Social media - PR Friend or Foe?

I was recently asked by the Asian Digital Marketing Association to join an Australian Chamber of Commerce panel. The topic of debate was “Social Media: Friend or Foe”. I thought this was interesting, given the profile social media has claimed of late.

Such is the hype you could be led to believe that social media channels are the only sources people turn to for information. In preparing for the panel discussion, I built up four home truths that I’ll table here for your consideration. 

1.       Social media isn’t a silver bullet. Until the day comes that all other kinds of media are truly eclipsed, putting all your eggs in one social basket is a flawed approach.

2.       Social media goals need to support your business’ goals. Success isn’t measured by the number of Twitter followers you have. It should be measured by what those people actually do.

3.       Social media is an ongoing commitment. A four week Facebook “campaign” opens the door to discussion. Close it at your peril.

4.       Social media alone isn’t a strategy. These are just channels through which, on occasion, a strategy is enacted

Now, with that out of the way, ladies and gentleman of the jury, is social media a friend or foe? If it will please you, let me present defence exhibit A - a Nestlé KitKat.

This icon of chocolate goodness seems, on face value, to be harmless. That said, Nestlé has long been the target of environmental groups, critical of its procurement practices. Greenpeace recently began pressuring Nestlé to stop using palm oil in its products, citing deforestation, greenhouse gas emissions and endangered species loss.

They placed a video on YouTube which graphically made a connection between dead Indonesian orang-utan fingers with Nestlé’s famous KitKats chocolate finger confectionery. 

In response, Nestlé lobbied to have the video removed from YouTube citing copyright infringement. Greenpeace received free press – and the video popped up all over the web. But it didn’t end there. With Greenpeace’s prompting, its supporters then attacked Nestlé’s Facebook fan page by posting negative comments on the company’s wall. They used anti-Nestlé slogans instead of profile pictures – distorting the Nestlé “KitKat” logo into Nestlé “Killer”.

Nestlé again went on the offensive, threatening to delete comments from people who misused their brand. The company’s forum moderator went on the defence, and fuelled fires by insulting the company’s attackers. Nestlé was portrayed as a company that wanted to stifle criticism – not defend its trademarks.

Ultimately, the Nestlé community manager apologized for being rude, and stopped deleting posts. But the damage had been done. In this case, Nestlé was under-prepared. It didn’t seem to have a plan when a very public social media channel came under assault. On the upside, I can hope that this lesson is one well-heard by brands now flocking to Facebook in their thousands.

Now, your honour, if it will please the jury, may I present defence exhibit B - a jar of Vegemite.

For the uninitiated, Vegemite is a sticky and pungent dark-brown yeast-extract that we antipodeans spread on our toast.  To launch a new cheese flavoured spread, manufacturer Kraft created a public naming competition, subsequently putting the nameless product on shelves. Kraft received 48,000 entries and announced winning name – iSnack 2.0 –at the 2009 AFL (Australia Football League) grand final.

Immediately, this name was met with almost universal customer condemnation. Without warning, the Web 2.0 generation turned on Kraft.  Thousands of comments flew across Twitter. 31 Facebook pages and 168 Facebook groups were created to condemn the iSnack 2.0 name. A website, “Names That Are Better Than iSnack 2.0”, sprang up.

One commentator even suggested that the 27-year-old designer who had submitted the winning name be tarred with Vegemite and forced to run naked through the streets of Sydney “as retribution for his cultural crime.”

Within 72 hours, Kraft decided the i-Snack 2.0 name wasn’t worth defending. A subsequent online poll and telephone survey of 30,000 Australians and New Zealanders determined Vegemite “CheesyBite” was the preferred name. The furore, however, paid dividends - Sales of iSnack 2.0 rose 47 percent during its controversial first two weeks, while sales of the original Vegemite were largely unaffected.

Marketing stunt or blunder? I guess the lines between genius and madness are blurred.

So, is social media friend or foe? Does it even matter? In both cases, social channels were certainly used to attack the brands. These channels don’t exist because marketers want them to. They exist because the mob wants them to. The real question, members of the jury, is what roles are you and your company playing in social media channels?

- Jeremy