The BBC’s expose that up to 6% (that’s 54 million) Facebook profiles may be fakes created by fraudsters using software to generate fake likes for ads and brand pages could represent a significant risk both to Facebook and its customers — advertisers, marketers and PR firms —.if both it and them don’t take appropriate action.
Facebook’s reaction seems, a little complacent, although their point about building in proper targetting is well made.
The question for marketers
and PRs is how to play this with clients. If you play it down as a small proportion
of users outweighed by a vast majority of genuine fans and likes, what do you
say if the problem grows, as spam has done – to represent more significant
numbers and in the geographic areas and demographic groups you’re targetting?
How can you recommend a
Facebook campaign if the credibility of it as a channel through which to
interact with target customers is under question? Would they be happy that up
to 6% of their money spent on Facebook would be wasted on fake fans and likes? Those
with a glass-half-full mindset may be happy to carry on given that, as per Lord
Lever’s adage, you rarely know which bit of your marketing spend is wasted and
which working (although these days monitoring as a lot better than it was then,
if you can pay for the right tools). But what about the others who aren’t happy
that some of their budget will be wasted on fake likes?
Perhaps, at least for now,
the line with clients will just to be accentuate the positive — concentrate on
the 94% of fans who will be real and to whom your carefully-wrought messages
will reach and hopefully have the desired effect.
But for that line, and
your advice, to continue to have any credibility, Facebook has to be seen to
tackling this problem seriously and soon. If it doesn’t, it won’t just be its
reputation which takes a hit — it’ll also be those of marketers and PRs recommending
it unreservedly for marketing to undifferentiated groups to their clients.
Some clients might see such
recommendations as evidence of you being just another firm recommending
expensive campaigns which benefit you financially regardless of how effective
they may actually be for them. And that would only lead to more client churn,
less stability in revenues and profits and more time acquiring new clients
rather than organic growth by building long-term relationships (and hopefully campaign
spend) with those who can totally trust your recommendations.
The question for you,
then, is are you doing transactional or relationship marketing? The answer will
partly depend on how much you see client churn as inevitable, not matter what
you do. Sure, some clients will never be happy and will always go off in search
of their perfect agency which they’ll never find. But for the rest, surely retaining
as many as you can, particularly in these tough times, makes sense. Ok, some
may not be that profitable now, but once a recovery comes, as it surely must,
that situation should change as marketing budgets increase. And that’s when
your reputation as a source of trusted advice will help you compete against
your many rivals and maximize your revenues and profits.
As ever, your reputation
will be a key source of competitive advantage if you look after it properly. So
absolute transparency with clients over what Facebook can and can’t do for them
and what it takes to use it effectively will be essential, for both them and
you.
It may prove to be a
coincidence that the story surfaced on Friday the 13th, but for
Facebook that may prove to be an unhappy omen unless they can take sufficient
action soon to shore up their service’s credibility with the marketing, PR and
advertising communities and stop the damage extending to those who recommend using
it.
No comments:
Post a Comment