April 21, 2015Organizations should treat social media as they would any other electronically stored information and assume it is potentially discoverable. Und...
March 26, 2015Feeling overwhelmed by the massive amount of customer feedback data you’re collecting? You’re not alone! Many businesses are struggling to find...
February 20, 2015Symantec, the global technology security provider, needed to provide its global customer base access to social customer service. They were...
February 20, 2015An Employee Advocacy program has value beyond your company’s marketing department. The community you build will be the single most important...
Apr 29 Posted 1 year ago
Thanks Loretta. It's hard to say that it's bound to go wrong, because in this case there weren't as many negative tweets as I expected (or tweets joking about the double entendre). But the brand's choices of promoted hashtags have seemed to be insincere to its own brand story, and that's something that needs to be evaluated.
Apr 29 Posted 1 year ago
Thanks for the comment Rick.
I was hoping to foster a conversation around what defines success for a promoted tweet/trend/hashtag (and thank you for hopping into the conversation). A very real discussion we had at our offices was whether a Twitter campaign is necessarily unsuccessful if it gets hijacked with negative responses. While we all agreed that no brand would hope for negative responses, we were divided on whether or not a viral spread fueled by negative reactions is all-in-all a bad thing. Rebecca Black's video went viral because it the song was mind-numbingly bad, but she turned that into a sort-of-career and makes paid appearances.
I, personally, agree that a campaign is not necessarily a failure if "a number of people" tweet negative things. Though if it were my campaign, I would prefer that the campaign flop in terms of exposure/interaction rather than have it go viral for the wrong reasons, but that's because I put a lot of value in brand storytelling and the stories audiences tell play a big role in that. Depending on what the brand's goals are, definitions of "success" will vary.
I'm not sure what to make of the #McDStories numbers you gave. First, I was just looking at the campaign specifically, so the tweets about McDonald's in general wouldn't be relevant to the discussion about successful promoted campaigns. McDonald's is such a huge brand that there are tens of thousands of tweets across the spectrum of sentiment every day. If your argument is that #McDStories made up a relatively small percentage of the tweets about the brand that day, then I'm sure that's true (presuming your numbers are correct). But how do you know that the 68,000 tweets about McDonald's (the ones without the #McDStories hashtag) were positive? Did you run sentiment analysis? Or have you done so in the past to know that, on average, McDonald's receives more positive sentiment than negative sentiment? I don't think a claim can be made that "the voices of our fans tweeting positive things far outweighed the impact of a few critics" unless there's proof about the sentiment of those tweets. If you have more insight on that, please share.
I would never claim that any hashtag is "unhijackable" and I hope that's not what came across in my article. That's impossible, and we even have a category on our blog called "Consumers Control Brands" which could easily be swapped with "Consumers Control Conversations." It's never the brand. My point was that brands need to be honest and aware of its brand story and make sure that the hashtags they use reflect that, especially promoted ones.
Thanks again for your comment. I appreciate the discussion!
Apr 27 Posted 1 year ago
Interesting points, but this article is lacking in some much needed context. Twitter, as with all social media, is a place of wonderful and free-flowing conversation. Any brand that enters the space needs to do so with a attitude of wanting to be a part of the conversation...not controlling it. That includes accepting some potshots and negative tweets from critics and comedians. Does that mean that a campaign is a failure if as the author puts it "a number of people" tweet negative things?
Doubtful...especially when the evidence is not real numbers but screenshots of four tweets.
Even looking back at #McDStories the numbers tell a different story than most of the "experts" wanted to hear. On the day of that story, there were more than 70,000 tweets about McDonald's. Only 2,000 mentioned #McDStories. During that month, there were nearly 3 million tweets about McDonald's and barely 3,000 mentioned #McDStories. In the case of both hashtags, the voices of our fans tweeting positive things far outweighed the impact of a few critics.
I totally agree with the point that much thought and care needs to go into hashtags, but the notion that any hashtag is unhijackable is simply incorrect.
Apr 25 Posted 1 year ago
When you are creating a Hashtag, you have to really evaluate it for a double meaning. That was McDonald's mistake....#unwrapwhatsfresh was bound to go wrong....