Social Media Cage Match

On Tuesday, KickApps was host for what was billed as a “Social Media Cage Match” featuring one of the highlights of Social Media Week, featuring two teams of well-known industry figures, divided into “Offense” and “Defense”

Moderator (and soon-to-be Digiday Editor-in-Chief) Brian Morrissey read out three hypothetical case studies that had previously been shared with the groups. They were given 3 minutes to come up with a defense-based or offense-based strategy and present it to the audience, who, along with Morrissey, tried to poke holes in it.

Team Offense

Ian Schafer, Deep Focus

David Berkowitz, 360i

Mike Monello, Campfire

Mike Scheiner, Porter Novelli

Team Defense

Chapin Clark, R/GA

Ana Andjelic, Huge

Jim Deters, Ascendant Technology

Tom Ajello, POKE

King Kong Bundy, Former Professional Wrestler

(It was billed as a cage match and Bundy did seem to know a thing or two about social media.)

What follows is a summary of their responses along with analysis by our Managing Director of Social Media Strategy (and the evening’s MC) Alan Wolk.

CASE STUDY #1: TUBULAR TELEVISIONS

Tubular is a well-known American manufacturer of television sets. They had a strong reputation back in the 60s and 70s and their TVs were considered both exceptionally reliable and cutting edge.

But Tubular did not keep up with the times and both quality and innovation slipped. Japanese, Eurpoean and Korean manufacturers came in and took away huge chunks of the market. BoBos, the “bohemian bourgeoise” upper middle class consumers on both coasts eschewed Tubular, which they associated with elderly Red Staters. Rap acts even mock Tubular TVs in popular songs.

Most of the chatter on the social webs then is about how much Tubular TVs suck. Which has been true until this year: after a concerted effort by their new management team, Tubular have produced a line of flat screen HDTVs that are even better than those of their overseas rivals. Trade journalists have been gushing over the new TVs, but Tubular wants to get their message out to a wide audience.

How does Tubular utilize social media to spread the word that they’ve changed? Can they use the social web to actually sell more TVs?

THE OFFENSE proposed a plan whereby consumers (and influencers) who were complaining loudest would have their TVs replaced with a brand new Tubular TV. A series of faux living rooms would also be set up in malls and big box stores where consumers could experience the new TVs and likely tweet/post about them.

THE DEFENSE proposed a plan whereby users would be invited to send in videos of themselves smashing their old TV sets. They would then receive new Tubular TVs.

ALAN’S ANALYSIS: Both sides were onto something: the key here is to get the product into consumer’s hands where it will speak for itself. I would focus on younger consumers who haven’t spent years believing that Tubular let them down. Tubular parties are another option, using a company like HouseParty to throw parties in Tubular owner’s homes so that their friends and neighbors could see a new Tubular TV in action.

One common thread found both here and in the following case studies, is that there is no easy answer, no “magic advertising words” one could use to make the problem go away. As one of the panelists (I believe it was Tom Ajello) said “this problem took two decades to create. You’re not going to make it go away in two days.”

Brands need to be patient about the impact that social media can make, especially in turning around the image of a product. While “Don’t Suck” is a good place to start, for brands whom merely “not sucking” indicates a giant leap forwards, there is much work to be done. Brands need to keep in mind that perceptions are hard to change and it will take Tubular a few years of consistently producing excellent ground-breaking products, to turn around brand perception.

Social media can facilitate the turnaround and help turn skeptics into believers, but it cannot erase the past.

CASE STUDY #2: SLOANE HARRINGTON

Sloane Harrington (née Staci Horowitz) is an American designer of high-end womens and mens clothing and accessories. Her lines are sold through her own stores and through posh department stores such as Bergdorff-Goodman, Nieman Marcus and Saks Fifth Avenue. Sloan Harrington’s “SH” logo is a widely recognized status symbol and she has been unrelenting in protecting it from counterfeiters.

Unfortunately for Ms. Harrington, she had invested her money with Bernie Madoff and now desperately needs to raise some capital. As such, she signed a deal with Wal-Mart to introduce a line of sportswear and home furnishings aimed at 20somethings under the “Sloane” label.

Although the line hasn’t even launched, her core fan base is up in arms. They feel that the brand is abandoning its identity and that the new lower-priced goods (at WalMart!) cheapens a brand many of them have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on.

Studies show that other high-end brands have introduced lower-end lines without harming the main brand, but Ms. Harrington’s fans are nonplussed and have been using social media to complain and organize, even going so far as to start a “Sloane Is Soooo Over” Facebook group with 30,000+ fans.

How does Sloane Harrington use social media to gain acceptance for her low-priced line which has been getting positive reviews from the fashion press?

THE OFFENSE suggested creating an exclusive, invite-only domain for fans of the high-end brand to show them that nothing had changed. Members of the exclusive domain would have access to special content and deals that were designed exclusively for them. Members of the anti-SH Facebook groups as well as prominent fashion bloggers would be invited to join.

THE DEFENSE suggested ignoring the naysayers and focusing on expanding the WalMart effort which promised a much larger market and greater profits. There was some debate between audience members and Team Defense as to whether WalMart was the problem (e.g. would the fans have been as upset if the low-end store in question was Target?) and what effect the elimination of a high-end line would have on consumer desire for the lower-end line.

ALAN’S ANALYSIS:  I think the offense is correct in trying to cordon off SH’s more vocal fans in an exclusive member’s only site where they can be mollified and their feeling of superiority indulged. I also agree that the WalMart audience could be huge and Ms. Harrington should pursue it with abandon.

I would suggest that Ms. Harrington reach out to the fashion press, influential bloggers and vocally dissatisfied fans by playing up her intention to bring fashion to “all the people” and how she’d always been interested in designing clothes for people who lived very different lives than her usual customer base: could she create clothing that was both stylish and functional?  From a product POV, I would recommend that Ms. Harrington ensure that there was no overlap between the two product lines: no handbags that sort of looked the same, no similarly cut t-shirts, etc.: the two lines must be kept completely separate. The logos should be as different as possible too, with the new Sloane logo looking markedly different than the SH logo.

Finally, SH should create videos of top fashion journalists talking about how much they love the Sloane line and what it stands for. While these will not “go viral” in the classic sense, they are likely to get picked up by fashion blogs and the fashion press and help create the impression among Ms. Harrington’s hardcore fans and other fashion insiders that the Sloane line is closer to “Isaac Mizrahi for Target” than it is to “Jaclyn Smith for K-Mart.”

CASE STUDY 3: AGRABAR

The Mediterranean nation of Agrabar is rich in history and natural beauty. The beaches of its coastal islands have long been the playground of the rich and famous. Tourists of all stripes and nationalities have come to see its famed palaces and the Hanging Gardens of Agrabar, one of the 8 Wonders of the Ancient World.

In 2007, the unpopular Sultan, a staunch American ally, was deposed by a violent populist revolution that dragged on for close to 8 months..

Tourism, which once comprised 40% of Agrabar’s GNP, stopped completely during the revolution and has not made much of a comeback. American reporters were attacked by crowds during the revolution and protesters frequently burned American flags and shouted anti-American slogans.

A new middle-of-the road government is now in power and they want to revive the tourism industry as part of an overall effort to mend relations with the West. But every time Agrabar is mentioned on travel message boards and the like, the conversation immediately veers towards how dangerous the country is and how much they hate Americans.

How does the National Tourism Board use social media to get across the message that Abgrabaris are a friendly people who welcome Americans to their country with open arms, while simultaneously reminding everyone of the beauty of the peaceful nation’s beaches and historic sites?

THE DEFENSE suggested that Agrabar focus on things like adventure tourism and eco-tourism, possibly even involving a Survivor-style reality TV show. The ultimate plan involved rolling out lots of little programs in a short period of time to create buzz and Google juice about the nation so that potential visitors would be more likely to see positive stories.

THE OFFENSE suggested using Agrabaris themselves as tour guides, encouraging them to embrace social media as a way to tell the world about their nation. Another intriguing idea was to invite artists and filmmakers to Agrabar, perhaps as part of an international festival. Seeing these up and coming celebrities vacationing and partying in Agrabar would help create the impression that it’s a fun, safe place that welcomes Americans.

ALAN’S ANALYSIS  – In my experience, tourism is a problem for Americans in areas with high crime and unstable governments regardless of politics – we are targets for people who thing we are rich and who know they are unlikely to be punished for attacking Americans. While the Agrabari revolutionaries may have been against the American government, they do not hate the American people. The new government appear stable and Agrabar seems to be under the rule of law. Therefore, I thought that both sides had good ideas.

If barebones ecotourism isn’t a viable option, Agrabar can build up ecofriendly high-end resorts stressing their “green” factor and modernity and put out a PR effort to let people know about the resorts and the A-list celebrities who stay there.

Another option would be to send travel bloggers on trips to Agrabar, especially those bloggers who “travel on the cheap.” This would tie-in with Team Offense’s suggestion to send artists and musicians to Agrabar, making it seem like a hip location. (More affluent travelers always arrive on the heels of the trendsetters.)

Here again, the theory that several years of damage cannot be undone by several hours of social media holds true. Agrabar needs a long-term plan to rebuild their tourism industry and they must be flexible and willing to make adjustments along the way as they gauge consumer reaction and interest.

Once again, thanks to all the panelists for their good spirits and insightful thinking. To the audience for some great questions. To Brian Morrissey for once again displaying his excellent moderation skills, and to JWT for hosting us.

For another excellent recounting of the evening, check out Kevin Haughwout’s Freedmarketer blog post