Brand Marketers: Listen When the Consumer Says, "Enough is Enough!" appears in the latest issue of Social Media Marketing magazine. Check it out at http://www.smmmagazine.com/
New research from ExactTarget has proven what we already suspected: too much of a good thing is, well, too much. The study concluded that if marketers use social media to barrage customers with self-serving, non-engaging messages, they're likely to be "unliked" faster than you can say buh-bye.
The conclusions may not be surprising, but what is surprising is the number of brands choosing to simply ignore the data, forging ahead with the great barrage. Sayeth the consumer, "We're talking about YOU!"
According to the study, when a consumer quits following a brand on Facebook, for example, it's because the company posts too much (44 percent), its pages are cluttered with marketing messages (43 percent), the messages are repetitive and uninteresting (38 percent), the messages are overly promotional (24 percent), and the content is irrelevant (19 percent).
Let's talk about frequency of messaging. While I've seen only anecdotal information about the optimum number of posts from a brand—and relevancy will always impact that optimal number anyway—I'm fairly confident that most consumers do not wish to receive brand messages every day. Yet the vast majority of brands that I personally/professionally follow are compelled to post messages five or six days per week.
None of the brands I follow ever posts on Sunday. While I will allow that social media usage is comparatively lower on Sunday—see Mashable's excellent article on Facebook usage—I could argue that the less-cluttered environment might be a good trade for the slightly lower usage. And if a broader audience was the goal, why would brands post on weekdays between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., knowing that 65 percent of users access the site when they're not at work or school, typically early morning or evening? According to Mashable's Adam Ostrow, "That means that if you're making social media only a part of a 9-to-5 workday, you might be missing out on connecting with consumers during the times they're likely to be online."
I'm going to pick on Best Buy for a moment, a brand that often uses social media very well, but sometimes makes me crazy. Today, I received nothing fewer than four messages from Best Buy. Message number two was a repost of message number one. I have additionally received six messages from Best Buy over the past two weeks about their buy-back program. This is precisely why I have hidden posts from Best Buy and go to its Facebook page only when I'm seeking specific information.
What is unfortunate about that is that buried in the clutter are some genuinely interesting posts. For instance, while most brands seem compelled to post their latest commercials—what may be the best example of the overt marketing message that survey respondents said they did not want to see—Best Buy has done it right. To create additional interest in its Super Bowl commercial, Best Buy invited Facebook friends to vote between four different endings for the spot. In the second part of its one-two punch, Best Buy auctioned off the autographed costumes worn by Justin Beiber and Ozzy Osbourne in the spot, donating proceeds to charity. Great stuff. But Best Buy, please lighten up!
Many brands still fight the urge to use friend and follower counts as a measure of success. What brands would do well to consider, though, would be the number of friends and followers who decide that enough is enough. Optimum frequency and the value of the posts' content will become clear.
Showing posts with label Facebook. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Facebook. Show all posts
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
A marketer’s personal dilemma: targeting versus privacy
In the Mad Men-days of advertising, targeting usually meant little more than selecting a TV show (from among three networks) that the “ladies” were inclined to watch. My, how we’ve focused.
As a marketer today, armed with the necessary data, I can find you, my potential customer, with microscopic precision. I know where you live, how much the houses in your neighborhood cost. I know your age, your sex. I know the websites you visit, the products you buy. This makes my job ever so much more efficient, and my marketing dollars more effective.
If I weren’t a marketer, the chances are still good that I could ferret-out a great deal of information about you. I could probably ascertain not just your age demo, but your exact birth date. I could determine whether or not you are married, the names and ages of your children, your cell phone number, your email address, your street address, and where (and when) you are going on vacation.
How? You told me. You probably didn’t mean to, but there it is…right there on the Internet. And armed with what I know – as a marketer or not – I can invade your email, your mailbox, your Facebook, your home, your bank account, your privacy.
Two things happened this week that gave me pause…should give ALL of us pause.
The first is the much-anticipated draft of a Congressional bill that would provide privacy protection both on the Internet and offline. The draft made no one happy. Advertising industry groups issued ominous predictions about the certain death of direct marketing, and the inability for consumers to be served valuable, relevant messages. Privacy advocates argued that the bill did little more than tell consumers to read the digital fine-print.
The New York Times describes the legislation this way. “The proposed bill would greatly extend what information should be considered sensitive. It would require companies to post clear and understandable privacy notices when they collect information ranging from health or financial information all the way to Internet Protocol address (which many companies are using to target now as a way of getting around privacy concerns), name, any unique identifier including a customer identification number, race or ethnicity, precise location or any preference profile the customer has filled out.”
“Essentially, whenever any information can identify a single person — or a single computer or device — companies would need to alert consumers about that with a notice.”
According to the bill, once that information is provided, the user has the opportunity to opt-in or opt-out of allowing the data to be used or shared.
Industry groups argue that the process will interfere with the user experience, and that a free Internet depends on sophisticated targeting models. They suggest a better approach would be to follow their recently put forth self-governing principles. Hmmmm, to all of that.
The second thing that gave me pause this week was the release of a new Consumer Reports study that suggests a majority of people seem unconcerned with online privacy – or safety – as they post risky information on their social-network profiles. Fifty-two percent of American adults have posted personal information, like their full birth date (38 percent), photos of children (21 percent), their children’s names (13 percent), street address (8 percent) and mention details about being away from home (3 percent).
The study says that one in four households with a Facebook account have users who aren’t aware of, or don’t choose to use, Facebook’s built-in privacy controls.
Are we really unconcerned about online privacy, or are we simply unaware of how exposed we are? I suspect it’s the latter. As a professional marketer, I am keenly aware of how precisely I can find you – and people quite like you – in order to serve up my product messaging. As an Internet user, however, I resent being targeted, and find it to be enormously intrusive. I’m a “mature female” consumer, and thus I am barraged with wrinkle-cream advertising. It makes me mad.
Unlike many of my fellow Internet users – and the majority of the 300+ million Facebook users – I’m pretty careful about maintaining my privacy online, although I could probably be even more vigilant than I am. I look for, and share, articles that provide privacy tips, like 7 Things to Stop Doing on Facebook, and Mashable’s recently-released guide to disabling Facebook’s insipid "Instant Personalization" feature. I repost warnings from friends and colleagues about the newest privacy attacks, such as the creepy website spokeo.com. It bills itself as an online phone book, but offers photos of your house, your credit score, profession, age, income level, horoscope, how many people live in the house…most of it erroneous, but available nonetheless. Astoundingly, you must provide them with your email address in order to opt-out through their privacy program!
Our collective tolerance for such matters may be running out. In a recent SmartBrief poll regarding legislation that gives consumers more control over their personal information online, nearly 62% said it's about time Congress took action. According to SmartBrief blogger Jesse Stanchak, "It's not every day you get 60% of a group to advocate federal intervention in private industry."
Marketer or not, I’m going to support any legislation that takes steps towards allowing ME to decide what information about me is shared, and what information is private. The industry will get over it. Remember how the email industry was going to be obliterated with the introduction of the Unsubscribe button? We’ll live.
As a marketer today, armed with the necessary data, I can find you, my potential customer, with microscopic precision. I know where you live, how much the houses in your neighborhood cost. I know your age, your sex. I know the websites you visit, the products you buy. This makes my job ever so much more efficient, and my marketing dollars more effective.
If I weren’t a marketer, the chances are still good that I could ferret-out a great deal of information about you. I could probably ascertain not just your age demo, but your exact birth date. I could determine whether or not you are married, the names and ages of your children, your cell phone number, your email address, your street address, and where (and when) you are going on vacation.
How? You told me. You probably didn’t mean to, but there it is…right there on the Internet. And armed with what I know – as a marketer or not – I can invade your email, your mailbox, your Facebook, your home, your bank account, your privacy.
Two things happened this week that gave me pause…should give ALL of us pause.
The first is the much-anticipated draft of a Congressional bill that would provide privacy protection both on the Internet and offline. The draft made no one happy. Advertising industry groups issued ominous predictions about the certain death of direct marketing, and the inability for consumers to be served valuable, relevant messages. Privacy advocates argued that the bill did little more than tell consumers to read the digital fine-print.
The New York Times describes the legislation this way. “The proposed bill would greatly extend what information should be considered sensitive. It would require companies to post clear and understandable privacy notices when they collect information ranging from health or financial information all the way to Internet Protocol address (which many companies are using to target now as a way of getting around privacy concerns), name, any unique identifier including a customer identification number, race or ethnicity, precise location or any preference profile the customer has filled out.”
“Essentially, whenever any information can identify a single person — or a single computer or device — companies would need to alert consumers about that with a notice.”
According to the bill, once that information is provided, the user has the opportunity to opt-in or opt-out of allowing the data to be used or shared.
Industry groups argue that the process will interfere with the user experience, and that a free Internet depends on sophisticated targeting models. They suggest a better approach would be to follow their recently put forth self-governing principles. Hmmmm, to all of that.
The second thing that gave me pause this week was the release of a new Consumer Reports study that suggests a majority of people seem unconcerned with online privacy – or safety – as they post risky information on their social-network profiles. Fifty-two percent of American adults have posted personal information, like their full birth date (38 percent), photos of children (21 percent), their children’s names (13 percent), street address (8 percent) and mention details about being away from home (3 percent).
The study says that one in four households with a Facebook account have users who aren’t aware of, or don’t choose to use, Facebook’s built-in privacy controls.
Are we really unconcerned about online privacy, or are we simply unaware of how exposed we are? I suspect it’s the latter. As a professional marketer, I am keenly aware of how precisely I can find you – and people quite like you – in order to serve up my product messaging. As an Internet user, however, I resent being targeted, and find it to be enormously intrusive. I’m a “mature female” consumer, and thus I am barraged with wrinkle-cream advertising. It makes me mad.
Unlike many of my fellow Internet users – and the majority of the 300+ million Facebook users – I’m pretty careful about maintaining my privacy online, although I could probably be even more vigilant than I am. I look for, and share, articles that provide privacy tips, like 7 Things to Stop Doing on Facebook, and Mashable’s recently-released guide to disabling Facebook’s insipid "Instant Personalization" feature. I repost warnings from friends and colleagues about the newest privacy attacks, such as the creepy website spokeo.com. It bills itself as an online phone book, but offers photos of your house, your credit score, profession, age, income level, horoscope, how many people live in the house…most of it erroneous, but available nonetheless. Astoundingly, you must provide them with your email address in order to opt-out through their privacy program!
Our collective tolerance for such matters may be running out. In a recent SmartBrief poll regarding legislation that gives consumers more control over their personal information online, nearly 62% said it's about time Congress took action. According to SmartBrief blogger Jesse Stanchak, "It's not every day you get 60% of a group to advocate federal intervention in private industry."
Marketer or not, I’m going to support any legislation that takes steps towards allowing ME to decide what information about me is shared, and what information is private. The industry will get over it. Remember how the email industry was going to be obliterated with the introduction of the Unsubscribe button? We’ll live.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
