Building Presence = Building True  Community

[tweetmeme source=”MarkBrimm”]

This is a tiny voice in the wind that’s gonna be heard in the end.

I’ve been thinking about social media and trust a lot lately. Not getting to attend SXSW Interactive this year made me watch the events there vicariously and start to ponder the meaning of it all. I saw Evan Williams, the CEO of Twitter, get slammed for being boring, for not engaging the audience with meaningful content in his keynote event–people AT the event were texting it to their Twitter accounts, his own company’s application! I saw how human and sometimes even completely LOST people at SXSW seemed to be when it came to what was happening to them. I kind of appreciated it. It made more sense of everything that’s currently wrong with social media for me.

This all got me to thinking about the lingering delusions that the social media “elite” seems to have going, and I came up with a solution that seems to me the only way I care to get behind. If it’s social media, then why do so many of the people who “lead” it seem to be so…unsociable? I watch as I and tons of others approach these unapproachable leaders of the social, or step on their toes by seeking their precious approval. Makes any sense whatsoever? It’s one thing when people are objectifying you as…whatever, but these were basically all people just trying to engage the “social media” leader, to engage a supposed authority. Hmmm…

I recently wrote a more lengthy and detailed “how-to” on setting up a social media presence quickly and painlessly, but the how is kind of easy compared to the WHY. So now I’d like to lay out my own thoughts on social media strategy and what it means to “build trust”.

What does “trust” even mean on the internet–or marketing? Why should we worry about trust if the goal is to sell? In short, because the goal of selling is too greedy-hearted to make the incredibly long haul to true success. Okay, maybe this point is easy. But how does one “give up” selling?

Companies do not live. People live. And people work in companies. When the company hits an iceberg, hopefully the people exit the ship and have somewhere good and warm to go. Hopefully they’ll pull together and share resources, take care of each other. When a ship hits an iceberg, people remember what’s important. Well, when a company is riding high on the waves, shouldn’t we still keep people firmly in focus? Aren’t people the point ALL the time? So why doesn’t it feel that way in the cold shadow of some of the more prominent Twitterers, for instance? Are cliques killing the democratic “social web” dream? Individual reps on Twitter are the company, after all. I notice more and more the strategy here, and it’s basically something along the lines of “talk only to those who can make me/my organization shine more.” I GUESS that’s a version of being social, but it’s not exactly the way I want to be social…

In working with clients who sell all kinds of things and services, it has become clear that the ones who break new ground are the ones who envision themselves from another perspective. The way they become engaging is by demonstrating an appreciation for community. They all “gave” to some extent and the feeling of receiving “so much” and without any sales pressure is what didn’t sell everyone, but is what did sell more than they previously sold. I saw it. I helped measure it in some cases.

If you’re a celebrity, let’s face it, you’re here to rally fans, but regardless of who you are or what you do, you’ll need something to engage people with if you’re going to use tools like LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook and say Digg or Buzz as a rallying point for your social media front. Engagement is in the final analysis, about giving, building community. Building social media presence should therefore really be an act of building rapport and  community.

I propose that community is the only way to love what you do and make it work. Moreover, I propose that community-at-large is the only kind of community worth having in the end, because it has no antithesis, no ultimate opposition, no counter-productive tendencies. Community absorbs minor passing frictions. Community is a church of good values for the sake of good values. I propose not only that community is the point, but that you have to start somewhere, in a smaller community perhaps that will allow you to work as if it’s for everyone, until the day that you stop questioning whether or not what you do is for the good of everyone. I propose that if you can’t see where you fit into the communities that exist around you, then you need to take a step back and reflect on what community means to you. Why do anything where it’s “me against them” or even “us against them” or even “us against that guy over there”? The only kind of community that feels right is the end is the kind that doesn’t omit anyone. When you can see your place in a potential community-at-large situation, then you can help build or even create the kind of meaningful relationships you need to succeed at being a whatever-you-wanna-call-it.

Representing the values of being a good member of the community is going to be my argument for how to conduct the building of trust in the new media arena. Giving what’s needed when its needed most, even if it’s just…space. Demonstrating a lack of greed and an abundance of good intention. And the only way to demonstrate all that…is to go ahead and become it, not just to say it, but to do.

I recommend that companies practice building social media presence by rethinking what they’re actually doing in the first place. By focusing on making their event horizon an engagement with the community-at-large in terms of giving to the community-at-large. I want them to FORGET to take credit and get wrapped up in the giving part. I mean, think about it. Don’t we all secretly wish that all CEOs were evangelists for community-at-large?

This…community-at-large…is the only place where you’ll come to see your role in other people’s lives (including customers and clients) and begin to develop a conversation with them, and with what was formerly your “target audience.” This is where social media and your communications can actually get fun and start to become more like mingling at a cozy gathering of people doing more than quoting famous people and smiling through their teeth with one finger on the “SELL!” button.


Malfunctioning Eddie, the Robot Car Salesman: "At these prices, I must be malfunctioning!"

Social media marketing is remarkably often cold and calculated, stiff–alligator smiles. People know PR when they see it. PR always seems to come off as “we are targeting, conditioning, branding, or otherwise doing various stuff to you”. It may fly in the moment, but people recall, process, grow, mature past such tactics. What we should be doing is communicating with and representing community values of sharing and giving for the sake of sharing and giving. This is where people are happiest and it’s how reputations have always really been made, including the reputations of good companies. If you’re an information-hawker, becoming a socializing giver of great info, innovation, inspiration (how about your own!) and value will in the end make your public image a much more profitable asset–because it’s a reality behind the image.


In the end, community buoys up the good people, and lets the not-so-good rot in their own undoing. People reciprocate kindness, generosity and demonstrated community values. Trust is something basic and elementary built upon experience. It’s not diffcult to be a member of a community. It’s the easiest thing. What’s difficult is holding on to the idea that you are somehow completely separate from all of these “others”. What a herculean act of will THAT is.
[tweetmeme source=”MarkBrimm”]

  1. jeremywaite says:

    Outstanding article – especially the bit about a company being like a ship and we should seriously CARE about people sticking together when things get tough. Great post mate.

  2. Compelling read. I can very much connect with the observations and thrust here. I think I personally need to invest WAY more time and effort into seeing myself from the other perspective and branching out / reaching out and doing more both on the “how to” as well as the “why”.

  3. Michele says:

    Great article Mark. The whole thing is incredibly ironic, if you think about it…which you I’m almost wondering if we’re now seeking a Social Utopia…where we “get back” to the real values behind social media…the whole purpose of it, if you will…I know I am. I’m pretty active on Twitter and FB, but don’t see all that much interaction (especially on Twitter) even when I’m just “talking”…yet it seems as though that Twitter Elite are talking up a storm and name dropping in their tweets and all of a sudden I’m back in the high school cafeteria…lol…

    • Mark Brimm says:

      Great insights Michele! This really struck me as being at the heart of my point: “it seems as though that Twitter Elite are talking up a storm and name dropping in their tweets and all of a sudden I’m back in the high school cafeteria”. I know that feeling. I know that in highschool, I NEVER came to school early if I could help it, because you had to herd in that cafeteria, often sitting wherever there was room amidst a sea of talking mouths and wandering eyes. As highschoolers, mob mentality and gossip held sway. The real power-users on Twitter tend to actually be 25+ in my experience. They’re not just texting their every move, but also forming debate and shaping discussions on culture-changing events and processes within their own fields, even the culture at large. I think many of us take this culture-shaping aspect seriously. I also think that we often can’t help but get a little woozy from the “highschool cafeteria” effect and the same hopes and fears about popularity and unpopularity come rushing awkwardly back. I think this is an illusion that needs to be broken repeatedly until nobody believes they’re really in the highschool cafeteria, and that we are all, in fact, equals.

  4. Michele says:

    So are the real power users actually the Twitter Elite? Case in point: I follow @Questlove – Member of The Roots band and Jimmy Fallon’s bandleader. He is a true power user but is he considered the Twitter Elite? Does the Twitter Elite consist of your Chris Brogans, Darren Rowses…..what determines one’s elite-ness? Name or usage? It’s hard to tell these days…

    • Mark Brimm says:

      I guess this could get complicated fast if we want to keep straight guru vs elite vs celebrity, etc., huh! I think in many cases these could all be true of the same person. Brogan, for example is a somewhat accessible power user / guru / elite / and quasi-minor-celeb by virtue of Twitter (the same as “elite”?). I’ve interacted with him before, he doesn’t always respond (as he freely admits he can’t), but he has, and I can relate to that. In many ways he is somewhat of an exceptional case. Others of a far lesser(right word?) stature however are much more numerous, seem to have clout by virtue of association with a guru / celeb, and benefit in terms of followers, but have highly editorial style tweets on “social media” topics. Everyone has their own world, and I don’t want to touch that. I don’t want to pick out and on anyone in particular, but I think those who regularly comment and interact with the gurus / celebs, these are the ones who share a good deal of rubbed-off social media guru clout with the gurus.

      My point was mainly along the lines of the self-appointed “Twitterati” opinion-forming group that pontificate and judge and are not that sociable.

      I saw a case recently where someone I knew was verbally lashed by the marketing demi-guru for being ignorant of a certain aspect of Twitter protocol. He was being overbearing and seemed to “own” Twitter. It was like he was saying “get off my lawn!”. And I thought, “Great you’re an expert, so you shoot your high-visibility barbs at a newbie to embarrass and belittle. Nice.” The guy didn’t take it that way, he was uber-constructive, more so than the “guru”, in fact. Case in point. The demi-gurus are often the students when it comes to basic humanity.

  5. I think you really nail it with the keeping-it-real vein. It was interesting to me that @pogue was here in Albuquerque for a talk yesterday and was Tweeting about how much he loved the free wi-fi and the powerstrips at the airport. It was clear it was real–he wasn’t doing it because he had calculated a demographic and was trying to build an audience of a certain kind.

    In a lot of ways, this goes to the core of what “sales” really is–it’s not about talking people into something. It’s about listening, seeing if you have what they want, informing them if you do, changing your product if you don’t, and, as you say, being human through it all.

    Very niece, piece, Mark.

  6. jckh says:

    “Social media marketing is remarkably often cold and calculated, stiff–alligator smiles.”

    That’s a reflection of the people behind the tools rather than the medium itself.

    Building a healthy community is simply good long-term marketing.

    • Mark Brimm says:

      I would agree with that in terms of SMM. So I think the formulaic SMM approach disappears when the tactics and strategies are learned and then forgotten completely to allow creativity and humaness to take over.

  7. Hey Mark,
    Interesting article. Clearly you have been synthesizing various data points and no-doubt, your own observations of your own twitter stream and blog posts you are interested in. You have some very interesting comments and views and agree in principle that social media marketing is in question by many.

    I don’t know if these following comments will be seen as ‘in favor’ or ‘opposed’ to your article, but I hope you’ll consider my feedback never-the-less.

    1) Good people turn bad in mobs.
    Fear, greed, self-preservation, and self-promotion all take shape in mob settings. I was at SXSW this week and was recognized by a few people and they came up to me to chat, it was very cool. Alternatively, in the blogger lounge I was introduced to Chris Brogan and he was warm and inviting for a few minutes and then had to move on – too many people vying for his attention. I got that. Alternatively, I had dinner with Julien the co-author of Trust Agents with Brogan. Dinner! No mob, no huge appeals, just quality time. Keep in perspective the difference between intimacy and mobs and understand environment and situation impacts behavior.

    2) “You’re doing it wrong”
    … She said. “wait, what? that’s how I’ve always done it” I said. “Well, for me, it doesn’t work that way” she said.
    See, it’s easy to pontificate based on your own perspective. It’s not easy to identify if its personal or if its universally true. I’m not sure in the social media marketing space that we (any of us) actually know what is true – universally true, only the way we do it and the way we think is right (or wrong). Never-the-less, we are driven by our worldview and the way we see the world is our reality. Just keep in mind, you may be doing it wrong (even if you think its right).

    3) Sales is a way of life not an act.
    I know at the end of the day that someone is selling me on what I eat, what I watch, and what I spend my money on. Someone is selling my child on what is right and wrong, why to walk not run, why to read and study. We are all selling – everyday – all the time. Some of us are better than others, but we are all buying. Community or not, sales are being setup and transacted – it just feels better when it happens around a campfire instead of a cash register. There is no social if someone isn’t selling (an idea, a link, a story, a belief or an interest). I’m just saying.

    I like the suggestions and considerations you propose in your post. Things we must definitely consider. I do, however, have concern that perhaps its only one side of the coin. Regardless, your points are well made and well received.

    Thanks for sharing.

    All the best,

    • Mark Brimm says:

      Hi Justin,

      Thanks for the comments, Justin. Actually this post is not a rant against social media marketing or social media. I tried to be clear that I’m saying that I feel that there is too much narrow focus in the end on “selling” and “self” and “my”. The proposition being put forth is that, letting go of the selling, the selling will happen on it’s own when you just try to meet needs of the other.

      The most effective people I know of in social media, such as Chris Brogan, since you brought up his name, and which has come up more than once in the comments here, already embody this sense of community-at-large that I’m proposing we all give our selling to. I just haven’t heard anyone else really put their whole weight behind this. I think it won’t surprise me if it’s hard to swallow. I don’t want people to swallow anything. I just want them to think.

      Personally, if I consider myself a salesman, I can’t sell squat. I arrived at this perspective by my own failure to “sell”. There was simply too much “me” in it…I had to give up all concern for my bottom line in the end and just “consult” to help, not to try to “sell”. It works!

      I hope I haven’t put words in your mouth here. I’m just trying to see your point and respond with care.


      • No words in my mouth. Nice response. I suppose, once my own opinion formed in my mind, I lost sight of the original intent of your message. My error.

        I agree that trying to force sales is bad news and I can especially relate to consulting versus sales.

        Great conversation here on your blog Mark.

        Keep doing good things!

      • Mark Brimm says:

        [Update: I noticed latyer on that for some reason this reply hangs toward the bottom of the comments, so for continuity’s sake, this was a reply to Justin’s last response]

        Even so, some very good points came out of your response all the same, and I don’t discount those. I appreciate the them and the place they come from.


  8. Sam Fagan says:


    I have to go along with Justin a bit here. I have always believed that unsolicited advice is criticism, but you did ask! Anyway, I follow your thinking completely, but I did have to read this about 3 times through to decide that it wasn’t a rant made by someone who got snubbed by a “social media guru”.
    You make great points about the need of and recognition of one’s place in a community. Back to the “linchpin” here. Those that ship value will get value back. There will, however, always be people that abuse the community.
    The “big wigs” play their part as innovators and some remain true to it while others become the very thing they stood against in the beginning.
    An example for me is Gary V vs. Eric Qualmann. I had a prospect read Crush It before I arrived for my initial appointment. Upon my arrival I discovered 3 other decision makers in the room , all of whom read the book. I left with a $50k contract that has since turned into a $650k+ contract. I didn’t have a business card , a website or even an email address for my new company.In between my setting the appointment and the appointment itself, I read Socialnomics. I used many examples from that book to close the deal.
    I have written both authors multiple times thanking them and sharing my success made possible by their labor. Gary V, no response not even to a tweet. Eric, immediate response, private email conversation and permission to reuse some material. One media elite blew me off, the other was gracious in the praise. Whose loss? Gary V., no skin off my back though. My point being, he has already lost touch with the media that made him rich, at least in my opinion.
    This happens in politics, sports, business, religion and everything else we endeavor.
    People like you , me and Justin ( not inclusivly) actually care about our word , our trust and our impact. That is why social media is great, those that want to can and those that “used to” , bellow.
    Trust has everything to do with selling. People become clients with those that they trust. When those of us who care, teach clients to use the medium with care, then one day, we will have to be sure that as social media elite, we stay true to the “social” in social media.

    • Mark Brimm says:

      Thanks for the comment, Sam! I think my reply gets rather long in retrospect, so hang on to your hat!

      I guess to be honest I’m still trying to see exactly where your objection actually resides and to what it is objecting. I’m wondering if it’s the tone, which is only moderately polemical in my perception, but challenging and not totally accessible perhaps to the public discussion talking points on “selling” and marketing.

      While I could see some points that Justin was making as useful (actually., maybe even contained in my own post), none of them to me went against what I was saying, except perhaps the one about “not doing it right”, since it wouldn’t apply–unless there was confusion there about my premise (perhaps my writing style is too meandering). In any event, I don’t claim to be suffering from having been snubbed by anyone, as you rightly (I think?) realized–it’s not about that. I wasn’t saying that I generally don’t feel supported by other people, including those who may snub me. In fact I do feel supported by the occasional snubs! I think everyone realizes that busy people have limited focus to sare. I don’t issue with that, either. I feel very supported by even those who may snub you or me, but I admit more prone to being annoyed when it happens to someone else. That’s my odd quirk I’ve developed. I just don’t know why so many people can’t stop *adoring* someone who’s job has now become to hold themselves higher than you in order to remain “the expert”.I also don’t want them to despise such condescending authorities. I just would like them to appreciate the input they are providing without swallowing it, or rejecting it and the giver. I think it’s possible to chew on input and appreciate the giver and the receiver and the chewing. Which also brings up the point of the absolutism of many of these “demi-gurus”. Wow! You’d think they invented the moon and trademarked it, too!

      My point is also that I think that there is simply too much emphasis on “selling” still in sales. I thought the Eddie the Malfunctioning Car Salsman cartoon (from Futurama) might help to bring out that point. I see it as a certain stiffness, a pre-calculated set of selling points and avenues to stroll down with the prospect. My point here is easily extended to marketing professionals on Twitter in that I think Twitter is littered with people trying hard to either be or become a cardboard cutout demi-guru who, though not an expert per se on anything, unwittingly form part of a impenetrable wall for those who’d simply like to engage freely on the social web about whatever their own field may happen to be, People who just want to be an actual person with more than one dimension. Though you may not be suffering, and I may not be suffering when it comes to contracts and generally “making it”, my post went beyond marketing in the final analysis, or at least that’s how I tried to write it and can’t help but read it.

      I think a LOT of people have this “together” aspect of their personalities that goes into selling. At some of the highest points in my own “success” I’ve seen some of the worst of these traits in myself, and noted them. Later I realized that indeed these moments of complete assured togetherness did create problems down the road. It always went too far in selling what was not up for a serious discussion yet.It was often rooted in either pride or desperation to earn more and more than before. Togetherness can seem to be self-validating. It repeats itself. It’s redundant. You can’t help but get the message, but it doesn’t engage much. It’s pre-made, prepackaged reasonableness peppered with “…and of course you’ll need to pay me now”. It’s the lack of engagement with the person at hand that I guess my little modest post was after. I’m guilty of it, too! That’s what prompted me to start questioning it! Why had I picked it up?

      I simply think that if you have a goal of contributing to needs, you won’t be focused so much on “me” and it’s true I think that helps sales AND the “seller” ultimately by allowing him to give up “sales” and be part of something that is no longer objectified as outside of himself or herself. I’m really taken by this community-at-large concept, and I think that it’s what’s on people’s minds but no one can formulate.

      I don’t really expect anyone to just gulp this as something they already believed or thought. I don’t think, if you penetrate the message, that it’s an easy one to gel with pre-existing ideas, but it’s something that may have to be kept and labeled as “curios” until the day it jumps off the shelf? The thing is, I’m 100% confident that it’s going to jump off the shelf. I don’t even care if I get any recognition. I just feel kind of excited about the intention and that it IS going to jump off the shelf and come into play sooner or later.

      What I’m truly grateful for is the people like yourself who have posed questions and challenges to this post. Perhaps especially the ones whose challenges were not that clear to me. They pushed me to go deeper into where I’ve been getting to all along–but I’ll admit, begrudgingly all the way! This thinking-engagement is something very valuable to me. So I have to thank you…big time…for making me get back to this point today. Today you were my teacher by making me think even more deeply on this. I bow to that, and you.

      With respect,

      • Sam Fagan says:

        Thanks Mark,
        I appreciate your candor and had this conversation taken place in person over a beer or 3, we would eventually laugh and agree that for the most part we are agreeing.
        When we give ourselves away, when we are transparent personally and professionally, there is little need to sell. I am much more a newbie than a purist and really was just flattered you solicited my opinion.
        I am enjoying the thought provocation, discussion and ’tis I who salute you!
        Here’s to the next discussion!


      • Mark Brimm says:


        I would welcome the beers and the conversation! I don’t doubt we all are trying to just make it more real, etc. Good salesman and marketers already generally have that part down. Of that I have no doubt. And I’m sure you fall in that number. Maybe I am aiming long and shooting for a new, more clarifying guiding principle on this one, and I admit that is a tall order for everyone involved. Perhaps my writing/thinking style is winding and full of thorny shrubs and leads off too many unexpected cliffs when I ponder, I don’t know…I suspect so. Again, you shook up my thinking a little on this, and I really did get something out of that.

        I will look forward to the next one, as well!


  9. Loving the discussion here. Re-reading your post makes me think of the well-established problem with American basketball teams: everyone wants to be the “star.” We all want to hit it big on American Idol. We live in a very me-focused society.

    This is reminiscent of the discussion that happened as the Wild West of the internet was first tamed by corporate interests in the mid-90s. Netizens had an identity positioned on a more or less free, open, and “real” platform, and a whole lot of people put the lie to that idea. Many didn’t even mean to, but they did.

    And yet, Howard Rheingold is still Tweeting away. I guess you have to look at it as you do any other group: you’ll have some “mensches” and you’ll have some tyrants.

    Mark, I’m old enough to really value faith and optimism these days, and it’s good to know someone holds this out as a value. Real community–lasting community–is an incredible effort. Keep it up!

  10. ThinkingFox says:

    Hey Mark.

    Another great post from you.

    I was going to comment on the social media stuff but actually I’ve been sitting here seething to myself about the ship and company analogy.

    You’re almost right except you missed something really important. How many of us would board a ship knowing the instant that it got into trouble the Captain wouldn’t be ushering us to the lifeboats but would simply throw us overboard?

    In fact let’s look at this closer. Not only would they just toss us all overboard, in most cases they’d push the ones they don’t like off first, the ones who warned about the icebergs? you’re next, then it’s the old ones, the young ones, the… yeah you get the picture. I’d hazard a guess they’d throw the lifeboats away at some point too, quite often before they considered the leather sofas in their private cabins…

    And when the ship finally sinks and they’re being winched aboard their own private rescue helicopter, they’ll be ranting and finger pointing at all the people in the water and saying “it was their fault”

    I’ll leave you with that whilst I think about the rest of your post 😉


    • Mark Brimm says:

      Thanks ThinkingFox,

      It seems like people DO board those ships, unfortunately, right? After all, the alternatives are usually quite limited. I’ve personally been invited to board a few of those ships. In other cases, I saw how decent companies were asking to hire me into a losing proposition where, due to the economy, I had to pull back.

      I used the SXSW example of dropping a bad experience with your target audience, but I didn’t explore it in this context. These guys are smart guys and I think they are interesting people, probably not oblivious to their audience intentionally.

      I’ve seen lots of such situations where things go awry and where, despite an apparent intention to be engaged with the audience, it falls far short. They say “it’s okay to fall” in many cases, but they don’t think as they are falling about how to adjust course and make things work better.

      Evan Williams said he didn’t think to monitor Twitter while doing their keynote event. BIG mistake for the CEO of Twitter to have made, but let’s be honest, we’re expecting him to adapt to something new. In this case, I think engagement with the community-at-large could have taken the form of grabbing your cell phone and seeing who’s talking about your talk while your interviewer / partner is interviewing you. In many ways, I think Evan cuts a static picture out of fear of making a mistake, even though the guy is clearly a genius (just maybe not a face-man). What was missing? The will to remain engaged. He realized this afterward and remained engaged. He learned from the experience.

      I think the community is missing at the top at too many companies because there is no feeling for community-at-large. If they did have that, they would be thinking in terms of “we” and not in terms of “saving my own tail first”.

      If we all took that step of faith, however, I think this is a risk that pays off big in the end.

      I think it’s hard to get around the idea that the market is an autonomous, self-regulating “mother nature”, when in fact it has props all over the place, always has, but maybe just not in the right places.

      Okay, I admittedly went off course in my response here, but in my defense, my response to your comment is better than my original post at this point. How can I not be thankful for that?

      With Respect,

      • ThinkingFox says:

        we DON’T board those ships but we do join those companies, and you’re right, it’s a lack of choice

        and of course we’re not buying a ticket… they pay us to get on board which changes the game somewhat 😉

        In answer to your point about the social media superstars, I like many others, follow what they post in their own social media networks. Some of it is inane dreary stuff but I follow them for two reasons :

        1. I follow because their streams throw up other people I should be paying better attention to, people I wouldn’t have heard about, people who’s views make me think.

        2. they occasionally let slip a genius insight into something that just blows me away in terms of pure raw talent. @jason (Jason Calacanis) is one of those. I don’t agree with a lot of what he spouts but you know the interview he did for Penn? I use that with my own teams!

        Perhaps we expect too much from our superheroes?! Are they not mortal? do they not bleed? 😉

        And not checking your own twitter when you’re the main twitter dude is a #fail whichever way you cut it


  11. ThinkingFox says:

    Your position on social media is, in my opinion the correct one. Only this week I was trying to explain to a client that they needed to think about their entry into social media in the same way they’d think about dating.

    They wouldn’t wander up to people and start shouting “I’M GREAT, COME ON A DATE WITH ME, FRIDAY NIGHT, 8PM, GREAT” so why do they think shouting their sales spiel at people would be effective? Engagement means exactly that, you need to engage your targets, you need to find out about them, build rapport, yes even perform a few test closes, objection handle… all standard dating stuff. Be funny, empathise, convince, and if you do it right you may even find that they’re asking you for a date without you even having mentioned it.

    Of course once you’re dating you have to keep it up, you meet their friends and they’ll judge you. They’ll judge you on how you are in their company, and they’ll judge you on things that are said when you’re not around, by people you’ve dated previously, by things your friends say about you.

    And this is the true power of social media. It’s why traditional search is being overtaken by clicks originating from social networks. It’s peer review and it’s much much more powerful than standing on your doorstep shouting “BUY ME, BUY ME NOW”.

    Community is king. Long live the king.


  12. […] Marketing in the Social Media Age « What’s Wrong About Social Media Marketing […]

  13. ThinkingFox says:

    I spotted something today that has relevance to your original post

    “Everyone has seen it happen. An otherwise accomplished person walks on stage at a conference, and subsequently one or more of the following occur: The microphone breaks, the speaker punctuates every sentence with “ummm,” he starts running out of time, whispers so quietly not even the front row can hear him, the technology breaks down, he fumbles at an impossible question, or forgets everything and stands on stage in terrifying silence. And everything falls to pieces.”

    Full article is here :

  14. Suzan Olsin says:

    Great one. Thanks and favorited.

  15. […] Being part of a community just feels better, and thus it makes us better at whatever we do. To fail to see that is to miss the central point of, not just building a brand, but of everything. Building a community may not seem to be what business is all about, but if you stop and think…it ultimately is: a community of allies, a community of people who understand what value you bring to the community-at-large. […]

  16. Bernie Boldt says:

    I agree 100% as I mature in my social media understandings. Valid points.

  17. Joni H. says:

    As soon as you approve our review, we can deliver $0.01
    to a particular cause.

  18. Lillian Page says:

    Nice post. I was checking constantly this blog and I am impressed!

    Very helpful information particularly the last part 🙂 I care for
    such info a lot. I was looking for this certain info for a long time.
    Thank you and good luck.

  19. Emilie C. says:

    Still so true, I’m afraid.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s