Socialnomics Part 1

From what I've read, Erik Qualman's most interesting writing so far has been in the first chapter, where he outlines social media and its uses. Side note -- this is similar to Sernovitz's Word of Mouth Marketing, where the first chapter was by far the most intriguing and captivating. Alright, back to Socialnomics. Qualman discusses a wide range of topics in the beginning of his book. The one that I found the most interesting was his take on the news. Usually, social media is only described from a marketing standpoint, but here Qualman looks at how modern-day bloggers are taking over the role of reporters. He describes a scenario in which Jane the Blogger beats a top news site to a juicy story about a drunk-driving senator. Jane was able to do this through her well established social network and use of social media. Where the reporter had to dig up background information on this senator prior to publishing a story, Jane was already aware of any background information because that is what she chooses to focus on in her blog posts. In other words, the way we learn about the news is changing. Whereas before you had newspapers and reporters, now you have online news sources and bloggers -- bloggers who have become experts in particular fields not because they are required to, but because they actually enjoy it. This is the future of news.

Qualman moves on to discuss the preventative behavior that needs to take place with social media. His subtitle reads, "What Happens in Vegas Stays on YouTube." This is becoming more and more true in today's business world. Never before has it been harder to keep your company's dirty laundry from becoming public knowledge. How do you protect yourself in a world without privacy? The answer is simple: stay clean, and when tarnished do not ignore it. Mistakes happen. People make bad decisions, and unfortunately these decisions can reflect poorly on your company. The most crucial point to remember is that when mistakes happen, do not ignore them hoping that they will go away on their own. Address them openly because covering up is no longer an option; Twitter and Facebook have made sure of that. If the public feels that you have addressed an issue properly, they will most likely forgive and forget. But, if you try and hide something, consumers will feel betrayed and hold that against you indefinitely. Be smart, be transparent.

Qualman discusses one other issue that is seldom brought into the social media conversation: politics. He looks in depth at the 2008 election of Barack Obama and how social media played a significant role. There is no doubt that Obama could not have won the election without the internet. His use of Facebook and Twitter proved to be his greatest asset. Not only did these tools help him raise money for the campaign, but they helped him gain votes as well. It was Obama's use of social media that caused young people to vote in record numbers, votes that directly lead to his election. McCain, on the other hand, did not harness the power of social media. He tried, but ultimately did not succeed. Obama was seen as hip and cool, therefore gaining the support of young adults everywhere. McCain, however, was seen as Bush #2 (opposite of hip and cool), and in the end this was his downfall. It is like comparing the brands Red Bull and Thomas Kemper. Both have followers, but in the end Red Bull comes out on top every time. Why? Because Red Bull is a brand that more and more people, especially young people, want to be associated with. It is new, hip, and cool. Thomas Kemper, on the other hand, is old and forgotten. Thus was the relationship between Obama and McCain. Young and cool vs. old and forgettable. Whether or not this is a correct way of thinking when it comes to a presidential election is up to the individual to decide. Either way, it is the truth, and it is exactly why Barack Obama was elected.