Social Media Geekiness & Its Discontents

Steve Rubel today writes in his blog and in Ad Age that we should embrace our "inner geek."   I'm really tortured on this one.  One one hand, as marketers, we're walking blind in this new unfolding social media world if we don't understanding key tech fundamentals or the new (sometimes impenetrable) jargon and vernacular.  Just take a peek at some of Steve's favorite words.  OPML?  Indeed, our "inner geek" may be our only hope for extracting (nay, desciphering) full value from Steve's excellent (and always timely) content.  But on the other hand, maybe there's a big risk of pushing marketers and  "conversational" aspirants too far to the tech frontier.  First, I'm just not sure we'll ever truly get it!  Second, I'm just not sure all these terms and definitions are really going to matter in the long term.

What's ultimately going to motivate marketers and other brand stakeholders to embrace blogs, conversations, social media, and consumer generated media is the recognition that unmet needs and solutions are being met and satisfied by all this new technology.  If we make it crystal clear that consumers' lives are simpler, easier, more meaningful and more fulfilled by these new capabilities, marketers will jump out of their shell.  YouTube at core is an "entertainment" play, not a new technology; FlickR is as much about self-affirmation and community as "tagging."  Closer to home, my own blog DosBebes.com is fundamentally about a father's almost-irrational sense of pride and accomplishment (and maybe even a bit of fear) versus all the techie-garnish I've layered on my blog platform.  In fairness, across his thousands of blog entries, Rubel has done a better job than any other blogger in hitting all the holistic "beyond technology" benefits of social media.  But I've really struggled with this "tech vs. benefits" dilemma ever since I jumped into interactive marketing at P&G back in the mid 90s.  Leading brands to the enlightened promise land is a delicate balance of shining half the light on technology and the other half on core consumer benefits and unmet needs.  Sometimes too much "tech" stuff makes everyone scatter like fleas; moreover, the last thing we want to do is give marketing a rationalization to abdicate responsibility to the IT or "tech" department.  (Budgets rarely follow the tech deparment.)  It's all a balancing act.

Comments

[Len Ellis]

Pete's warning is well taken. The phrase "inner geek" conjures up a technophile. That's misleading. Users who generate content are passionate about innumerable topics!

Worse, a phrase that's good for grabbing our attention can muddle our understanding. The motives of content-generating consumers range from noble to narcissitic, and we need to understand how they derive self-fulfillment and/or meaningfulness from these activites.

Here as elsewhere, labels can obscure as well as clarify.

[Gary Stein]

Truly.

I have to admit, the technology is interesting to me, and exploring it definitely catalyzes thoughts and brainstorms. But playing-with-toys is always a danger in interactive marketing. Maybe the analog is the traditional agency tendency to head toward wanting to be a Big Film Director.