The stagnating social media landscape

I’m going to avoid falling into the “…is dead” rhetorical trap that some writers use in order to gain easy linkage and make themselves look like they’re oh so smart and ahead of the curve. Most of the people who write headlines along those lines probably don’t even believe their own spiel anyway and just use that sort of crutch as a way to bring in a bunch of new visitors as they feel their influence waning.

But I do have the strong feeling that we’re in the middle of a period of stagnation in the social media world, specifically in its use as a connection tool between brands or companies and their customers.

I’m speaking here of a number of fronts on which social media tools are used, from direct communications to advertising through online media.

First of all, let’s drop the notion that every company needs a blog/Twitter account. They don’t. Jason Calacanis can say that if your CEO isn’t blogging he should be fired all he wants but that doesn’t make it any more true, regardless of the repetition. Has his profile been raised by blogging? Absolutely, but that’s because he operates in the online media space and it fits in very much with what he’s trying to do, which is reach an online audience.

While companies like Comcast and JetBlue have a great reputation for their work in reacting to problems through Twitter, every time I read about an instance of this happening it just makes me wonder if they extend the same sort of instantaneous customer care to their offline customers, where the impact on the search results isn’t as immediate or noticeable.

There are some solid examples of good corporate blogs but there is absolutely no reason for every company to be blogging. Some of my colleagues will point to the low percentage of Fortune 500 companies that are blogging as proof that they’re “closed” or “just don’t get it.”

I’d be willing to bet, though, that many of those who aren’t blogging completely comprehend the power of blogging and other social media ventures but simply choose not to engage themselves because – and here’s the dirty little secret a lot of those making money as social media consultants won’t tell you – they don’t really have anything interesting to say.

And that’s OK. If you’re feeling pressured to make decisions based on whether or not you’ll look cool you’re about to go out of business. Chasing fads is not conducive to long-term success. Adherence to proven best practices mixed with experimentation that compliments those ideals and doesn’t replace them does.

There are a variety of reasons a company would choose not to blog. Those reasons range from things like financial disclosure laws, a desire to protect proprietary information or any other legalistic or related concern. Or it could be because they don’t have anything of value to add to what’s already being written.

SHOCKER!!!!

This notion that people are more likely to trust a corporation that speaks directly to the audience through a blog than one that relies on the press is kind of absurd when you apply any sort of critical thought to it. Both are outlets that allow for some measure (either total or a good deal) of control by the corporation. That’s because on a blog, whatever sort of fact-checking or un-spinning that might go on by a newspaper reporter is completely absent.

There are people out there saying a blog allows for “unfiltered messaging.” That’s true on the corporate end because it means their hyperbole isn’t going to be filtered out. But for the reader, it means that hyperbole isn’t being filtered out and actually has the potential to create a less informed audience.

The problem now is that social media programs are being proposed by people who have no place proposing a social media program. I said to someone while at BlogOrlando that more social media ideas have been derailed by someone simply asking “Why?” than for any other reason.

But the more often things like Twitter or FriendFeed are covered by Time and BusinessWeek and other mainstream publications the more often “We need to be doing X” is said in corporate hallways. And the number of people willing to ask “Why?,” I’m afraid, is falling as the number of People Who Know What They’re Doing and Have a Grounding in Solid Marketing Practices dwindles and is being overshadowed by People Who Read About TechCrunch In Newsweek and Flutter From One Thing to the Next.

Let me give you a little bit of advice if you’re looking for someone to help you with your social media efforts: The less you seen a name in the press the higher the likelihood (up to a point, of course) that the person actually knows what they’re talking about. There are a group of practitioners that I *know* are doing good work but who don’t run after the media, either online or offline, spotlight. If you see them quoted it’s not because they made themselves available for comment on a certain issue. It’s because they have a reputation for being informed and for knowing what’s BS and what’s not. If you’re not sure who these people are drop me a line and I’ll hook you up.

Social media is in a rut, and it’s largely being driven by the pretenders, those looking to make a quick buck while they can and those who are just clueless. Need proof? Do a quick Google search for the phrase “like twitter for” and see how many services have been labeled as such. Or the fact that the two big stories in my feeds yesterday were that Google had created a replica of what it looked like in 2001 and the new features from StumbleUpon, features that should have been there from the beginning.

There’s also a problem with where companies are directing their efforts. They’re spending so much time on coming up with a BS micro-blogging strategy that they’re not putting any time into making sure all the information that could possibly be on their official website – a concept that hasn’t changed a whole lot since 1997 – is there. I run into this all the time when I’m researching columns for MMM. What did a studio do to advertise a movie, and what sort of publicity did it receive in the press?

I’m not sure a lot of the time because the sites for those films are so half-assed and don’t contain all the press mentions or advertising collateral – including what sort of strategy they employed – that was assembled or attained. So my perspectives on those issues is skewed by my own media experience, a historically bad yardstick to use.

But look! – they have a Twitter account that labels everything that’s released as “hysterical” or “very useful.”

Shiny….

If you’re involved in social media marketing in your organization try something new today. Propose something that’s actually going to be “of value” as opposed to something that “your competitor is doing.” And if your social media marketing professional isn’t proposing something new on a regular basis and isn’t willing to give you an honest answer to the question of whether you should do something or not they need to be reevaluated.

There’s also stagnation in what blogs have been labeled as “influential.” Too often nowadays “influential” seems to be understood by marketers as “willing to republish our talking points/press release with little critical thought put into it.” They know what blogs will be swayed by the promise of an exclusive and will fawn all over whatever it is because they’ll be the first to press with a bit of news.

But if you’re not willing to have your product/brand/whatever assessed in an intellectually honest manner, you’re tipping your hand that the product is probably not all that great. Some writers take this to far, that’s true, and apply cynicism to everything that crosses their desk, not willing to give anything praise for fear of appearing to be someone’s lapdog. But if someone can say that even if they like it there is still room for improvement then *that* person is your biggest fan. Why? Because they care enough to give you honest feedback.

That’s probably why I’m not on everyone’s outreach list. I’m also alright with that. I’d rather feel satisfied with what I write and be comfortable that it reflects my honest reaction than go chasing people offering them zero criticism in exchange for exclusives or other favors.

I’ll be honest and admit that I’m writing this in part to shake up my own thinking. I’m feeling beaten down by so many stories telling me that Yammer is the next big thing (It’s not – just look at how many people actually sign on to your company’s intranet and divide that by five and you’ll have the average enterprise adoption of something like this) and feel like no one is coming up with anything new, including myself. Between lack of original thought and the kowtowing to bad ideas coming from either upper management or entrenched practices, things are failing to move forward on a number of levels in the marketing industry.

I don’t mean to discount social media or any of its offshoots by what I’m saying here. I’m a big believer in the power of the tools that are available to us in 2008 and I’m excited about what’s coming down the pike. But there is, on just about every level, too little critical thought that’s put into what’s going on. And there’s too much stagnation in how tools are being implemented.

So let’s change things. And let’s start today.