After reading a brief article written by Tim Peterson, I was rather interested in the idea that celebrities that help market products could very well be replaced by ordinary people. The SES Conference and Expo was held in New York this year, on March 22, where key note speaker Duncan Watts explained that "...the influencers with the largest mouthpiece are not always the most cost-effective brand ambassadors" (Peterson). He explains that "Potentially, anybody can influence somebody else...The real thing you want to do is quantify that in terms of the outcome that you care about..." (Peterson). By using ordinary people in social media, in other words, you create more of a trust between customer and company. There is more of a belief that, when an ordinary person is on the screen talking about how great their cleaning product is, that this particular product could also work for you. Personally, if I saw a celebrity advertising a cleaning product, the first question that would come to me would be- does this celebrity even know what that product does? They have nannies and maids, so how would they know how much sparkle the product leaves? By seeing ordinary people enjoy and trust a product, we, as other ordinary people, are more likely to trust it too.
On the other hand, some celebrities may endorse products that sell simply based on the fact that the celebrity wears it, or owns it, so ordinary people want to too. Take Michael Jordan sneakers, for example. Does it then depend on the product you sell? Should companies try to reach a more trusting relationship with their customers? Should celebrities still be involved with the social media, or do you agree that ordinary people should start a social media career of their own?
http://www.dmnews.com/rely-on-ordinary-people-not-celebs-in-social-media-ses-conference-expo/article/198897/
No comments:
Post a Comment