For years, brands have been running “do unto us and we’ll do unto a charity” campaigns. It's a way for the consumer to make a contribution to a charity or a cause without putting down a dollar value; their continued patronage is used as a means to donate. When used in social media, the brand is requesting its followers to actively help spread both its message and its marque – extending the brand’s immediate sphere of influence to reach an audience ordinarily reserved for paid media.
Within social specifically, the ReTweet to donate is a somewhat elegant, albeit tired, way to both spread awareness and do social good at the same time. Last week, Kellogg's, in taking this exact same approach, ran afoul of supposed negative public reaction and were forced into making a stock in trade mea culpa.
The language Kellogg’s used in their tweet – “1 RT = 1 breakfast for a vulnerable child” – was rough, and it was crude. Possibly this less than graceful phrasing made the mechanism behind the campaign appear more unseemly, less altruistic. But for whatever reason this campaign drew complaints above others, it is just the latest example of brands being held to a higher standard by the public within the realm of social. Because of social's pure immediacy and the fewer corporate barriers for its message has to circumvent before going public, we see time and time again brands being taken to task and being forced to issue apologies. We're not used to seeing this because traditional marketing is made anodyne by multi-layers of lawyers and approval, with its Sisyphean task of appealing to all while offending no one.
Thanks to the mechanism of social, for the first time brands (that are using social right) are being seen laid bare by the public - and it's for that singular reason that social is responsible for both resonating and humanizing the corporate entity more than any other form of media.
In contrast to the response Kellogg's received for their attempt at social good, MasterCard is running a traditional media campaign, 'Dig in and Do Good', that utilizes the exact same concept – when you dine out using a MasterCard they will donate $X to charity. “When everyone does their part: priceless”, is how MasterCard describes it. In other words, you can go about your business as normal, without changing your habits one iota, and feel as though your efforts have contributed to help cancer research. You may not even be aware of the campaign and have your habits rewarded. This particular campaign is being heavily promoted during NFL games and has, as a result, far a far larger amount of media impressions than a single Kellogg's tweet. In other words, more people are aware of this campaign and yet, to date, there has been no outrage registered.
Same mechanism, same ideal, different reaction. It seems apparent that social, and the brands participating, are being held accountable to a 'higher standard' than what has become de rigor in traditional marketing. This is due to social’s immediate and personal nature. Social echoes the world we are trying to relate to: sometimes rough and always open to interpretation. Businesses, brands and individual luminaries have become more realized for the individual follower because of social and its immediacy. We hold television, print and radio at an arm’s length, tuned out and ready to dismiss everything we hear. However, social, and its burgeoning, fledging up close and personal nature has made each and every touch point seemingly very real and very immediate.
Or perhaps it’s just the instant dissemination and the democratization of social that gives us all a voice, about everything. Death by a thousand tiny cuts, and with an infinitesimal audience who all innately have the ability to instantly comment and pass judgment, those cuts will come almost no matter what.
Traditional marketers will continue to foist old ways of thinking onto the new ways of communicating until the public tells them otherwise five times over. In the long run, what will it mean for brands to be taken to task for merely maintaining their status quo approach to marketing? I fear that for many it will mean treading even more lightly than they have done, doubling down on content calendars and the approval process, and completely losing the creative freedom that social needs to breath and succeed. And that would be a shame.
No comments:
Post a Comment