It was only a matter of time before the obvious happened. Media outlets seeking a profit would use their influence, and social media stream to launch commercials during their periods of no news. As you can see by the picture, I posed a question to the media channel asking what the outcome would be of selling marketing bandwidth to businesses seeking to grow their revenue. The question was genuine. Is marketing for others on your channel a catch 22 for businesses? Businesses have to make money to survive, just like me & you. We cannot naively think they operate on good looks and charm, though many of their anchors are attractive. Ultimately, none of us survive on good looks alone. So, what is the answer? Will the payout work? Or will the approach cloud what people come expecting to hear?
I see two possible outcomes to this argument.
From a consumer’s perspective, we don’t engage on social mediums to be sold, but to be entertained. When I engaged with the media source, I was expecting news, not a plug for a business. My first reaction was hollow. I read the feed thinking I was getting something new in the entertainment medium of news, only to see something I wasn’t expecting. Noise. Noise that did not match the voice I was expecting to hear. The respect of a news media source was now altered to sell. Puristically, I expected news, reality was they had to pay the bills too. Which brings me to my point: If you are going to alter your voice for revenue – before we stake our spile into a holy sap tree for syrupy goodness and yes, we all do it – your voice needs to be protected. There is only so much sap in that holy tree, are you willing to sacrifice your established voice for a new tone?
Outcome Two: (more…)