Small World Labs

Long time readers of this blog could very well have a drinking game set up that goes like this: One shot for every time I mention "transparency" or "customer voice". Granted I don't post enough to do any serious damage to one's liver but the game could definitely take the edge off a hard day at the office. And while social media's foundational mantra of generating power via conversation is still as valid as ever, Skittles has shown us the limits of open conversation.

For those who missed it, this week Skittles blew away their old site and replaced it with a browser widget and a Twitter search stream that showed tweets containing the brand name. They also cycled through a version involving a Facebook page. Initially, I applauded the move because of- get your drink read- the idea of putting the spotlight on the customer voice. I didn't, however, expect this to a permanent or long term move. Why wouldn't I want a brand like theirs to get rid of the professionally manicured copy and images on their website for the unmitigated raw content from the people who actually buy and consume their product?

The answer lies in the fundamental difference between social media and traditional (or even mainstream interactive) marketing. When you use social media channels, marketing campaigns are no longer under the control of the brand- they become communication platforms in and of themselves. If your platform is large enough, you must expect that people who either dislike your brand or dislike blatant commercialism on social media will try to hijack it.

Here are a few suggestions for brands that want to launch high visibility social media integrations into brand marketing efforts while reducing the possibility of getting egg on their faces:

1) Stick and move! If traditional marketing is like a dictator- rigid and demanding- social marketing should be like a ninja, striking quickly and moving on. Instead a week long (or longer) website switch, I suggest a series of random days where Skittles.com is pointed at the Twitter search stream. This would be supported by a team of people monitoring and conversing with people tweeting about the brand even after the site had reverted to another campaign would have done massive things for the brand online and potentially could have laid the groundwork for another campaign of "skittwitters". Could you image if Skittles used the mass of followers they get to organize a flashmob style campaign to replace Facebook profile pictures with Skittles images for a day?

2) Plan for pirates. With the good of social media comes the bad. Social media is fast, and the potential for adbusting, as a result, is greater than ever. Be ready to deal with people taking advantage of the openness of the social media platform. How will you handle "Your brand/product sucks" posts? What if they get even worse than that? Having a solid plan and a "nuclear" option to revert a site quickly if things go horribly wrong will not only help your team execute but also allay the fears of your c-suite.

3) Monitor the buzz constantly. Sometimes campaigns can be be a flop and the social channels you counted on to spread your viral content is now spreading negative buzz just as quickly. Motrin learned this lesson the hard way with their "mommy blogger" debacle. Now, if Motrin had a team monitoring the buzz on Twitter, that episode would have lasted 5 minutes, instead the negative buzz raged undeterred 2 days before any action was taken. By then the story had ballooned so large that an apology had to be issued.

Those are my suggestions... anyone have more?