Jay Baer is one of the few bloggers I’ve found who consistently provides business-based, practical marketing advice.  I usually agree with him.  But he made a reference to social media marketing on a post this week that struck me as odd:

“… unlike every other marketing tool for the past 200 years, it’s a meritocracy, and that benefits us all.”

I’m only picking on Jay because this is the most recent iteration of a theme I’ve observed countless times — the opinion that somehow the social web is in a special new category where you actually have to EARN the trust of your customers.  Another variation is that the social web has “changed everything” about business and marketing.

No, it hasn’t.

The free market economy has ALWAYS been a meritocracy and always will be. If you don’t provide a quality product or service and you don’t represent it in an honest and compelling way, you won’t earn your way into the hearts and wallets of the world’s consumers.

Pre-social media, pre-Internet, even pre-mass communications, the fundamental tenet of marketing was this: Establish a brand promise based on consumer trust and never, ever break that trust. The concept is simple, the execution is extremely difficult.

Marketing is a continuous war to promote and protect your brand, whether it is a company, hospital, university, sports team or individual.  Social media offers an exciting new way to connect, but the marketing fundamentals are truly still the same.

The social web is just a new battlefield, not a new war.

How is the social web affecting your battle plan?

If I leave a conference with a few “kernels of truth” I can gnaw on and think about, I consider the time well-spent. Here are a few nuggets I picked up at the Social Fresh conference held in Nashville this week.

“Movements make their audience feel like rockstars.”
To me, the highlight of the conference was a talk by Geno Church. Geno, of Brains on Fire, is an engaging speaker and discussed the distinction between marketing plans and a cultural movement. The most amazing case study of the day was work he had done for Fiskars Scissors (I guess you could call it cutting-edge). By enlisting scrap-book enthusiasts (The Fiska-teers) to contribute as bloggers, they created an army of passionate Fiskar users. If you can make scissors exciting, this guy can market about anything!

“People fill information voids with rumors. Your strategy is simple. Don’t allow information voids.”
Another super-bright guy I met was Dan Zarrella. Dan spends his time poring over Twitter statistics to determine the secret sauce that makes something go viral. He applied evolutionary theory, mathematical principles and psychology to his study.  A few Twitter items that people pay attention to:

• Warnings
• “Social proof” as evidenced by large numbers of tweets
• Bigger, bolder, louder statements
• Tweets with “you”
• Tweets that are personalized
• Tweets that occur later in the week

“The biggest failure in social media marketing is not doing anything.”

Paula Berg, who just left her job with Southwest Airlines told some riveting stories about the social web and crisis communications.  Remember when the USAir flight went down in the Hudson and the first news and photos came through Twitter.  USAir did not have a Twitter account … but started one that day!  She also talked about the trust-selling strategy on Twitter, noting that the airline had been on Twitter since 2007 but did not attempt to make a sale through the channel until 2009.  When they did, they set a single-day sales record — only using the social web!

Paula also provided an entertaining case study about a rap-singing flight attendant that became a national phenomenon.

“If you don’t think it’s about BUSINESS your gonna be out of a job!”

This was a refreshing and encouraging statement from Jason Falls, an admitted recovering social media purist. He has distanced himself from the “it’s all about community crowd” and in fact playfully made fun of them.  Nice to see capitalism creep into the social conversation.

Illustration: Christian Science Monitor

 The mysterious, mean-spirited, self-proclaimed “strumpette” Amanda Chapel is the most divisive personality in the social media movement.  She relentlessly shoots poison darts at nearly every voice of authority on the social web.  It’s typical for her to characterize many of her A-List blogger targets as:

• “Baby babble”
• “Full-on non-stop shameless surreptitious sleaze”
• “The cacophony of dopes”
• “Sacs de douche”
• “Self-important fatuous boobs”

… and worse. But her commentary can also be positively brilliant, insightful, and hilarious.  There is no humor so sublime as pomposity pricked. 

All this venom sometimes leaves me wondering if she’s a just a pesky mosquito annoying everyone at the social media picnic or if she is having a meaningful impact on the evolution of the social web.  Does Amanda Chapel even really exist?  Does she matter?

I decided to ask her these questions myself.  Here is my interview with Amanda Chapel, which was conducted last week via email (I added the hyperlinks):

MWS: You are one of the most reviled personalities on the blogosphere. Why are you so mean?

AC: Actually, that’s two separate questions.  With regard to “reviled,” I am/we are anti the general Web2 Cluetrain commie crap.  We poke at the movement’s weakest links.  We show their Golden Calves for what they actually are, i.e. self-serving buffoons.  That said, we also take no prisoners.  As such, we lay claim to, and inspire, the inverse of the movement’s immature passions … as does anyone who thinks critically … as does any skeptic who refutes a bogus pseudo religion.

As to “mean,” I am cutting.  Satire and mockery are biting at their best.  Poignant is poignant.  It’s smart and often cuts through the clutter.  I also believe that the “David Letterman Beat It To Death School of Comedy” is VERY effective and resonates.

MWS: So you refer to yourself as “we.”  This begs the question, are you real?  Are you even a woman?

AC: The identity issue is so old and tedious frankly.  It’s been asked and answered SOOOO many times.  Sadly, it keeps coming up because the nature of the SMedia crowd tends to be literal minded. Brian’s interviews with Bill were pretty explicit.*

“We” means a group represented by a single brand.  Asked and answered.

All to say, you can call me Amanda Chapel.  That’s what we are.

MWS: One of your biggest criticisms is that many of the A-List bloggers don’t have the business experience or credentials to have a voice of authority in this space.  Why are you different?  Why should we listen to you?

AC: I’m not selling anything.  I’m questioning.  Those two things are NOT on equal footing.  “Doubt” is not about credentials, per se; it is about the strength of the argument.  That said, we stand on what already exists.  The core of our system/Union is NOT enthusiasm; it’s rationalism.

MWS: What is pissing you off the most these days?

AC:  Most?  That’d be Liz Strauss, Brian Solis, and Deepak Chopra.   Ironically, as more light has been shed on the ethereal emptiness of the movement, its “evangelists” have gotten bolder and strident.  They’ve become irrepressible caricature.  It’s like watching amateur Benny Hinns whistle on the way to the bank, having only increased their flocks after being busted on 60 Minutes.  Arrrgh.

MWS: You have been one of the most visible voices of dissent for several years.  Have you made a difference?

AC:  Many say I have made a significant difference.  Frankly, I’m not so sure.  I think I’m more of a catalyst than a direct agent for change.  Our outrageousness with Strumpette,** etc. made it safe for critical thinkers like you, Bill Sledzik,  Sean Williams,  Joel Postman,  Ike Pigott, et al. to occupy the middle.

MWS: Do you have plans to ever shed the Amanda Chapel character or are you in it for the long-haul?

AC:  I think the character is only good as long as our argument is relevant.  Let’s put it this way: most of the failure of Cluetrain, etc. is pretty basic.  But it is a bubble that sadly continues to grow.  However, the FTC, Congress and business are waking up.  I’m certain when the bubble breaks a new canvas will present itself.  I’m pretty excited about that actually.  It’s long overdue.

MWS: So far I have not been the target of your fury.  What would I have to do to have you take a crack at me?

AC:  We’ve seen you slip on occasion.  But that’s rare.  To REALLY get our attention, I’d think you’d have to have had a serious head injury.

______________________________________________________

The title of this post is “Does Amanda Chapel Matter?” so I’ll offer an opinion. 

One of the most disturbing aspects of power and the social web is the herd mentality.  You’ve seen it.  If Chris Brogan, Guy Kawasaki or Jeremiah Oywang burps, it is tweeted 900 times.  That burp gets repeated and codified by other bloggers and soon, it becomes a marketing tenet, a “rule” for social media marketing.  That’s called “group think” and it is DANGEROUS.  Maybe we should call it “burp think.”

It is difficult to have an impactful, dissenting voice in this arena.  It’s like yelling for the opposing team at a home Steeler game – You won’t be heard and you’ll probably be squashed.  

But Amanda gets through.  She often pisses me off.  She’s shrill, offensive and sometimes even flat-out wrong … but her message GETS THROUGH.  We need that dissent. Even her detractors should admit we need it.  Some of the most important and effective dissenters in history have been anonymous “characters” and maybe that’s what we need to rise above social media’s sycophantic mind muck — a voice who doesn’t play nicey-nice all the time.

I think Amanda matters.   What about you?

* This refers to a 2008 series of interviews of Brian Connolly by Bill Sledzik.  In this interview, Connolly disclosed that the idea for the Amanda Chapel character started while his friends were watching a basketball game. The idea for the “blog of naked PR” was born, complete with an Amanda Chapel backstory. Between 4-7 people have sustained the Chapel character and signed a non-disclosure agreement. “Amanda” would not disclose the identity of the person or persons who answered these questions.

**Strumpette was the Amanda Chapel blog which was discontinued in 2008. 

Note: I noticed that today, the little green “tweet” button on this article is not working.  Here is a shortened URL you can use to “tweet” this story and share the love: http://bit.ly/4CumNw

Jayme Soulati is a regular contributor to the {grow} community and she recently challenged me to comment on the whole Tiger Thang.  I challenged her back to go write her own darn blog and to my delight she did!  Here’s Jayme:

Public relations crisis managers are having a field day as the Tiger Woods debacle goes uncontrollably viral.   

The gory details of such an event monopolize gossip moments and no one rests until truth is revealed; everyone is a skeptic today.  The intimate moments with how many, duration of romances and number of bong hits are now tantamount to corporate fraud, backlash over corporate scandal, or poorly manufactured products.

We owe thanks to so many for spicing up the ether and forever tarnishing their celebrity brand: Phelps, Bryant, Vick, Bonds, Letterman, Sanford, Spitzer, Clinton, Edwards, and… (am trying to be gender neutral here, but the pendulum is swaying – oh, yes, Charlie Sheen’s wife could be a husband stealer).

Living life under the public eye has never been more scrutinous (I frequently coin words) or pressurized. A simple transgression like driving a vehicle into a fire hydrant may have blown over with a public statement within 24 hours, but fear and shame about truth over-rode the immediate fess-up. Digging a deeper hole with half the truth is akin to a brand blemish gone to acne.   

How is this unfolding saga relevant to our daily social media business lives?

As Tiger attempts to fix his still-fraying public image of gambler and lady’s man, he’ll grapple with questions about his private life forever.  He’ll be the butt of jokes. He’ll be scorned with “I told you he was too clean” remarks.  The damage control will now last a lifetime and be constantly echoed and amplified by a million Tweeters.  

In this day of social media scrutiny, our companies, clients, and our professional selves may be vulnerable to the same intense under-glass existence within the social mediasphere. The rules of engagement are clear: truth, trust, transparency — not Tiger. You do not want to become an adjective.

The call to action here is a heightened awareness of personal vulnerability, risk and exposure.  And when “Tiger happens,” making your tee time is critical. Public relations must gauge the proper balance and momentum, and do it quickly.

 It’ll be interesting to see how the ruins are restored.  Watch the handlers for the next 12 months; you might learn a few things to repair a brand of your own some day.  And, perhaps, you have some immediate counsel of exactly what that plan ought to be?

Jayme Soulati is a 25-year public relations veteran and can be found at www.soulati.com and on Twitter, @Soulati.

While the case for social media as a marketing channel is compelling for consumer products companies, I’ve been particularly interested in how it is being used … or not … by mainstream industrials.  Earlier this year I assessed the social media presence of most of the major Fortune 500 B2B giants looking for case studies.

I found some great examples, but for fun, I’ve decided to start out with the WORST companies I found out there. With few exceptions, major industrial companies are not utilizing – and in many cases ignoring — social media as a stakeholder connection point. A few fun facts:

• Number of Top 25 B2B companies with more Twitter followers than me (None)
• Worst B2B corporate Twitter-er (by far) — DuPont. An example: “Back off weeds! 4 new herbicides are coming to get you …”
• Most popular corporate social media platform: Facebook
• Percent of companies with either Facebook or MySpace pages: 75%
• Percentage with both: 25%
• Most popular use of social media: A place to post press releases

With no further delay, let’s take a look at the Top Five biggest B2B social media screw-ups.

5. 3M Corporation – I love 3M. I’ve always cherished their heritage of innovation and product development. If any company in America could take advantage of the awesome power of global community it should be 3M. Where are you guys? We need you out here.

4. General Dynamics — There is a not-very-good techno rock band called General Dynamics who dominates the social media bandwidth. That’s a problem for a Fortune 100 company with the same name. This is the time for the company to flex some legal muscle and tell them they were there first! In the corporate world, this ID theft is tantamount to a porn starlet naming herself “Pepsi.” You have to take action on this, General Dynamics! Go kick some techno butt!

3. Oracle Corporation – You would expect an ego-laden company like Oracle to be sucking up the social media space, but not so. The Twitter account is exclusively a press release machine and their other sites are ill-attended placeholders. Larry, look at what SAP is doing with social media. Work it baby.

2. Johnson Controls — This Fortune 50 titan has had their name usurped on Facebook by a bunch of disgruntled employees. An example of social media gone very wrong when you’re asleep at the wheel.

1. Dow Chemical Company. The pinnacle of social media mayhem. The first search result for Dow on Twitter is called “spillspill” and the largest company-related Facebook page is called Fuck Chemical Valley and Fuck Dow (42 members). The MySpace presence has also been hijacked, complete with fake logos, fake employees and a mission statement that includes: “minimizing damage by angry citizens who have been affected by our pollution through legal suits and PR campaigns, making sure scientists who find our products to be dangerously toxic are not allowed to publish.” Dow has a proud history of PR fubars. The legacy continues.

Disclosure: My ex-wife had family ties to the chemical industry. While clinical tests have shown she is toxic to humans, she is not associated with the Fuck Dow campaign.

Myth number two: “It’s all about the engagement.”  

Myth number three: “Never sell.”

Myth number five: “Social media is all about authenticity”

a) If you don’t know if this trend is applicable to you (hint: it probably is), it’s important to find out! Tap into your existing data to discover core users and trends. If you’re not a data person, I know two people who can do this type of analysis quickly and affordably. Drop me a note or call me and let me know if you need a reference.

b) Word of mouth is 4X more effective than personal selling and 7X more effective than most types of traditional advertising. If your fanatics are driving sales better than any marketing effort you could dream of, what are you doing to make it easy for them? Wouldn’t fanatic-focused marketing be the most effective ad dollars you can spend?

c) Surround your 4 percent with the tools to help them recruit others to your brand. Ideas – special deals, gifts, logo-clothes, programs available for them to pass on to friends.

d) These people want to give back to your brand. How do you engage them, encourage them, and listen to them in a special and personalized way? Ideas: Invite them to special one-on-one sessions with company employees and executives; develop personal portal websites where they can submit ideas, stories, photos; feature them in your ads and promotions.

e) If you are building your brand with a limited budget, don’t focus your marketing dollars on the masses. Start small with your core fanatics.

f) Now that you have identified and nurtured your core 4 percent, how do you replicate them? Do a simple profiling exercise. Click here for a previous article that will give you ideas on how to do this quickly.

g) Here’s the most important point of all – LISTEN to them. These people are your leading indicators of customer satisfaction and a potentially powerful source of innovation who WANT to help you! Dig deep. Spend time with these people! Show them the love!

Illustration: Cheryy8_15

By the way, Joe Friday still looks so damn cool.

What stirs me is that Anne used our community’s input to take a stand and get in front of possible U.S. Federal Trade Commission guidelines on disclosure of sponsored content. In fact, she told me it is her objective to EXCEED the proposed standards.