!). I just found this post by Mack Collier who also examines the promotion but gives predictions as well, worth a read, too: http://moblogsmoproblems.blogspot.com/2009/04/how-oprah-and-ashton-have-forever.html

By: Kandeezie

Kandeezie — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 15:34:06 +0000

Sooooo good. This guy used his advantage and acted like he was grass roots. Susan Boyle should give him a reality check. But as you said, people like us weren’t the target, so do they really care?
You said all I wanted to say and more. Thanks!

By: Stuart Foster

Stuart Foster — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 14:50:30 +0000

We as Americans tend to be King makers despite our democratic roots. We worship at the altar of celebrity for better or worse.
The key for those of us who haven’t drunk the celebrity Kool Aid? Monitor it but don’t overtly buy into it. Can’t really do much else…

By: Zane Aveton

Zane Aveton — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 14:29:27 +0000

This has been THE most excellent commentary on the Ashton/Oprah/Twitter subject that I have read. I too find all this fascinating to watch unfold…maybe even a little amusing when I see the videos, the commentary, the tweets, the unfollows, the “advantagists”, the “panic-ers”, etc…but just like you stated in so many words above ~ it’s just opinion and everyone’s got one.
I am now going to promote your post as the one “in my opinion” that is the most clear summary of what we just witnessed.

By: Julio R Varela

Julio R Varela — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 14:21:20 +0000

What an excellent post! You hit this so hard and so well. This is a MUST read for anyone who wants to know that the true essence of Twitter is all about. Check you egos at the door, we are all the same, we all are experts. That is why I love Twitter. It is the true human equalizer.