This document is a dissertation that explores how social media has changed the relationship between brands and consumers. It discusses the rise of social media and its impact on brands' ability to control their messaging. The author analyzes case studies of both successful and unsuccessful brand uses of social media. The dissertation aims to develop guidelines for how brands can best utilize social media.

1. To what extent has social media
changed the relationship between
brand and consumer?
Patrick Stileman
MA Advertising
6th October 2009
Top copy

2. Bucks New University
Faculty of Creativity and Culture
Dissertation title:
To what extent has social media changed the relationship between brand
and consumer?
By
Patrick Stileman
MA Advertising
VMC Tutor: Ray Batchelor
Date of Submission: 6th October 2009
Word count: 8336
Module Number: ADM02
2

3. Index
1. Research Questions 4
2. Introduction 5
3. To what extent has Social Media impacted the communications industry? 6
3.1. The rise of social media 6
3.2. What is Social media…Exactly? 8
3.3. What impact has social media had on brands? 10
3.4. This is what social media can do… 15
3.5. How has social media affected the advertising process? 19
4. Why should Social Media be used with caution? 21
4.1. People are talking to each other, not brands 21
a) Case Study: Dell 24
4.2. 'It's called social media, not anti social media' (Powell, 2009) 28
b) Case Study: Habitat and Twitter 28
4.3. People trust people over brands 33
c) Case study: Aquafresh – Creating word of mouth through targeting influential
consumers 34
4.4. What did the Social Network Community Site do? 37
4.5. Guiding rather than controlling 39
d) Case Study: Obama Presidential Campaign 40
5. Who should use social media, and who shouldn’t. 46
6. Choose your media with care. 48
7. Overarching Guidelines 50
7.1. 'Give us the people control and we will use it, if you do not give us control you
will lose us' (Jarvis, 2009). 50
7.2. Respect the community and they will respect you 51
7.3. ‘Your best customer is your partner and your worst customer is your best friend’
– be accountable (Jarvis, 2009) 52
7.4. Life is public, so is business (Get used to it) 53
8. Conclusions 54
8.1. ‘Give in order to receive’ 54
8.2. The opportunity 57
e) Case Study: Nike 58
9. References 61
9.1. Bibliography 68
9.2. Webography 72
3

4. 1. Research Questions
1. What is social media?
2. To what extent has social media impacted brands’ ability to
control how they are both conveyed and received?
3. Why is the new media environment not suitable for traditional
forms of brand communication?
4. How do people use social media?
5. What brands have done in terms of trying to adapt to this new
media environment?
6. What has been successful, what has been unsuccessful, and why?
7. How can this information be used to create a form of guidelines
for brands when entering social media?
4

5. 2. Introduction
The fundamental aim of this essay is to explore the extent to which social
media has changed the relationship between brand and consumer in order
to establish a set of guidelines for brands when using social media as
communications platform. In order to come up with a set of guidelines it is
important to present social media as something that should only be used
by brands that are committed to using it in the CORRECT way. In short
that that means listening, sharing and responding to consumers over a
long period of time. If they do not have the resources to do this then they
should be weary of social media as a communications platform as the
wrong type of presence can be very damaging, as will be illustrated.
‘Where brands tend to fall down is applying traditional modes of
advertising communication in an environment (social media) which
does not support them. Social media is all about two way
conversations with consumers, not one way broadcast...making this
mistake is far too common and simply makes brands appear out of
touch with their audience and reality, and is detrimental to their
over all image’ (Zirinsky, 2009).
The outcome of this dissertation will provide the reader with a theoretical
and practical understanding of how brands can use social media to their
advantage, but also how inappropriate use can be damaging. This will be
mapped out using a combination of theory (gleaned from individuals within
the advertising communications industry, web based resources and a
range of literature) and practice (analysis of real life case studies).
5

6. 3. To what extent has Social Media impacted the
communications industry?
3.1. The rise of social media
The invention of the Internet and rise of digital media has had such a
profound effect on society that it can be seen not just as a technological
revolution, but a cultural one too.
‘Sixty five per cent of all UK households had a broadband connection
in 2008. Adults under 70 years of age who had a degree or
equivalent qualification were most likely to have access to the
Internet in their home, at 93 per cent’ (Office for National Statistics,
2009).
Alongside this general growth and popularity has been the rise of social
media,
‘Social media is perhaps one of the fastest growing areas of the
Internet’ (Emarketer, 2009).
It has taken off in the UK in particular,
‘By 2013, the social networking population will reach 21.9 million,
and represent 50% of UK Web users’ (Emarketer, 2009).
6

7. Fig1. Social media strategy relevant in UK as use increases year on year:
(Emarketer, 2009)
7

8. 3.2. What is Social media…Exactly?
One current definition reads;
‘Online tools that people use to share content, insights, opinions,
profiles, experiences, perspectives and media itself. Social media
facilitates conversations and online interaction between groups of
people’ (Solis, 2007).
This is a valid definition but needs to be narrowed. The reason for this is
that the definition above may say what social media is, but it doesn’t say
what it isn’t. If marketers are going to use social media effectively as part
of an integrated campaign, they must know what it offers them in terms of
consumer engagement that other platforms do not.
The best way to do make this point is to ask what differentiates sites like
Facebook and Youtube from any other online platform that can be used to
share information, like email. How does sending a group email not fit in to
the above definition of social media?
The problem is that sending a group email does fit in with the above
definition. It would only then be logical to assume that email is a form of
social media, but email is not social media. The reason for this is that
social media is so much more than just simple information sharing.
According to Universal McCann (2009, pp. 29 –30), 55% of social media
users uploaded photos, 21% installed applications and 23% uploaded
8

9. video.
‘The biggest problem I have with the term “social media” is that it
isn’t media in the traditional sense. Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, and
all the others I don’t have the word count to mention aren’t media;
they are platforms for interaction and networking’ (Hopkins, 2008).
The facility that differentiates these social media sites from standard email
software is that they allow people to upload and
‘insert content (not just share information) into a shared
community’ (Powell, 2009).
The truth we arrive at is that social media adds value over other forms on
online communication when used for enabling content sharing in a
networked space. It is this ability to enable content sharing and
interaction that defines social media and separates it from other
communication platforms.
This means that if brands are going to the get value from social media,
they must use it for what is does best; enabling and facilitating the sharing
of engaging content in the hope that it creates relevant talkability around
the brand or product.
‘Brands need to add value into an online community through
enabling the sharing of content, if it cannot do this it has little value,
and will be perceived as having little value’ (Powell, 2009).
9

10. 3.3. What impact has social media had on brands?
One of the facilities social media provides is the opportunity for users to
share information/content with each other about a brands products and
services. Essentially this means that brands no longer have the same type
of control over how they are conveyed and received as they once did.
The diagram below shows the way in which content and information is
now shared. It is no longer the brand (broadcaster) communicating
through a medium to a selection of individuals (consumers). Now, the
brand sends out a message and from that point on, consumers are able to
edit and share it however they choose, adding or taking away meaning as
they so wish:
10

11. Fig 2. Message control has shifted from brand to consumer:
Broadcaster Consumer
One way communication ‘Peer to Peer’ communication
Push messaging Multiple Publishers
(Runnacles, 2009)
'It is this ability for consumers to communicate to each other online
that underpins the brands’ biggest opportunity, but also represents
their biggest threat' (Diamond, 2009).
If a plumber in a small town does a few botched jobs and lies about it to
his customers. Sooner or later the poor work will reveal itself though
conversations people have amongst each other within the community.
Once the plumber has a bad reputation there is not a lot he can do, and is
subsequently unlikely to get much work.
11

12. This type of information sharing has been going on for a very long time.
People have, and will always talk.
Essentially, the rules have not changed, but the environment has.
Social media is a catalyst for information sharing and has accelerated the
entire process.
‘Across networks, a good or bad experience will be shared,
potentially on a huge scale. Between 700,000 and 1.3 million blog
posts are made daily and, according to Google, a new blog post is
being created every second of every day’ (James, 2009).
If we swap the plumber around with an international brand like Habitat
(who made the error of lying to people using the micro blogging service
Twitter ), the same rules apply. Their misleading Twitter posts became
common knowledge in a very short space of time.
‘In 2008 Twitter usage grew 422% in the UK, and in February of
2009 it grew to 1,382%’ (Emarketer, 2009).
The information spread like wildfire and placed H a b i t a t in an
uncompromising situation. They are now referred to as an example of how
not to use social media (The case study is discussed in greater length
later).
12

13. ‘Normal social etiquette has crossed over into social media, social
media are communities and there are standards and protocols as to
what kind of behavior is acceptable and unacceptable’ (Powell, 09).
What this means is that brands should address the community in a way
that is not going to offend any of the inhabitants.
‘A brand that is popular on social media is one that behaves how a
popular person behaves on social media; they upload interesting content
and they respond to messages, those that don’t can become unpopular’
(Gower, 2009).
It is for this reason that social media should not only be treated as
something completely separate from other forms of, often one - way
media, but should be used with a human like sensitivity.
Social media communities are populated by humans, for a brand to be
accepted on any level, it must act in a more emotional way, or face the
consequences,
'Today, when you lose a customer, you don't lose just that
customer, you risk losing that customers friends. And thanks to the
internet and blogs and consumer rate and review services, your
customers have lots and lots of friends all around the world' (Jarvis,
2009).
It is this new environment that has fundamentally changed the relationship
13

14. between the brand and the consumer.
'The brand is no longer what it says it is, it is what people say it is'
(Powell, 2009).
14

15. 3.4. This is what social media can do…
This first case study illustrates the sheer impact that social media can have
in terms of generating a buzz around a brand or product in an extremely
short space of time, and dramatically boosting its’ sales.
A t-shirt being offered on Amazon sold huge numbers after one extremely
sardonic and funny review inspired thousands to talk about it…
Fig 3. Never has such a bad t shirt had it so good…Talkability is
everything.
(Govern, 2008)
‘14,512 of 14,643 people found the following review helpful:
15

16. 5.0 out of 5 stars Dual Function Design” (Amazon, 2008).
‘This item has wolves on it which makes it intrinsically sweet and
worth 5 stars by itself, but once I tried it on, that's when the magic
happened. After checking to ensure that the shirt would properly
cover my girth, I walked from my trailer to Wal-mart with the shirt
on and was immediately approached by women. The women knew
from the wolves on my shirt that I, like a wolf, am a mysterious
loner who knows how to 'howl at the moon' from time to time (if
you catch my drift!). The women that approached me wanted to
know if I would be their boyfriend and/or give them money for
something they called ‘Meth’. I told them no, because they didn't
have enough teeth, and frankly a man with a wolf-shirt shouldn't
settle for the first thing that comes to him.
I arrived at Wal-mart, mounted my courtesy-scooter (walking is such
a drag!) sitting side-saddle so that my wolves would show. While I
was browsing tube socks, I could hear aroused asthmatic breathing
behind me. I turned around to see a slightly sweaty dream in
sweatpants and flip-flops standing there. She told me she liked the
wolves on my shirt, I told her I wanted to howl at her moon. She
offered me a swig from her mountain dew, and I drove my scooter,
with her shuffling along side out the door and into the rest of our
lives. Thank you wolf shirt.”
“Pros: Fits my girthy frame, has wolves on it, attracts women
16

17. Cons: Only 3 wolves (could probably use a few more on the 'guns'),
cannot see wolves when sitting with arms crossed, wolves would
have been better if they glowed in the dark’ (Govern, 2008).
This review prompted millions of others to write similar frivolous comments
and the Wolf T shirt review became an internet phenomenon.
According to Russell Dicker (2009, cited in Emery, 2009), a spokesman
from Amazon, The sales of the actual T-shirt went up 2300%, making it
Amazon’s highest seller in the clothing department.
What is particularly poignant about this example is the fact that the
product sold on the basis of how it was talked about by the online
community, there was no advertising of any kind, there was none needed.
The challenge for brands is to create content that will generate buzz and
talkability around a product.
Social Media Futures– The Future of Advertising and Agencies in a
Networked Society (2009) is an IPA report that illustrates the importance
of brands being prepared for a consumer led world, made possible by the
rise in digital technology and social media,
‘Consumers will increasingly mediate messages between brands and
other consumers in the social media arena, this could result in the
power and influence of paid for advertising diminishing’ (IPA, 2009).
17

18. 90% of industry representatives agreed with the statement,
‘Some advertising campaigns will be built entirely on messages
being passed from individual to individual’ (IPA, 2009).
The strong brands will look to generate peer to peer communication. They
can do this is by creating content that people will want to actively talk to
each other about,
‘If you get it right, people will actively market to each other on your
behalf’ (James, 09).
18

19. 3.5. How has social media affected the advertising process?
‘Traditionally advertising has been defined as, ‘a form of controlled
communication that attempts to persuade consumers, through the
use of a variety of strategies and appeals, to buy or use a particular
product or service" (Defleur & Dennis, 1996).
It is becoming abundantly clear that although the central goal of
advertising is still the same (to persuade consumers to purchase a product
or service), the media environment into which advertising operates has
changed.
‘The lines have blurred like the modalities of media – those that
consume can also produce, those that receive can also broadcast
and it is within this new context that marketing exists, connecting
consumers to businesses in a way never before possible’ (Yakob,
2009).
Brands have lost the traditional sense of control they have enjoyed in the
past,
‘Brand and product related conversations are happening all the time
whether the brand likes it or not’ (Powell, 2009).
That does not mean however that they have lost all potential for some
kind of control, or that social media is not worth using as a marketing
platform, quite the opposite, social media can still be the best thing for
19

20. brands, but it can also be the worst, depending on how it is used.
20

21. 4. Why should Social Media be used with caution?
An inhospitable environment
4.1. People are talking to each other, not brands
'People are using social media to have two way conversations with
each other, not one way conversations that originate from the
brand' (Diamond, 2009).
Imagine sitting in a pub with a group of old school friends. You are all
enjoying reminiscing the past and relaxing in each other’s company until
you are approached by a man selling pirate DVDs.
The general consensus around the table is ‘piss off’. The DVD seller could
obviously see that we were having a good time in each other’s company,
he probably thought, 'Ah what a good time to sell these guys some
DVDs'...
Wrong, not a good time, we came here to talk to each other, you have
interupted us.
It is this lack of sensitivity and preference for interruption rather than
willingness to have a conversation that often defines modern brands
behavior within the new media environment and culminates in them
getting extremely little in the way of brand affinity with potential
customers.
21

22. ‘Social media is all about two way conversations with consumers,
not one way broadcast...making this mistake is far too common and
simply makes brands appear out of touch with their audience’
(Zirinsky, 2009).
Based on its research, Ofcom (2008) identified the following “fundamental
principle” of social networking;
‘By extending their social networks, users have the opportunity to
communicate with people who share their interests and with
people from different countries, cultures and backgrounds’ (Ofcom,
2008).
And,
‘Communication with family and friends was found to be the main
reason adults used social networking sites’ (Ofcom, 2008).
The words that are highlighted are done so to make the point that social
media and networking is about people communicating with people.
There is no mention or hint at an environment where brands can talk to
people. A powerful statistic was gleaned from Next Thing Now (McCann,
2008) social media report that stated that 74% of global social media
users are there to communicate with friends.
Referring back to the interruptive DVD seller; it is not the product in which
22

23. our dismay is aimed at, it is the seller and the method and environment he
chose to ply his trade. He simply wasn’t welcome.
It wouldn't have mattered if he had a rare, amazing collection of films. The
group of us around the table still would have thought badly of him simply
for the fact that he interrupted us. He could have tried to engage us in a
way that would have minimized interruption and entertained us, but his
biggest crime was the environment in which he chose to sell.
‘If a brand enters the social media world without adhering to the
etiquette that is expected by users, they run the risk of invading
privacy, pissing off the user and generally not doing themselves
any favours’ (Diamond, 2009).
These figures inform us that the task of using social media is even more
daunting and lacking in impact for brands who use it in an un -engaging
way...
According to the IPA Social Media Futures Report (2008), 99% of branded
widgets/applications are not used and half of all sponsored groups on
bigger sites have fewer than 1,000 members across Europe’.
This is not good news for brands, the environment in which they are trying
to enter is not a particularly hospitable one, and even if they do get in, it is
still saturated with competitor brand presence.
23

24. ‘In a UK study by Jam/MySpace in early 2009, 26% of social media
users said they already felt bombarded by too much
clutter/advertising’ (James, 2009).
The social media environment is unique and demanding and those brands
that do not adhere to the requirements will struggle as their counterparts
gain market share.
But those that can make the most of the environment stand to forge
deeper relationships with their consumers, and increase their brand
affinity. One such interesting case study that illustrates this is Dell.
a) Case Study: Dell
This situation is particularly relevant because it shows the extent to which
social media can be your best friend, or your worst enemy, depending on
how it is used.
'Dell had been the poster child for what you should not do, and then
became the model of what you should do' (Jarvis, 2009).
Jeff Jarvis is the proprietor of one the web's most respected blogs about
the internet and media. Unfortunately for Dell they sold Mr Jarvis a faulty
laptop. Despite having paid for home service insurance, Mr. Jarvis had to
send off his Laptop off on more than one occasion. Each time it returned it
had a new problem and in Mr. Jarvis's own words,
24

25. Fig 4. Dell could not have picked a worse person to poor customer service
in Jeff Jarvis… ‘blog daddy’.
(Google, 2009)
'Each time I dared to contact Dell, I had to start from square one:
Sisyphus on hold. I never made progress. It drove me mad' (Jarvis,
2009).
On June 2005 he decided to vent his anger by posting on his blog;
'The machine is a lemon and the service is a lie', and 'DELL SUCKS,
DELL LIES. Put that in your Google and smoke it, Dell’ (Jarvis,
2009).
And Dell did have to smoke it. Little known to Mr. Jarvis thousands of
people began to rally around him. His blog became saturated with a tirade
of comments all aimed at Dell.
It did not take long before these negative comments appeared in front of
the Dell homepage on Google search.
25

26. 'The conversation about my blog post was beginning to damage
Dell's brand'. Dell's share price quickly plummeted, the revenue fell
and customer satisfaction ratings dropped’ (Jarvis, 2009).
In a letter to Michael Dell, Jarvis outlined four main points of advice. In
summary he advised Mr. Dell to listen to what people were saying about
them, and respond with help and advice, admitting they had problems, but
were willing to try and fix them.
Dell responded to this in the best possible way, they began replying blog
posts and even set up their own blog, DirecttoDell, which responded with
help and advice to every single disgruntled Dell customer.
Before long there was positive buzz surrounding them as they were
providing a genuine, personalised service. Dell then took things a step
further, they created IdeaStorm, a site where customers could vote and
discuss new ideas for the company based on what they, the people
wanted. Dell began making real life decisions based on what their online
community felt was right. The result of this is that users felt they were
actually part of the brand and had a sense of their own control.
Dell's previous presence on social media was practically non - existent, and
their willingness to get on board only really came into action when they
were facing possible extinction. They did however, adapt extremely well to
the environment. It may have been as a result of Mr. Jarvis’s public
critisism, but Dell still did it.
26

27. Instead of continuing to bury their heads in the sand, Dell listened and
responded to their consumers and have subsequently earned a higher
level of respect from them. Essentially, Dell behaved more like a human
and benefited from it.
27

28. 4.2. 'It's called social media, not anti social media' (Powell,
2009)
Effective and enjoyable communication is about listening and responding,
as seen in the case of Dell.
Why would any brand feel they had the right to bellow out monologue
after monologue, in a two-way conversational environment.
It is important to highlight this point with a real life example. The much-
documented case of Habitat's use of Twitter is perfect;
b) Case Study: Habitat and Twitter
A Habitat employee used Twitter to wrongly promote Habitat items, he did
this by bombarding Twitter with marketing tweets that were disguised as
'trending topics'. A trending topic is identified by hashtags before an item
and is deemed by the tweeting community as something of universal
interest. The employee hijacked this service by placing Habitat links behind
genuine trending topics such as the Iranian presidential election...
28

29. Fig 5. Habitat hijacked the Iranian presidential election to get exposure:
'
(Perry, 2009).
Negative comments regarding the Habitat brand started coming in thick
and fast...
29

30. Fig 6. Twitter users were happy to share their disappointment in the
brand:
(Perry, 2009).
The offensive tweets can still be searched for using the search facility on
Twitter . Whether they are deleted or not makes little difference, the
damage has been done.
Although this is a very well documented case study, it is perfect for
illustrating poor social media etiquette, because not only did Habitat use
30

31. Twitter in an arrogant way, they also made little attempt to apologise to
the online community for their breach of protocol, the same mistake Dell
made initially. Habitat chose burying their heads in the sand, (like Dell)
when they could have actually messaged every single person who made a
negative comment and said sorry to them, and explained to them what
happened.
They could have sent out generic tweets saying ‘sorry’, they could have
given the offended users special discounts.
What brands like Habitat need to understand is that it’s ok to fail, people
expect that, they do it all the time.
‘Apologise quickly and apologise publicly’ (Jarvis, 2009).
People are a lot more forgiving when you admit to your mistakes rather
than deny any wrongdoing.
Despite this the @HabitatUK page still looks extremely corporate and
traditional. If there was a guide how NOT to use social media, Habitat
would be on the front cover. Their mantra can be summed up by this
comment,
'Admit nothing, aplogise for nothing, do not engage in conversation,
advertise, advertise, advertise. You have to wonder why they’re
even bothering being on Twitter in the first place' (Tipherith, 2009).
31

32. The biggest mistake that Habitat made was not the hijacking of the
trending topics, but their severe lack of reaction to the events.
The one reaction they mustered up just put them in an even worse
position, they blamed an 'over enthusiastic intern' for the hijacking (who
still remains unknown).
Passing the buck on to a young, inexperienced guy who was just trying to
benefit the company. He was not aware of the consequences, but he was
the one who would carry the blame.
The fact that they did not make a dignified apology instantly on Twitter,
which would have reached millions, speaks volumes about Habitat's lack of
understanding of how the micro blogging service works, and can be seen
as the epitome of bad social media practice.
32

33. 4.3. People trust people over brands
Before making a big purchasing decision we often will seek the advice
from another person or a group of people. We do this because we know
they have not got an agenda to sell.
This is the case in Canada where a staggering 63% of people consult
peers online before making a purchase (Leger, 2009), this is not always a
good thing for the brand,
‘When user generated content is negative, it can have harmful
implications for building and sustaining a brand's equity, an issue
compounded by the fact that readers of UGC may consider it more
credible than content that originates with the producer (e.g., brand
advertising) (Johnson and Kaye, 2004).
This means that even if brands find some credible way to communicate
with consumers on a social media site, they will be trusted the least. This
explains the success of such companies such as Which? magazine, a non
for profit organization that describes itself as;
'No advertising, no bias, no hidden agenda. Just expert advice from
an independent source’ (Which?, 2009).
Which? rigorously tests a wide range of products and then presents totally
impartial, fact based reviews. Which? began in 1957 from a converted
garage in Bethnal Green as result of the labour party creating a ‘Consumer
33

34. Advisory Service’. It is now ranked 4th in the Newspapers and Magazines
category of the Superbrand Index.
‘The success of companies like Which? is thought to be based
around the level of trust that they instill in those that consume it’
(Powell, 2009).
If people trusted brands there would be no need for companies like
Which? It is important to understand how trust can be built between a
brand and consumer.
The Aquafresh case study shows how a brand can use people as the
medium in which to generate buzz and credibility.
c) Case study: Aquafresh – Creating word of mouth through
targeting influential consumers
The insight that people trust each other over brands has spawned a new
method of social media marketing; Social Influence Marketing.
SIM (for short) is a process used by brands that sees people as the
medium. Members of the public are identified by their ability to influence
their peers purchasing decisions. These influencers are then targeted by
the brand in the hope that they will spread positive news around a brand.
Strategies are employed to help these targeted individuals tell their story
to their peers. Aquafresh executed a SIM campaign to perfection in 2008
34

35. when it won the WARC Word of Mouth Marketing awards.
Fig 7. Highly Targeted, high impact, product trial experience:
(WARC, 2009)
Aquafresh created a targeted social media campaign to create a buzz
around their new Aquafresh Iso foaming gel toothpaste. Having
researched their target audience, women between the ages of 16 and 25,
they found out that this particular group were more likely to buy a
cosmetic product if it had been referred by someone they trusted.
Aquafresh set about constructing an online community that attracted the
target audience. By targeting 10,000 ‘influential’ women, identified by
Wildfire’s Influencer Identification Tool on the basis of having high social
35

36. network reach and strong category involvement.
Aquafresh were able to send product trial packs to each of them. In
exchange, the free trialists agreed to invite their friends to the home site
where they would share their experiences with the product.
On the basis of the ‘Influencers’ online status, Aquafresh knew that other
users would hopefully make steps toward purchasing the product having
read the positive reviews, and that is exactly what they did.
According to the WARC Advertising Research Centre (WARC, 2008), the
program reached a total of 1.4 million users, each user spent an average
of 6 minutes per visit and 99.5% of the participants asked to be involved
in future projects.
36

37. 4.4. What did the Social Network Community Site do?
• Enable trialists to share product experiences & recommendations;
o This was based on the research that showed the target
audience felt more confident purchasing after a
recommendation.
• Chat, polls, product ratings;
o The research showed that the target audience enjoyed simply
chatting about these products and enjoyed sharing their
views.
• Social network tools – send to a friend, upload email address book.
o A key feature that enabled the trialists to bring others to the
site
• Sneak-peaks: making of TV ads.
o Giving the user a feeling of exclusivity, increasing that sense
of trust and belonging.
Although the Aquafresh campaign did not engage users across a variety of
social media like we will see in the case of the Barack Obama presidential
campaign. A sense of community enabled those once on the site to feel a
37

38. sense of trust and belonging. In which discussions about the product could
take place in a seemingly impartial environment. This made the target
audience feel more assured in purchasing the new range of toothpaste.
One such triallist testimonial read,
‘"Really Impressed! I love the new buzz brush. My teeth have never
felt so clean. The toothpaste is fantastic the feeling of freshness that
lasts too, is fab. I have already started to recommend these to my
family and friends..." (WARC, 2008).
There were reams of comments just like this on the homesite at the time.
Aquafresh used a sensitive understanding of the target audience and how
they used social media to deliver an effective campaign.
38

39. 4.5. Guiding rather than controlling
According to Razorfish’s Social Influence Perspectives Report (Razorfish,
2009) there are over 1 billion social media channels.
Fig 8. The extent of the social media conversation…
(Google, 2009)
‘The battle brands will face in controlling messages within the new
39

40. media environment is monumental, so much so that what it means
to actually control a brand may change’ (Diamond, 2009).
This idea of the definition of control changing is key; Paul Diamond was
keen to inform me that this was not the end of brand control, more so that
it was just going through a process of adaption.
He informed that it is much more likely that brands will take much more of
a guidance role. They will look to spark conversations and then harness
the content of the conversation. The Barack Obama case study will now
show how best to h a r n e s s conversations. This case study is
predominantly about harnessing and facilitating conversation:
d) Case Study: Obama Presidential Campaign
This diagram is more widely know as the Hub and Spoke model, and is the
perfect strategy for listening to the conversation and harnessing it to the
advantage of the brand. The hub and spoke model utilizes various media
channels to listen and respond to the conversation. In this case Obama’s
team looked to reach voters wherever they were, which was everywhere.
40

41. Fig 9. The Hub and Spoke Model was the key to Obama’s teams’ success
using social media.
(Google Images, 2009).
A senior partner at Dachis group summarises the logic behind the hub and
spoke model,
“you engage people where they are but provide a place for them to
come to, a way for you to get all these enthusiastic and passionate
people together” (Armano, 2008).
This strategy was born out of the conundrum that brands first faced when
41

42. trying to engage people through social media.
Their decision was,
‘do we go to where the consumers are (Facebook, Myspace etc), or
do we create somewhere for the consumers to come and try and
entice them where they currently are’ (Diamond, 2009).
The Hub and Spoke model represents the synchronised use of both.
Obama’s team used this type of strategy in his presidential campaign to
great success.
Social media enabled Obama’s team to transmit campaign news to users in
an extremely quick time. Campaign news can be seen as a form of
content, a form of content with huge talkability.
The news cycle has typically seen an incident happen on day one, it is
then written about on day two, then it is published and read by consumers
on day 3.
When Obama’s team used social media channels to upload news content
as quick as two hours after it took place. He was supplying users with
content in record quick time that no other party was capable of.
‘The people felt they were alongside the campaign at every step,
they had a constant stream of up to date content, and Obama’s
team was providing it’ (Powell, 2009).
42

43. This content was simply news about the campaign, people were
interested, they wanted to see what was going on as it was going on.
‘This ability to share campaign news related content with users
almost in real time was central to Obama’s success’ (Powell, 2009).
Not only were users getting up to date content, but they were getting
content that was tailored to the media on which it could be viewed.
“These relationships were built on multiple social media channels,
rather than a single social platform or community' (Gower, 2009).
It was possible to connect with the Obama campaign content by being a
fan on Facebook. At the same time you could connect with other
supporters on www.obama.com and Twitter and through other channels.
Each different channel of social media was used slightly differently,
depending on how that particular channel was used by consumers.
This approach not only gave users a slicker cross media experience, but
also allowed the campaign to track voters and volunteers across the web,
and engage with them through the voters’ chosen channel of choice.
At the same time this enabled the campaign to get personal information
on voters so that their forthcoming communications could be even more
targeted.
43

44. This supported the gathering of data on individual voters that allowed the
campaign to meaningfully target people.
The degree to which the Obama’s teams’ social media strategy enabled
supporters to take the campaign into their own hands, can be seen as an
example to other brands. It gave supporters a feeling that they were part
of the campaign. They could directly participate in discussions and gather
support from peers. Obama’s team were simply connecting people around
engaging up to date content.
Another example that shows the brilliance of the campaign and it’s use of
the social web was when an issue arose regarding the authenticity of
Obama’s birth certificate. Responding extremely quickly the campaign
created a fact-checking microsite called fightthesmears.com…
‘Voters could check out the facts on the issue and were encouraged
to spread the truth by distributing the message and links to their
personal social networks on Facebook, Myspace, Twitter, etc. With
reach they could never achieve through traditional news outlets or
advertising, the Obama campaign was able to quickly quash
unfounded rumors and short circuit the typical 48-hour news cycle’
(Michael, 2009).
The way in which Obama’s campaign used social media was
commendable, but they had a huge advantage; people across the country
44

45. were already extremely interested in who their next president was going to
be.
Obama’s team facilitated that interest through a variety of social media
channels in different ways dependent on how used the channel in
question.
The major task that brands face is how to create conversation and buzz
around them so that it can be harnessed.
45

46. 5. Who should use social media, and who shouldn’t.
The case studies have shown how social media can be extremely useful for
brands that look to create a stronger relationship with consumers.
Successfully developing stronger relationships with key customers will build
brand loyalty and, over time, increase sales.
There are brands however that are able to meet their business objectives
without being well liked on the basis of what online content they supply, or
how they facilitate or engage in conversation online. Anyone low budget
would fit. It is these brands that need to ask themselves the question, ‘do
we really need social media?’
It's important to recognise that there are still brands that are best able to
meet their business objectives through other channels; brands which do
not need to actively take part in social media.
‘I think the brands that shouldn't be doing it are those that don't sell
primarily based on reputation’ (Powell, 2009).
Sagem (low end mobile phone manufacturers) do not need to have a
brand to sell their product.
‘They don't need to build a brand as they are selling a basic product
through mass-market retailers based on price / features’ (Powell,
2009).
46

47. Every company has different business objectives. In Sagem’s case, it is
about shelf space, relationships with retailers, price points, feature sets.
They simply do not need to have a sophisticated relationship with the
consumer to sell their product.
• Every company has different business objectives and should be sure
that social media can play a significant part in reaching these.
• If not then it may be a good decision to leave it alone as the wrong
type of presence can do more harm than good, as was shown in the
case of Habitat.
47

48. 6. Choose your media with care.
Fig 10. Twitter (Microblogging service) is just coming down after huge
expectation. Will it stand the test of time?
(Gartner, 2009)
New technologies are often accompanied by huge expectations regarding
the impact they are going to have on how we communicate to each other.
This expectation is not always fulfilled.
48

49. Twitter is still in its relative infancy. Only time will tell whether it
progresses through to the ‘slope of enlightenment’, some way along The
Hype Cycle.
The mistake that Habitat made was caused by not understanding the
codes of conduct on Twitter . If they had been patient and waited for
Twitter to develop and stabilise as a medium, it is possible they may not
have made the same mistakes. because They would have had time to
assess how the micro blogging service worked.
Every form of social media is different, they have evolved at a different
rate and people use them in a different way.
What Obama’s team did to perfection was to use each form of social
media on its merits. Facebook was seen as a different channel to Youtube
and used accordingly.
49

50. 7. Overarching Guidelines
7.1. 'Give us the people control and we will use it, if you do not
give us control you will lose us' (Jarvis, 2009).
In the introductory section it was shown that the control was now very
much in the hands of the consumer.
'Previously, the powerful; companies, institutions and governments -
believed they were in control, and they were. Now the internet
allows us to speak to the world, to organise ourselves, to find and
spread information, to challenge old ways, to retake control' (Jarvis,
2009).
When companies recognize this shift in control is when they can stop
grappling on to what is lost, and start investing in what is really going to
engage consumers. If it suits the brands business objectives, engagement
means supplying engaging content, a way and and a place to talk about it.
The control can be seeded out to the consumer. It is possible that the
word consumers spread about a brand can have an extremely positive
impact.
50

51. 7.2. Respect the community and they will respect you
This is a simple rule that can be summed up with the phrase, ‘treat others
how you would like to be treated yourself’. Brands have to behave in a
way that is suitable to the environment they are in. They are in a
community inhabited by humans. Yes these humans may be online but
that makes them no less human and may choose to engage or ignore a
brand on these premises.
51

52. 7.3. ‘Your best customer is your partner and your worst
customer is your best friend’ – be accountable (Jarvis, 2009)
If you have a good relationship with a customer, they will want to say
good things about you. The job of the brand is to enable the customer to
say the right things in the right place. Both Aquafresh and Obama’s team
did this to perfection. Obama’s team knew that people were talking about
the presidential campaign, he just gave them more news content to get
them talking and then harnessed the conversation to make his
communications more targeted. Aquafresh brought positive conversation
to their communal site, which served to act as a hub of positivity around
the release of their new product.
A customer that has fallen out of favour with the brand should be treated
just the same as if one falls out with a friend; apologizing, admitting
mistakes and trying to rectify the situation.
'Find someone who has a problem. Find out more about the problem
by engaging in conversation. Solve it. Learn from it. Then tell people
what you learned' (Jarvis, 2009).
This is the fundamental mistake that Twitter made after they were placed
in the spam category for hijacking trending topics. If they had acted
sensibly and apologized, they may well have been forgiven.
52

53. 7.4. Life is public, so is business (Get used to it)
‘We now live and do business in glass houses (and offices). And
that’s not necessarily bad’ (Jarvis, 2009).
In order for brands to be found and engaged with they must be public.
Their actions must be visible to the world (no secrets) if they want people
to talk to or about them, and ultimately to trust them.
‘Trust is the cornerstone of all human relationships, brands must
adhere to this truth’ (Grant, 2008).
53

54. 8. Conclusions
8.1. ‘Give in order to receive’
It has been shown that social media has had a profound effect on the
relationship between brand and consumer. While the aim of advertising is
still the same, the environment in which it operates has changed. People
now have the opportunity to create and share their own brand related
content. This has been shown to have a direct on impact on brand affinity
and even sales as people tend to trust people over brands.
People have always talked. They have always talked about products and
services. Social media acts as a catalyst for that conversation to the extent
to which good or bad news can travel around the world in a matter of
minutes.
In understanding and presenting this in the introductory section, the aim
of this dissertation has been to provide the reader with an understanding
of where the brands can go from this point with regards to how they use
social media as a communications platform.
The case studies have been used to show the ways brands have tried to
adapt to this new media environment. Some were successful, for individual
reasons and some were unsuccessful for individual reasons. Every brand is
different, and it is for this reason that this dissertation has not been able
to say what exactly to do. What it has done it garnered information from a
variety sources to provide a set of guidelines for using social media.
54

55. I believe that by being sensitive to the codes of conduct that exist within
the social media environment, a brand can place itself in a strong position
to try and enter the ‘conversation’ itself, this time though it enters with
integrity and humility.
‘Brands must develop a credible social voice. Regardless of the
industry, brands will need to focus on developing credible voices for
SIM. These voices will need to be more engaging, personal, humble,
authentic and participatory than traditional advertising messages’
(Razorfish, 2009)
As brands learn the sensibilities of the environment they wish to enter,
they must then set about supplying that environment with relevant, helpful
and engaging content. They must try to minimize interruption and truly
add value.
‘Brands must socialize with consumers. It won’t be enough for
brands to craft powerful messages and push them through different
media channels. They will need to participate directly in
conversations with consumers and provide more meaningful value
exchanges. And they will need to do so in ways that increase their
relevance and value in the eyes of their consumers – or the brands
will be completely ignored.’ (Razorfish, 2009)
Brands must provide a return on emotion to their consumers. Presently,
loyalty between consumers is asymmetric. The more consumers sense a
55

56. symmetrical relationship, the more loyal they will be. Social media is a
great tool for building symmetrical brand relationships, in which both the
brand and the consumers reap equal returns on their relationship.
56

57. 8.2. The opportunity
For the moment there remains a lack of trust between people and brands.
The solution may lie in brands showing more respect to people by being
more like people; More honest, accepting their dark side, embracing
imperfection with the understanding that it increases personality and soul.
Not smothering themselves with a glossy veneer at every opportunity.
Once brands have earned the respect and trust of people. It is a possibility
that they could become leaders.
Seth Godin’s book Tribes describes the world as populated by individuals
who crave a sense of belonging,
‘Human beings can’t help it: we need to belong. One of the most
powerful of our survival mechanisms is to be part of a tribe, to
contribute to (and to take from), a group of like minded people’
(Godin, 2009)
People can never belong to too many tribes, we are in some ways
insatiable for belonging,
‘We want to belong to not just one tribe, it turns out, but to many.
And if you give us tools and make it easy we’ll keep joining’ (Godin,
2009).
57

58. For me this represents a huge opportunity for brands. ‘Give people the
tools, and we will keep joining’. Brands can create tribes around
themselves. Once they have done this they can keep providing new and
engaging content or products to keep interest at a premium.
‘We can’t resist the rush of belonging and the thrill of the new’
(Godin, 2009).
e) Case Study: Nike
One brand that has already begun this is Nike.
Nike managed to spark a movement by bringing together all of those
people in the world who loved the running lifestyle.
Nike provided users of the website with the tools to amplify not only their
own interest in running, but the interest of other runners too. Nike enabled
relationships through providing the ability for personal, relevant content to
be shared:
Nike Plus uses your I - Pod and technology built into the Nike running shoe
to measure and track workouts. While the technology itself is fascinating,
it is how Nike used the technology in conjunction with social media.
Nike created a site where users could enter and log their workout
information. To do this users would create a personal profile of
themselves. Once they had done they could chat to other users, sharing
content and building relationships, facilitated by Nike.
58

59. Once a user created a profile by entering personal information Nike was
able to send them targeted communications based on their individual
preferences. The genius of this is that Nike did not have to interrupt the
user experience to gain user data. Nike provided a service that directly
benefited the user (networking), but at the same time benefited Nike.
The NikePlus.com site is now emphasising user personalization even more
by giving the "goals" feature (where users set their own training goals
online); ranking runners in networks on levels based on how much they
run. Thus the brand is building a close relationship with the consumer and
supporting them in their challenge to improve themselves. Matching
runners up with each other is enabling people to share REAL life
experiences through an online channel.
The site will make shoe recommendations based on questionnaires to help
move more Nike products. And users will now be able to share running
information on Facebook and Twitter, as well as add other users to their
network. The solution will even suggest potential running partners based
on location and training intensity. Nike is adding value after value.
‘Nike Plus is credited with fueling Nike's surge in the running shoe
category, moving from 48% of the marketing 2006, to a full 61%
last year’ (SportsScanInfo, 2009).
What Nike did that has brought them such success is that they adapted
quickly and led from the front within the new environment. They have
59

60. succeeded in adding true value to the lives of runners around the world,
while at the same time meeting their business objectives. It is the ability to
do both of these things at the same time that is commendable.
Nike has successfully created a tribe of runners around its’ brand. Each of
them united to one another by a shared passion in running. This shared
passion always existed. Butt it is Nike that has leveraged it through its
superb use of social media.
60

61. 9. References
1. Armano, D. (2009). Logic and Emotion: The Hub and Spoke Model.
{online}
Available at:
<http://darmano.typepad.com/logic_emotion/2008/02/index.html>
Accessed: 21 September 2009
2. Diamond, P., (2009).The impact that social media has had on the
communications industry [interview].
(Personal Communication, 11 June 2009)
3. Defleur & Dennis. (1996, p. 564). Understanding Mass Communication:
A Liberal Arts Perspective. Houghton Mifflin (Boston)
4. Emarketer, (2009). UK Social Media, Joining the Conversation, {online}.
Available at:
<http://www.emarketer.com/Reports/All/Emarketer_2000575.aspx>
Accessed: 4 August 2009
5. Emarketer, (2009). Fig 1. UK Social Media, Joining the Conversation
[Photograph], {online}
Available at:
<http://www.emarketer.com/Reports/All/Emarketer_2000575.aspx>
Accessed: 4 August 2009
61

62. 6. Emery, D., (2009). Joke review boosts t – shirt sales. {online} (updated
21 May 2009)
Available at: <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8061031.stm>
Accessed: 17 August 2009
7. Gartner, (2009). Fig 10.The Hype Cycle. [picture] {online}
Avaliable at: <http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1124212 >
Accessed: 28 September 2009
8. Godin, S. (2009, pp. 7-8) Tribes. USA: Penguin.
9. Google. (2009). Fig 9, . Hub and Spoke Model of Social Media
Engagement. [picture], {online}
Available at:
<http://images.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://katiepoplin.com/obama
_hub_and_spoke.png&imgrefurl=http://katiepoplin.com/2009/01/hub-and-
spoke-social-media-engagement-
model/&usg=__1N7ZcUKURpi2iVaLsL7iHmKiLyQ=&h=326&w=481&sz=10
2&hl=en&start=1&um=1&tbnid=uXwOWaezvbWsIM:&tbnh=87&tbnw=12
9&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dhub%2Band%2Bspoke%2Bmodel%2Bobama%
26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-
US:official%26hs%3DuBH%26sa%3DG%26um%3D1>
Accessed: 14 August 2009
10. Govern, B., (2008). Fig 3. Dual Function Design. {online} [picture]
(updated 18 November 2008)
62

63. Available at: <http://www.amazon.com/Mountain-Mens-Three-Short-
Sleeve/dp/B002HJ377A>
Accessed: 12 February 2009
11. Gower, G., (2009). Discussion on how social media has impacted the
communications industry [interview].
(Personal communication, 3 September 2009).
12. Grant, J. (2006, p.22). The Brand Innovation Manifesto. Chichester:
John Wiley and Sons.
13. Hopkins, (2008). Just what is social media…exactly?, {online}
Available at:
<http://mashable.com/2008/11/18/social-media-defined/>
14. IPA (2009). The Future of Advertising –ad industry should prepare for
a consumer led world or face decline. {Online},
Available at: <http://www.ipa.co.uk/Content/The-future-of-advertising-
%E2%80%93-ad-industry-should-prepare-for-a-consumer-led-world-or-
face-decline>
Accessed: 5 July 2009
15. IPA, (2009). Social Media Futures– The Future of Advertising and
Agencies in a Networked Society. {online}
Available at: <www.ipa.co.uk>
Accessed: 5 July 2009
63

64. 16. James, L., (2009). Should you Advertise on Social Networking
Websites?, {online}
Available at: <www.warc.com>
Accessed: 19 August 2009
17. Jarvis, G., (2009, p. 21). What would Google Do? New York: Harper
Collins Publishers.
18. Johnson and Kaye. (2004, p. 624). Consumers' Reliance on Product
Information and Recommendations Found in UGC, By Hyuk Jun Cheong,
Margaret A. Morrison, Volume 8, No2, {Online},
Available at: <http://www.jiad.org/article103>
19. Leger Marketing. (2008). Social Media Usage Report. {online}
Updated: 6 June 2008
Available at: <http://www.legermarketing.com/eng/synd.asp>
Accessed: 15 July 2009
20. Michael, A. (2009). How Obama used Social Media to drive his
campaign. And how you can use it to drive yours. {online}
Available at: <http://www.digtrends.com/2009/03/10/how-obama-used-
social-media-to-drive-his-campaign-and-how-you-can-use-it-to-drive-
yours/>
Accessed: 12 August 2009
21. Ofcom. (2008). Social Networking: A quantitative and qualitative
research report into attitudes, behaviours and use. {online}
64

65. Updated: April 2009
Available at:
<www.ofcom.org.uk/advice/media.../socialnetworking/report.pdf>
Accessed: 15 August 2009
22. Office for National Statistics, (2009). Internet Access - Households and
Individuals, {online}.
Available at:
<http://www.statistics.gov.uk/hub/search/index.html?newquery=technolo
gy+and+internet+use>
Accessed: 4 August 2009
23. Perry, J. (2009). Fig 5 – 6. Habitat says Misuse of Twitter was a
Mistake. [picture] {online}
Updated: 23 June 2009
Available at: <http://www.retail-week.com/in-business/marketing/habitat-
says-misuse-of-twitter-keywords-was-a-mistake/5003786.article>
Accessed: 12 September 2009
25. Powell, D. (2009). What brands are suitable for social media and what
brands are not suitable [interview].
(Personal Communication, 12 September 2009).
26. Razorfish. (2009). The Social Influence Marketing Survey. {online}
Available at: <http://fluent.razorfish.com/publication/?m=6540&l=1>
Accessed: 10 September 2009
65

66. 27. Runnacles, M. (2009). Fig 2. The Media Landscape presentation.
[Picture]
February 2009: Bucks New University.
28. Sanghera, S. (2009). Riddle of the Ubiquitous Brand that Disappears.
The Times, 28 September 2009, p. 46.
29. Solis, B, (2007). The Definition of Social Media, {online}
Available at:
<http://www.webpronews.com/blogtalk/2007/06/29/the-definition-of-
social-media>
Accessed: 21 July 2009
30. SportsScanInfo. (2009) Market Sales Summary. {online}
Available at: <http://www.sportscaninfo.com/free.htm>
Accessed: 26 September 2009
31. Tipherith. (2009). How not to use Twitter: Habitat as a case study.
{online}
Updated: 6 June 2009
Available at: <http://www.socialmediatoday.com/SMC/103334>
Accessed: 11 September 2009
32. Universal McCann, (2008). Next Thing Now, s.I., Universal McCann.
33. WARC. (2008). Aquafresh : Iso Active Launch Case Study. {online}
66

67. Available at: <www.warc.com>
Accessed: 12 August 2009
34. Which?. (2009). Company slogan: ‘No advertising, no bias, no hidden
agenda. Just expert advice from an independent source’. {online}
Available at:
<www.which.co.uk>
Accessed: 16 September 2009
35. Yakob, F. (2009). Talent Imitates, Genius Steals. {online}
Updated: 12 Novemer 2008
Available at: <http://farisyakob.typepad.com/>
Accessed: 12 January 2009
36. Zirinsky, J., (2009). How social media has impacted the
communications industry [interview].
(Personal communication, 1 June 2009).
67

68. 9.1. Bibliography
1.Ariely, D. (2008). Predictably Irrational. London: Haper Collins.
2. Armano, D. (2009). Logic and Emotion {online}
Available at:
<http://darmano.typepad.com/logic_emotion/2008/02/index.html>
3. Bucklin et al. (2002). Online Discussion Groups as Social Networks:
An Empirical Investigation of Word-of-Mouth on the Internet, By Alexandre
Steyer, Volume 6, No 2, {Online},
Available at: <http://www.jiad.org/article80>
4. Defleur & Dennis. (1996, p. 564). Understanding Mass Communication:
A Liberal Arts Perspective. Houghton Mifflin (Boston)
5. Emarketer, (2009). UK Social Media, Joining the Conversation, {online}.
Available at:
<http://www.emarketer.com/Reports/All/Emarketer_2000575.aspx>
6. Gangadharbatla, H. (2008). ‘Facebook Me: Collective Self-Esteem, Need
to Belong,and Internet Self-Efficacy as Predictors of the iGeneration's
Attitudes toward Social Networking Sites’, Volume 8, No 2, {Online}
Available at: <http://www.jiad.org/article100>
7. Grant, J. (2006, p.22). The Brand Innovation Manifesto. Chichester:
John Wiley and Sons.
68

69. 8. IPA, (2009). Social Media Futures– The Future of Advertising and
Agencies in a Networked Society. {online}
Available at: <www.ipa.co.uk>
Accessed: 14 August 2009
9. IPA (2009). The Future of Advertising –ad industry should prepare for a
consumer led world or face decline. {Online},
Available at: <http://www.ipa.co.uk/Content/The-future-of-advertising-
%E2%80%93-ad-industry-should-prepare-for-a-consumer-led-world-or-
face-decline>
10. James, L., (2009). Should you Advertise on Social Networking
Websites? {online}
Available at:
<www.warc.com>
Accessed: 7 August 2009
11. Jarvis, G., (2009, p. 21). What would Google Do? New York: Harper
Collins Publishers.
12. Johnson and Kaye. (2004, p. 624). Consumers' Reliance on Product
Information and Recommendations Found in UGC, By Hyuk Jun Cheong,
Margaret A. Morrison, Volume 8, No2, {Online},
Available at: <http://www.jiad.org/article103>
69

70. 13. Lombard, M. (2001). Interactive Advertising and Presence: A
Framework, Volume 1, No 2, {Online},
Available at: <http://www.jiad.org/article13>
14. Michael, A. (2009). How Obama used Social Media to drive his
campaign. And how you can use it to drive yours. {online}
Available at: <http://www.digtrends.com/2009/03/10/how-obama-used-
social-media-to-drive-his-campaign-and-how-you-can-use-it-to-drive-
yours/>
15. Ofcom. (2008). Social Networking: A quantitative and qualitative
research report into attitudes, behaviours and use. {online}
Updated: April 2009
Available at:
<www.ofcom.org.uk/advice/media.../socialnetworking/report.pdf>
16. Office for National Statistics, (2009). Internet Access - Households and
Individuals, {online}.
Available at:
<http://www.statistics.gov.uk/hub/search/index.html?newquery=technolo
gy+and+internet+use>
17. Razorfish. (2009). The Social Influence Marketing Survey. {online}
Available at: <http://fluent.razorfish.com/publication/?m=6540&l=1>
18. Sanghera, S. (2009). Riddle of the Ubiquitous Brand that Disappears.
The Times, 28 September 2009, p. 46.
70

71. 19. Solis, B, (2007). The Definition of Social Media, {online}
Available at:
<http://www.webpronews.com/blogtalk/2007/06/29/the-definition-of-
social-media>
Accessed: May 2009
20. Yakob, F. (2009). Talent Imitates, Genius Steals. {online}
Updated: 12 Novemer 2008
Available at: <http://farisyakob.typepad.com/>
Accessed: April 2009
71

72. 9.2. Webography
1. Armano, D. Logic and Emotion
Available at:
<http://darmano.typepad.com/logic_emotion/2008/02/index.html>
Accessed: 10 August 2009
2. Catone, J. How to use Twitter Hashtags for Business.
Available at: <http://mashable.com/2009/09/04/twitter-hashtags-
business/>
Accessed: 21 September 2009
3. Emarketer. UK Social Media, Joining the Conversation,
Available at:
<http://www.emarketer.com/Reports/All/Emarketer_2000575.aspx>
Accessed: 4 August 2009
4. Griffin, J. The Doctor is IN: How to Use Social Media the “Not Wrong”
Way
Available at: <http://www.ignitesocialmedia.com/blog/>
Accessed: 7 August 2009
5. IPA. The Future of Advertising –ad industry should prepare for a
consumer led world or face decline.
Available at: <http://www.ipa.co.uk/Content/The-future-of-advertising-
%E2%80%93-ad-industry-should-prepare-for-a-consumer-led-world-or-
face-decline>
72

73. Accessed: 6 September 2009
6. Jarvis, G. The Buzz Machine.
Available at: <www.buzzmachine.com>
Accessed: September 2009
7. Lombard, M. Interactive Advertising and Presence: A Framework,
Volume 1, No 2,
Available at: <http://www.jiad.org/article13>
Accessed: 10 September 2009
8. Michael, A. How Obama used Social Media to drive his campaign. And
how you can use it to drive yours.
Available at: <http://www.digtrends.com/2009/03/10/how-obama-used-
social-media-to-drive-his-campaign-and-how-you-can-use-it-to-drive-
yours/>
Accessed: 12 September 2009
9. Solis, B. The Definition of Social Media,
Available at:
<http://www.webpronews.com/blogtalk/2007/06/29/the-definition-of-
social-media>
Accessed: May 2009
10. Tipherith. How not to use Twitter: Habitat as a case study.
Available at: <http://www.socialmediatoday.com/SMC/103334>
Accessed: 11 September 2009
73

74. 11. TrendWatching. Varous Articles.
Available at: <http://trendwatching.com/>
Accessed: June – September 2009
12. Yakob, F. Talent Imitates, Genius Steals.
Available at: <http://farisyakob.typepad.com/>
Accessed: April 2009
74