Personally, I think social media does and will continue to have its place in the media mix. But I also think a fair number of marketers over-estimate just how “engaged” consumers really want to be with brands. Not everyone is Nike or Apple or Harley-Davidson. I have no desire to follow Acme Screw Company on Twitter. As always, the media mix depends on the brand and its target. Use what works, jettison what doesn’t.

And if I had to bet, I’d still bet on Lee.
Jason Fox´s last blog ..Mmmmmmmm, Donuts

If you want examples of good social marketing, look at what Mullen has done with Olympus’s release of the E-P1, look at companies that integrate social efforts in congruence with their other PR efforts like Tide’s strategy with mom bloggers, look at what small companies like Kogi BBQ have accomplished exclusively through Twitter. Maybe the high-buzz promotions like My Starbucks Idea will fade away, but social is quickly becoming an integrated part of marketing in many ways.

Social media is about becoming a part of your own community. That’s the difference between Gary Vee and Lee Clow. As with anything, we will get better at it with time. Don’t be so dismissive or you could be missing out on some huge opportunities.
Christine Peterson´s last blog ..captain_pete: I love the word "snarky"

This is exactly the mistake that Starbucks made – and the reason I’ve hit a wall (no pun intended) with Facebook.

Wither Starbucks? I don’t need cute. I don’t need my name on a cup. I don’t need throw-away small talk from a barista. I don’t need tryouts for some BravoTV barista reality show on my way to the office. I need coffee that makes me want to drink more. They still have it, except you need a mental machete to find it. Taking on water, they have made a recent token attempt at being coffee-forward, but it’s a weak one.

Facebook is a neat idea. Very creative. Never done before (OK never done since the salad days of the W.E.L.L.) But for me to weed through the barrage of personal flotsam and advertising jetsam in order to pluck the occasional heartstring or get a shock from the honest connection of ideas has reached a tipping point. Unfortunately that tipping point is one that drives people from a clear message. Again with the mental machete.

I use an iPod Touch. First piece of new-new technology I’ve fully adopted in a long time, and I’ve beta’d and early-adopted them all. I didn’t buy it because of someone cyber-shilling about it. I finally bought it because one night, alone on my TV, there was a white screen and a focused set of fingers showing me things I’d never dreamed of seeing on a handheld. One focused ad. They now have several flavors of it. Ditto the iPhone. Focus, clear message, simplicity. Broken model? All those Web 2.0-ers would kill for Apple numbers.

“Way less money” is not getting the audience numbers clients are used to – it’s getting many smaller collections of followers – nanomarketing – who are beginning to realize the original false fear of nanotechnology – they are becoming a grey goo. Facebook is a great example of this. People get sick of the ad-driven apps faster than anything else on there. They are the first to go when people realize the clutter.

There might be a paradigm-shifting (sorry!) post-2.0 ad model – but the present is the first wave and will look positively cacophonous and infantile when the real deal arrives.

As for Lee, he does the kind of work that you see at the festivals, big, pop culture influencing, able to put brands on the map. The creativity behind that advertising is helpful (though not always) in getting a brand remembered.

This post was intended to be tongue in cheek, sort of, but at the same time to say, as you suggest, that things really are changing; we now have new media and tools, changing roles played by the consumer, and easy to master technologies and platforms that let an individual achieve massive reach and influence.

Those are the facts. Figuring out how what to do with it all to be an effective marketer and creator is the challenge.