1. Social media sites are overhyped and merit much caution on the part of marketers.

2. The campaign rings hollow and deserves being called out as a flop. It’s sick. And I mean sick. Sounds like some dumbfuck C*O caved into peer-pressure and/or wants to be cool, without much concern as to cost.

3. The idea that most any advertising on social media is a waste of money is itself overhyped, as some advertisers *are* generating worthwhile ROI as sure as others are pissing cash away. I suppose it’s just easier to generalize glibly and write off disliked venues.

4. Greg has a good question: does one failure negate an entire field? I think not.

5. Based on the Forrester figures you quoted, I’d say Tide’s problem isn’t social media, per se, so much as being ignorant. Ignorant enough to pay invoices anywhere close $300,000 for a Facebook page, especially when the overpriced and lame agency clearly has no fucking clue what to do.

6. Fear of user comments means you need to rethink your approach. You don’t own the brand, you influence it. If you’re afraid of user comments, then you haven’t reached out to the right people in the right way. Generally speaking, folks don’t cruise the net looking for websites where they can go out of their way to disparage Brand X. That’s silly. Rethink your plan and figure out what you’re doing wrong. Did I mention you don’t own your brand? Get over it.

7. I agree with Adam (and you) that the social media hype has gotten stupid.

8. I also agree with Michael that Tide should experiment with social media. From this particular campaign, they can reach only one conclusion: they need to fire their agency.

9. I agree with Michael that Tide should re-focus on how they can facilitate additional benefits to their intended audience.

10. Timer may be a good idea or not. I think it’s an interesting.

11. Your point about not wanting any further relationship with Tide falls on deaf ears. People don’t want Tide ruining their magazine or interrupting their TV. But it happens anyway. Tide is the cat on your book and the barking dog who disrupts your favorite show. It gets in your face and tries to be involved in your life like every other fucking annoying product and company spending money on marketing. That Tide wants to flirt with dialogue is simply an upgrade to what it’s been doing all along, only this time you get to talk… if you want. If not, don’t participate. Pretty simple.

12. Hey Tide drones, if you want a social media campaign that *will* produce ROI against measurable objectives for a reasonable price, call me.

This looks like a compelte joke to me.

I think you miss the major point here: Tide is a detergent. I don’t want Proctor & Gamble to “facilitate a conversation.”

And I don’t need useless tools such as a laundry timer that reminds me when to switch my laundry. I can keep track of time with my watch, thank you very much. Have been doing it for years and it seems to be working fine so far.

So what do I want Tide to do? Clean my clothes. Nothing more, nothing less. That’s the extent of my “relationship” with Tide.

1) It’s the first of what should be many experiments from a brand like Tide. They’re trying, and that’s good.

2) They haven’t thought at all about how they can help people, or facilitate a conversation or actions via the online presence of that brand. Should it be as simple as a laundry timer that reminds you when to switch your laundry?

Tide miracle stain-removal stories? Some people will actually talk on and on about how clean something got. In this current iteration, they’re asking people to talk about their problems. Who wants to hear about problems in the context of any brand?

Aside from it all,
I really can’t think of anything more boring on the internet than discussing why I needed to conduct certain household chores.

But in their defense, you have to realize, these are people who live, eat and breath their product 24/7. The pressure for them to increase sales and market share of canned cat food is slightly more intense than that of the current democratic primary race.

I can’t tell you how many times I wanted to just tell it like it is and let them know, “It’s just processed cheese wraps. No one cares as much as you.”

If they could put that same amount of effort into ending hunger, then I’d share that app with my friends.

Great post!

According to Forrester Research, the cost of a Facebook page is $50,000 – $300,000. I’d imagine that a YouTube channel is equally expensive.

Note that these amounts, relatively speaking, are small for a brand like Tide, but for what they’re getting in return, it’s completely excessive in my opinion. It’s akin to the government paying $10,000 for a screw or $150,000 for a toilet bowl cover.

Outside of the obvious costs, it’s also worth pointing out that these campaigns often take more time and effort than expected. As you pointed out, for instance, many brands will feel inclined to “protect” themselves and thus have to invest in monitoring comments they don’t like, deciding what moderation policies are needed and taking action to implement them. And, of course, when they do, there’s the risk that they’ll have to defend themselves against accusations of censorship.

Additionally, as you pointed out, Tide probably doesn’t want people talking about certain things. In my article on E-consultancy.com, I noted that a major brand my company is working with opted to avoid standard fare social media marketing campaigns. One of the things their marketing team mentioned in our discussions was that they don’t want to encourage consumers to make their brand part of “user-generated jokes,” even if the jokes are cute and harmless. Why? It just doesn’t benefit the brand. Consumers might remember and promote the joke, but is that really remembering and promoting the brand?