I read a blog post from Elizabeth Shugg that raises very valid points about how social media just might be missing the mark.  I recommend reading her entire post, but if you’re pressed for time, the nutshell version is this: Why is so much of social media purposely over the heads of the very people who NEED to understand it in order for social media to succeed?

Elizabeth asks six specific questions in her post.  Rather than overwhelm her comments field, I’ve opted to answer them here.  (If you’re in a hurry, I’ve highlighted my key points.)

1. Who exactly are the social media “experts?” What is a typical profile in terms of their experience and education?

Because the barrier to entry is so low, anyone with a blog or a Twitter account can claim to be a “social media expert.”  Like all reputations, the proof is in the work.  If you’re interacting with an alleged expert, know what YOUR criteria for being an “expert” would be, and then ask questions / do research to verify whether that person actually knows what he / she is talking about.

2. Who are the social media consultants directing their advice to? Other consultants? It seems mainly marketing and publicity professionals comment on these blogs, but rarely do I read input from representatives of other business departments.

Due to a need for validation, social media consultants often get trapped in a conversation loop with their peers. From the outside, it looks like the equivalent of 20 guys talking about which Green Lantern is their favorite*; if you’re not “in the know,” you’re never going to enter that conversation.

Also complicating the issue are elements like traffic, page rank, reach, etc.  The tools that measure these aspects of a website’s clout are weighed toward the people who know how to use those tools — namely, other tech-savvy people. So for a social media consultant to be taken seriously, he / she needs to court the attention of the people who can drive up those numbers and help that website stand out.

And yet, ironically, social media consultants won’t have jobs if they can’t also explain these geek-friendly processes in layman’s terms. If someone can’t speak at both levels, they’re going to have a tough time being successful.

3. Is it possible to measure the demographics of Twitter followers?  And if you have thousands of followers, how do you find the time to get know who they really are?

It’s not currently possible to measure the demographics of your Twitter followers, partly because Twitter itself doesn’t even measure its users demographics.  That time will doubtlessly come.

As for “getting to know your followers,” that’s rarely the point of anyone using Twitter for business.  Despite all the talk about “joining the conversation,” most businesses still use social media as a megaphone to broadcast their message to the public. Any “listening” is usually done from the POV of damage control.  There are exceptions to this technique, but they’re few and far between — and, ironically, are sometimes chided by observers as a case of that business or person being “unprofessional” or “off-message.”

4. Everyone agrees Twitter is a great tool in the marketing toolbox, but it seems like some consultants see it as more than that? If so, why, and how?

It depends on how you use Twitter.  If it’s just a megaphone, fine.  But if you actually *do* take the time to listen, learn, interact and evolve along with your fellow conversants, Twitter becomes a mix of water cooler, newspaper, comedy club and self-help resource. Or, if you’re a business that can afford to allocate someone’s time to monitor and interact with customers on Twitter, you can build a deeper relationship with those people — and receive incredibly valuable feedback in the process.

5. What is the proper protocol when it comes to following people and businesses on Twitter?

That depends on your end goal.  If you just want to be heard, follow everyone under the presumption that they’ll follow you back.  If you have a specific audience in mind, only follow people in that niche.  And if you’re just using Twitter as a personal outlet, only follow the accounts of people you know and / or consider interesting.

6. Regarding blogs, how important is juxtaposing keywords in a headline just to increase SEO? As journalism major in college, I was coached to write engaging headlines that entice readers. Web 2.0’s keyword-laden headlines don’t always work for me. Could this be the case for an audience of business leaders as well?

I’m no SEO expert, but I will say this: SEO is often a gimmick meant to make up for mediocre content.  A well-written headline does the job of SEO simply by being interesting and compelling, which brings in traffic — which is what SEO is all about. (Cue the SEO experts who will tell me that SEO is a positive element of *any* website, regardless of how compelling or efficient that site is to begin with; that’s still ignoring the central issue of actual quality.)

That’s my POV.  What’s yours?  (And if you’re interested in these types of discussions, be sure to follow Elizabeth Shugg‘s blog as well.)

* Hal Jordan.

Tags: , , , , ,

  • http://www.clickstomysite.com Pittsburgh SEO

    I resent (predictably) that you refer to SEO as simply making “keyword-laden headlines”. there’s more to it than that, and SEO, for me, isn’t always about keyword stuffing and “tagging” — it’s also about writing RELEVANT, USEFUL, content. As you suggest.

    Also: Sometimes “compelling” and “interesting” is a very good read, but doesn’t require anyone to TAKE ACTION, which is the whole point of business – increasing value by landing a sale, getting referrals, etc. A business should strive for all three in regard to content: relevant, useful, and interesting. And this goes back to your #2 reason – the conversation that business owners and managers want to have is ultimately, “how do I increase my business?” And that’s what social media “experts” should be thinking about.

  • http://www.justinkownacki.com Justin

    No one said SEO was *only* making keyword-laden headlines — though that’s obviously one component of smart SEO. But some people seem to (mistakenly) think they can regularly include a bunch of SEO-friendly keywords in their blog post titles and expect that kind of chicanery to have the same effect as actually creating quality content; that is, driving traffic to a site (and, ultimately, being profitable).

    Also unaddressed is the original question from Elizabeth: doesn’t loading a headline with SEO juice create “journalism” that makes the average person’s eyes glaze over? If SEO capitalizes on the terms and phrases people *are* searching for, and then everyone writes articles that sound the same… why click on any of them?

  • http://elizabethshugg.com Elizabeth Shugg

    Justin, I agree with your points and your response to Pittsburgh SEO as well. I especially like this answer to my question about “Twitter follow protocol,” — If you have a specific audience in mind, only follow people in that niche.

    That is how I use Twitter for my parenting social networks that I run.

    Thanks for writing a thoughtful, informative post. I’ve also posted the same blog at the link below, and it’s generating lots of great responses as well, if you want to check them out.
    http://inside919.ning.com/prof.....perts-your

  • http://www.clickstomysite.com Pittsburgh SEO

    I agree with you 100% that some people mistakenly and irritatingly include lots of keyword stuffing. But, let’s not call “loading a headline with keywords” SEO. Let’s call it “annoying, bad writing”. :-)

    Search Engine Optimization (SEO) SHOULD take into account GOOD, RELEVANT writing. Although, as you suggest, yes, many people thinking they are using good SEO techniques will just stuff the headline with annoying words. This is not good, and you should always think of the audience’s reaction first, not “how do I get an audience”.

    However, if you skip keywords completely and disregard SEO as a “gimmick”, well, then you’re going to miss out on some opportunities. Big ones.

    It’s all about the Yin and Yang.

  • http://joecascio.net Joe Cascio

    Re: #1 Be wary of people with canned products or extraordinary claims about raising whatever statistics they think you’re fond of. In my experience social media is not a numbers game. Let your own bullshit detector inform you when someone’s trying to sell you a bill of goods.

    Re: #2, I have begun advising small businesses that are not yet using social media on how to best apply it to their situation. Since they’re not yet adopters, by definition you won’t see them commenting on blogs or Twitter or anywhere else.

    ps. Well done as usual, Kownacki. :)

  • Pingback: These Messages Did Get Through! « Elizabeth Shugg ~ Bring Your Message Home

  • http://elizabethshugg.com Elizabeth Shugg

    I’ve added a new post to my blog titled “These are the Social Media Messages That Got Through” here: http://elizabethshugg.com/2009.....t-through/

    This post contains a summary of responses and insight from those who commented on my previous blog. Let me know what you think!

  • http://www.stpaulrealestateblog.com teresa boardman

    Very well said!