The Curated Brand
The Skittles experiment of last week led me to think some more about how brands will grapple with the rise of Consumer-Generated Content (CGM) in the future.
I think it’s unlikely that any major brands will mimic Skittles’ approach — who wants to be called a copycat? — however, there are surely core elements that will likely come into play. The day will come when brands that ignore CGM will appear pretty clueless.
Why? — Because more and more consumers are becoming familiar with creating & publishing content online. And as the process becomes easier for them, consumers will publish new content at an ever-faster clip: as random thoughts occur to them, they might whip up a YouTube video, or rant on a blog, or create their own blog, or rig-up an elaborate photo for Flickr…
A lot of this user-created content will promote brands. People are inspired by their favorite brands. But they are also inspired to rat-out companies that disappoint them. So, most big brands will see a wide range of both positive and negative creativity pointed in their direction.
As noted in my last post: marketing managers will come to serve as curators of brand-related content. They will highlight and celebrate CGM that enhances their image/reputation. They will studiously ignore CGM that takes them to task.
But is the brand that embraces Social Media obligated to show the good and the bad?
I don’t think so. “It may be the future but you still gotta eat,” right? A corporation operating in a capitalist society has the obligation to make a profit. It does not have the obligation to make friends, except where/when that would lead to profit. It does not have an obligation to abash itself at every possible opportunity.
This does NOT eliminate the need for brand managers to listen and respectfully respond to negative criticism online! In fact, doing so is even more critical for companies that are serious about brand curation. Because negative CGM will still exist, of course — and will only grow in volume and venom if users feel ignored.
Thus, corporations that do a good job of curating positive content and SEO could still fail: because whether they ignore “bad CGM” or not, Google still indexes and reveals everything.
Got thoughts on this? Do you think that companies who claim to embrace Social Media must show off warts and all?
Posted on: March 9, 2009 at 10:42 am By Todd Defren
Subscribe by Email
Really benefited from reading this above my morning coffee.
This is the main reason I like http://www.pr-squared.com. Amazing post.
Have you seen Shannon Whitley’s Real-Time Chatterbox? Brand curation made easy.
I like your thoughts that a brand doesn’t have to promote the warts necessarily, but responding and acknowledging is a good practice.
I do think that the occasional promotion of your naysayers is a good thing though – Gary V. does this quite well for his personal brand and is a good lesson for companies.
An important post about the direction of brand marketing.
I agree with the comments that curators will need to show at least some “warts” in order to demonstrate how they respond to criticism…will it wind up being about 3-5% of the total negative feedback on average?
It would be interesting to see another post that explores either a “litmus test” for what level of sharing is appropriate or perhaps develops a policy for identifying the “right” 3-5% of negative news to leverage.
Much of this content exists in blogs that explore “how to respond to bad feedback,” but the curator should be able to take the dialogue to a more strategic level.
@elizabethsosnow
Interesting points…Obviously you wouldn’t expect a company to announce every “wart” that is brought up, however it is absolutely their responsibility to allow their customers to express their opinions. If you are truly attempting to embrace social media, then you have to allow for open, transparent conversation, moderating only spam. It’s also important that when you find that your community, or at least a good portion of your community, has a complaint, you make sure they know that you’re listening, and that you’re making moves to improve. Hiding “warts” won’t make them go away, and certainly will not create brand loyalty within your community.
Dave
I am thinking of writing a blog that features all of the other blogs that are talking about the skittles experiment.
I first heard the idea of ‘curator’ in an interview with Jack Myers who said we’ll have experts to curate user generated content in order for advertisers to feel safe. This post takes the idea a step further and addresses the point in a general sense of how companies should participate in social media.
The role of a curator is to select elements that reflect the essence and purpose of the show or brand in this case. So while they make the choice, they are open to comment. Art critics often criticize the curator as much as the artists – ‘why did he select that piece? why did she ignore this important work?’ The chosen pieces reflect the theme of the brand; it does not mean that the non-chosen examples and oddities are doomed for oblivion.
The very nature of ‘social’ means that people will express their opinions; exposing warts and all. How a curator responds is as equally important as what she selects.
Anthony, Chris – I think it’s fair for the “brand curator” to include some of the negative commentary/content, if only to ALSO show how responsive the brand can be to criticism.
I think “curating” is a great way to frame the concept. What you choose to highlight will not only shape people’s perceptions of the brand, but will also become a topic of analysis and discussion in its own right.
Some inclusion of negative comments lends credibility to the story a company tells of itself. Too much focus on negative comments puts the brand in a defensive rather than leading position. Finding the right balance to demonstrate a brand’s market engagement, without being framed by critics, is going to be a hallmark of effective communications in a world of social media.
Chris took the words right out of my mouth! Do you believe anyone who has 100% positive reviews or do you assume they’ve been tampered with if that’s the case? You must allow negative response to show through; how you decide what’s acceptable and what’s not is a big part of setting a company’s online policy.