A Look At, And Analysis Of, Some Serious Social Media Screw-ups.

Social media most undoubtedly has its benefits and its drawbacks. Especially since brands and marketers are still experimenting with the concept.

I've reprinted an article and analysis from Bernhard Warner with a slide share presentation from Social Media Influence's editorial and social media training partner, Custom Communication, who has gone back through six years of social media and compiled a visual narrative of company misadventures with bloggers, tweeters and other social media voices. [Still images added by me].

Since 2004 they’ve identified 37 notable instances where companies have been caught short by social media protests and complaints or where they’ve shot themselves in the foot with dumb marketing.

A snapshot of the history:
Given the explosion in social media participation it’s not surprising to see a steady year-on-year increase in social media screw ups but while 2006 saw 7 major incidents the 10 recorded so far this year suggests that corporate communicators and marketers are becoming more savvy in how they engage and look after their online reputation.

The numbers are trending nicely for social media. As the IAB UK points out this week, the surprising surge in online advertising through the first half of 2010 can be attributed in part to more money pouring into social media marketing. There’s another social media figure on the rise, and it’s not quite so inspiring.

According to the new piece of research by Custom Communication, “Social Media Screw Ups – A Short History,” along with the surge in social media investment comes a surge in social media screw-ups by major corporations using these channels to reach the public. 2010 is on pace to see more reputation-bruising social media gaffes than in any previous year. Haven’t they learned anything from the Kryptonite lock fiasco of 2004? Apparently not.

Social media Screw Ups - A History

In reviewing the findings, it’s become clear: many of the mistakes are being repeated time and again. We list here the most oft-repeated missteps and misconceptions that lead to trouble.


above: kryptonite lock could be broken with a pen, image courtesy of wired.com

* Underestimating influence/impact of your social media critics. Kryptonite is the business school case study here, but loads of brands since – from Target telling the blogosphere they don’t rate to Nestle telling off eco Facebook protesters – have failed to understand that bloggers/Tweeters and Facebook protesters may not be The Guardian or New York Times, but they do hold plenty of weight.


above: bloggers bitch-slapped L'oreal for using false eyelashes on Penelope Cruz to sell mascara, image from L'oreal

* Giving the online community flashy marketing message when they just want simple, straightforward detail. These days, companies can get into big trouble for issuing fictitious glowing reviews or trotting out seemingly genuine testimonials by paid actors. Even before these consumer protections were put into place, L’Oreal paid a higher price – it got burned by vigilant bloggers.


above: Dell Hell, courtesy of blaugh.com

* Culture of unresponsive/uncaring customer service fuels recurring gripes, becomes PR headache. Dell learned the hard way that Jeff Jarvis’ customer service gripes were not an isolated issue; a massive backlash was brewing. It just took one well-connected critic to put his finger on it and the avalanche ensued.


above: the Diet Coke and Mentos experiments could not be hushed, image from reputation online

* Failing to understand the Coke credo: “our consumers control our brand.” Coca-Cola tried to stifle conversation around the combustible combo of Diet Coke + Mentos. Later, it would acknowledge, you cannot hope to muzzle what everyone is talking about.


above: the Chevy Tahoe commercial competition, image from Chevy.com

* Petition the public for crowdsourced ideas, only to be caught out when they have something nasty to say. Crowdsourcing is in vogue these days, giving loyal fans a chance to name a new product or devise a new softdrink formula. But as Chevrolet learned with its Tahoe SUV, be prepared to get from the public more than a clever new slogan.



above: the controversial Vodaphone tweet and reaction from Vodaphone

* Asleep at the wheel: giving junior employees full reign of the channels and providing them with little direction. What could go wrong? Where to start here? Last year, the epic #fail was engineered by Habitat which gave an “overenthusiastic intern” the keys to the Twitter feed. The result? Famously tweeting sale promotions by piggy-backing on the trending Iran election hashtags. More recently, the Vodafone UK Twitter feed was hijacked by a rogue employee who let fly with the odd homophobic Tweet.


above: Wal-Marting Across America, image from walmart.com

* Attempts at feel-good social media washing won’t come back to bite. Wal-Mart took the most heat here when a folksy, it-will-be-blogged “Wal-Marting Across America” journey emerged just as it was getting pressured elsewhere for its checkered labor practices. All goodwill was lost when it was revealed Wal-Mart was funding the feel-good road trip.


above: negative comments on Nestle's Facebook Fan Page

* Facebook is a forum for fans and “Likes.” Burger King, Nestle, and BP, to name just a few have seen their Facebook pages overwhelmed by critics who want to expose dodgy company practice. Greenpeace has had great success mobilising its followers in a series of corporate Facebook pressure campaigns. BK quickly caved to the demands to cheers. Nestle, on the other hand, shouted back, inviting more opposition.

The biggest culprits – plain dumb marketing, officious customer service and asleep-at-the-wheel moments in monitoring online reputation – are alive and well and triggering protests from the general public. For all the fresh money pouring into social media, we would expect the number of screw-ups to rise before companies really get the message that social media investment means more than crafting a slick campaign. It means two-way dialogue, transparency and, yes, learning from your mistakes.

sources: SMI, Reputation Online, Custom Communication

Brand Trophies (Gucci, Nike, LV, Cartier & More) By Artist Pucci de Rossi

above: Gucci is written in the stylized horns of Rossi's Shopping trophy

What at first appear to be stylized wall mounted animal head trophies made of steel, wood, ceramic, plaster and leather, when examined more closely, contain famous brand names such as Cartier, Gucci, Prada, LV, Danone, McDonalds, Coca Cola, Nike and more (some surreptitiously) within the horns.


above: Nike swooshes are hidden within the wooden stag horns

Pucci de Rossi's Brand Trophies, also referred to as 'Shopping Trophies' or 'Metropolitan Trophies', are a commentary on marketing and a comparison of contemporary art with the tradition of hunting*. A surrealistic representation of how trademarks and brand names have infiltrated our society to such a point that they have attained an almost mythical significance. Even when taken out of their natural context, separated from the products they represent, they continue to have loyalty and value attached to them.


above: Installation view at the galerie Anne de Villepoix

Each trophy is hand-crafted and there are multiple versions of certain pieces in various materials as you will see from the images below. The show exhibited at galerie Anne de Villepoix in Paris under the name of Têtes bizardes » (trophées de chasse métropolitains) in 2003.

Gucci:


Prada:


Louis Vuitton:

Cartier:

Fendi:

Dior:

Coca Cola:

McDonalds:


Nike:

Nike -Texas:

Danone:

Others in the collection are simply ornate:


*An article about the series written by Alexandra Senes
Brand Tyranny


above: Pucci de Rossi (photo: Anne-Sophie Granjon)

The designer Pucci de Rossi, a sort of Italian Gyro Gearloose (the Disney-created madcap inventor) has always tended to joke about everything. The focus is now on his provocative logo sculptures. 

Hunting in Le Marais district of Paris: magnificent and disconcerting, weird sculptures are growing on the walls of a Parisian gallery in the "Shopping Trophies" exhibition. These trophies, with their sensuous and erotic curves, like some kind of extra-terrestrial fauna slain in the course of an imaginary hunt, are set to disconcert us by exhibiting between their antlers familiar logos such as those of Nike, MacDonald’s, Cartier, Gucci and Prada. 

Their creator, Pucci de Rossi, has always pushed luxury to its limits, asserting both its usefulness and uselessness.

This time, he alienates everyday realities from their usual meaning by juxtaposing them with their apparent opposites: nature versus culture… brand culture. A tone of cynical derision together with a craftsman’s expertise testifies to the symptoms of an industrial society polluted by logos which endlessly invade our field of vision. Values which consumers, for want of any clear direction, identify with when making their purchases. Values which have become a refuge in a world that is undergoing an identity crisis.


Customisation in limited series.
These sculptures display a panorama of an era. Through them, Pucci questions and subverts the image of advertising. These luxury brands, trophies of a kind (an insult to the language of hunting), which we flaunt more or less ostentatiously, these exotic antlers are the mouthpiece for anti-consumerist messages. With the arrogance of a seasoned "domestic hunter", Pucci sets out to explore and reflect on this. Now that he has got over the monochromatic silence of his minimalist period, his liberated and unpretentious trophies speak out amid the cacophony of provocative logos. Pucci uses these capitalist symbols and logos as the instrument of his revolt. "We are all prostitutes who’ll go with the first punter."

Far removed from political manifestos, his art plays with the customisation of limited series, and his sculptures stage an ephemeral image of a certain section of our society. In keeping with this sense of humour, these logos are an inspiration to the imagination, showing how an independent mentality could be exhibited. Depending on your mood, you could exhibit your fascination with chaos and your hatred of confusion on a wall in your apartment. Provocatively, Pucci takes a particular prop or pretext and invents a new form of media, developed from his work: creative resistance to globalisation. "Globalisation is a subject I find both troubling and challenging and which I considered sufficiently important for me to tackle and do something with."

Exorcising the marketing element 
"Paradoxically, by exhibiting these brands, I am, in effect, glorifying them. But it is also an animal that I have slain and defeated. A way of exorcising it." Being allergic to marketing, he does not censor himself: from his condemnation of the power of multinationals to anti-globalisation demonstrations, everything is the object of his critique. And should one suspect him of wanting to "act like a cheap salesman", he transforms his client into a vengeful buyer who ends up by following him, willingly, thanks to his lively language that overrides jargon. (published in magazine Jealous n°64, Octobre 2003)

images courtesy of the artist, made75 and the gallery

Pucci de Rossi

Is Your Client Reluctant To Embrace New Media?

Today's NY Times has an article by tech writer, David Pogue titled Are You Taking Advantage of Web 2.0?



While it's a very good article (albeit the term 'new media' is really more apt than his use of the term Web 2.0) it may be a little myopic and a touch obvious.

I'd like to add a little insight, if I may.

Given that I've been an Advertising Creative/Art Director for many large ad agencies and clients for over 20 years, and am one of the few over 35 who understand the importance of consumer generated content and new media (and how it works), I feel Pogue's is a good article to share with hesitant clients.

While he writes about the fact that 'Web 2.0' is a good forum for more human, less structured, often funny communications that can introduce to people to previously unknown companies, (like his example of Willitblend.com), or give a humane and credible face to more corporate companies, he didn't mention it is as a part of a larger marketing plan.

I agree that allowing the public to create mash-ups and fun multimedia content will create trust, goodwill and positive attention. Of course clients get nervous about the potential downside of public forums and blogs. The fear of negative or potentially slanderous comments often keeps them from embracing avenues like You Tube, My Space and Facebook, but, as he pointed out in his own example, consumer generated content can easily be moderated nowadays.

If I may add a few things from personal experience, I've noticed how many large ad agencies do realize the importance of "Web 2.0" or advertising on new media, but don't go about incorporating it properly. Several are quickly trying to staff up their 'interactive departments' and scrambling to hire 'Interactive' Creative Directors. While this is admirable and necessary, they limit themselves to looking at those who have designed many 'hot' websites or won a bunch of Webbys, without realizing that understanding media and marketing credible messages to consumers isn't a new idea, it's just changed forums.

Sure, it requires manpower, technological resources and the spending of money, but that's always been advertising/PR. Yes, one must hire someone who knows the terminology, the intimidating acronymns, the glut of web apps and the functionality of the wireless world, but it's still marketing and it still requires well designed and easily comprehensible and navigatable, targeted communication to make a real and long term impact. Since most clients, and still many consumers, are not completely web savvy, just having a cool site or fun podcasts, favorable comments on social networks, hot videos on You Tube and a Facebook or My Space page is not enough, but it IS essential and should be included in any media plan nowadays.

The very same ad agencies who used to call me in for freelance to work on tv and print ad campaigns or new business pitches are now turning to young hot web designers for their interactive communications without realizing that, although talented at designing flash sites, online animation and cool or funny videos, they often lack an understanding of the big picture of marketing or are too myopic in their understanding of a comprehensive marketing plan. That 'talked about' video on You Tube may get their website a lot of hits and make a company instantly popular, but it must be considered in conjunction with other communications to build a brand that isn't just a flash in the pan. After all, no one is more fickle than a consumer and with the immediacy of online communications, a brand can be hot one week only to 'cool off' in a month.

To wit, many of the large ad agencies are losing work to the new crop of places that call themselves 'interactive' agencies or 'new media' agencies. Microsites for popular and prestigious clients like BMW aren't being designed by the ad agency of record, but instead are being 'farmed out' to these boutique companies filled with talented tech savvy 20 somethings.

While embracing Web 2.0 (or new media) as part of their marketing or PR plan may give a company a more humane, likable and credible image- especially to a younger demographic, the rest of that company's communications to the public, be it via 'old school' forums like magazine, newspaper and television advertising, must also be considered in conjunction with Web 2.0 to fully make a lasting impact.

It behooves any advertising agency to understand the importance of consumer generated content within these new forums as an essential PART of their overall communications for their clients. They need to start by educating their present creatives and clients at to how it works (and it does work) or else they will lose more and more future business to those companies who do embrace Web 2.0 (as defined by David Pogue).

And they can start by reading his article.