Find the original blog post at knogimmicks.com.
Summary
Written in 2013 in response to a Forbes.com article, this blog asks questions about why large (mainstream?) companies (including “educational institutions, ‘Big Box’ companies, traditional marketers and CEOs”) have not embraced social media marketing (SMM) as a budgeted position (an important distinction) within their larger business plans. Thames blames social media’s mutability, uncertainty and (apparent) inconsistency as culprits for CEOs not signing on fully. To the author, the nature of social media precludes the all important “ROI guarantees.”
Written in 2013 in response to a Forbes.com article, this blog asks questions about why large (mainstream?) companies (including “educational institutions, ‘Big Box’ companies, traditional marketers and CEOs”) have not embraced social media marketing (SMM) as a budgeted position (an important distinction) within their larger business plans. Thames blames social media’s mutability, uncertainty and (apparent) inconsistency as culprits for CEOs not signing on fully. To the author, the nature of social media precludes the all important “ROI guarantees.”
Response
I can easily see Thames' point about CEOs. Even for me, a Millennial, social media as a whole is pretty overwhelming. However, I would argue that social media does in fact demonstrate a certain amount of consistency, particularly in each platform's primary function (each has strengths and weaknesses).
Overall, I would agree with the statement that social media is not yet "formally recognized" among many businesses. Return on investment is at the core of every business campaign, and it seems like stepping out into SMM without a specially-trained person(nel) is admittedly risky.
I think part of this plays into Hinton and Hjorth's comment in the last reading, that "most new technologies are met with an initial social response that contains elements of fear, paranoia and anxiety" (49). Though social-networking-as-advertising is nothing new, as long as traditional marketing strategies provide (relatively) more predictable results for the money, I think this will continue to be an issue.
I can easily see Thames' point about CEOs. Even for me, a Millennial, social media as a whole is pretty overwhelming. However, I would argue that social media does in fact demonstrate a certain amount of consistency, particularly in each platform's primary function (each has strengths and weaknesses).
Overall, I would agree with the statement that social media is not yet "formally recognized" among many businesses. Return on investment is at the core of every business campaign, and it seems like stepping out into SMM without a specially-trained person(nel) is admittedly risky.
I think part of this plays into Hinton and Hjorth's comment in the last reading, that "most new technologies are met with an initial social response that contains elements of fear, paranoia and anxiety" (49). Though social-networking-as-advertising is nothing new, as long as traditional marketing strategies provide (relatively) more predictable results for the money, I think this will continue to be an issue.
Questions
- In terms of business and marketing, how can we characterize social media in terms of its consistency and predictability?
- The article mentioned educational institutions not embracing SMM. Has anyone seen any notable examples companies/institutions that are leading the way into SMM for education?