Here's the original story:
Unilever Warns Social Media to Clean Up Toxic Content
https://techcrunch.com/2018/02/12/unilever-warns-social-media-to-clean-up-toxic-content/
Here's what it means for us:
In the past thirty years, the definition and articulation of brand has shifted from a top-down, single Brand voice to a collaborative negotiation of co-authorship with a brand's constituency. In the old world, brands were static and reinforced by brand messaging. In the new world, brands are ever-changing and representative of collective consumer sentiment.
This is a double edge sword for marketers. It allows for brands to be true reflections of their underlying consumers, but sometimes that may not be the voice or message that a brand wants. Brands constantly have to police what consumers and brand advocates are saying about them. This becomes increasingly challenging in a programmatic digital world. Most digital marketing is built off of relevancy. But relevancy has unintended consequences. When you talk with a retailer, the first this they will discuss is brand adjacencies. This is whole they sit next to on a shelf at retail. Adjacencies act as not-so-subtle positioners of brands. Think of a trip to your local watering hole. Even if you've never heard of a liquor, but it sits on the top shelf next to Johnny Walker Blue, you know it must be good.
On digital platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube, algorithms are constantly being rewritten to increase the relevance of paid marketing with social content. These automated actions can lead to unintended adjacencies. Just look at what happened with YouTube last year. Unilever is on the first brands to push back. Unilever can because of its scale. Hopefully this will open up new tools and refined algorithms to not only serve up relevant content to consumers but also take into consideration brand adjacencies in programmatic placements.
Unilever Warns Social Media to Clean Up Toxic Content
https://techcrunch.com/2018/02/12/unilever-warns-social-media-to-clean-up-toxic-content/
Here's what it means for us:
In the past thirty years, the definition and articulation of brand has shifted from a top-down, single Brand voice to a collaborative negotiation of co-authorship with a brand's constituency. In the old world, brands were static and reinforced by brand messaging. In the new world, brands are ever-changing and representative of collective consumer sentiment.
This is a double edge sword for marketers. It allows for brands to be true reflections of their underlying consumers, but sometimes that may not be the voice or message that a brand wants. Brands constantly have to police what consumers and brand advocates are saying about them. This becomes increasingly challenging in a programmatic digital world. Most digital marketing is built off of relevancy. But relevancy has unintended consequences. When you talk with a retailer, the first this they will discuss is brand adjacencies. This is whole they sit next to on a shelf at retail. Adjacencies act as not-so-subtle positioners of brands. Think of a trip to your local watering hole. Even if you've never heard of a liquor, but it sits on the top shelf next to Johnny Walker Blue, you know it must be good.
On digital platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube, algorithms are constantly being rewritten to increase the relevance of paid marketing with social content. These automated actions can lead to unintended adjacencies. Just look at what happened with YouTube last year. Unilever is on the first brands to push back. Unilever can because of its scale. Hopefully this will open up new tools and refined algorithms to not only serve up relevant content to consumers but also take into consideration brand adjacencies in programmatic placements.
No comments:
Post a Comment