I hate linkbait. Scratching your head? Linkbait is when someone crafts a headline that designed to get clicks, views, shares, etc…but the content is often misleading. Well, earlier this week, there was some serious linkbait going around with respect to a recent “study” completed by Socialbakers, that looked at the social media customer service habits of companies.

The stat, often being quoted from the study was, “58% of social media users want a response. But only 22% actually receive one.”  That stat is sometimes presented as “70% of fans are being ignored by companies.” Provocative, right? Did you lean forward? Raise an eyebrow? I’m sure lots of people did.

Even the “study” looks legit. I mean check this out:

and then this…

Real companies. Accurate fan counts. So clearly…the data is right.

Add in the fact that Socialbakers is a “global social media and digital analytics company with customers in 75 countries representing every continent. Socialbakers helps companies measure the effectiveness of their social marketing campaigns across all major networks, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, LinkedIn and Google+.” and wow this is looking good.

Are you concerned yet? With all this data…and all these insights, you should be right? Wrong. This is the problem that happens when organizations who have never actually brought social media to the enterprise at scale, start offering advice and “insights” about social media. Having actually been part of teams or leading teams that were focused on bringing social media to the enterprise at scale, let me drop some reality to balance the linkbait.

Most organizations have some type of response protocol for addressing content and conversations created in the social media space. My personal favorite is the flow that Ohio State created:

Social Media Response Flow Chart

It’s detailed and allows for a very quick assessment of what content is actionable. In Ohio State’s model they have categories called “Trolls” and “Ragers.” Posts/content flagged as such do not get responded to. I know this is going to just blow away the social media pseudo experts, but, not every comment or post should be responded to. Wait, look outside your window…did the Earth stop rotating? Yes, it’s true, your organization doesn’t have to respond to everything, nor should it.

Did you notice in the nice colorful chart from Socialbakers, the response rate for the Alcohol category is ONLY 5.2%. That looks really bad right? But, take a closer look. Use insights, not raw data. You know how whenever you visit a website from an alcohol company you have to provide your birthdate? They do that to make sure you’re 21 (in the USA) and/or of age. Do you know why they do that? They do it because they are legally obligated to not communicate/market to people under the legal drinking age. The penalties are extremely stiff. Unfortunately, even “age-gating” pages or profiles in an attempt to only allow drinking age adults to enter is not a perfect science. People can lie. People can skirt the system. The tools/options provided by social networks are generally weak. Then, add in the fact that there are significant number of people who choose to omit critical pieces of info, like their birth date, from their profiles and you can start to see how complex this problem is.

So…combine the flow chart from Ohio State with what I just shared about the legal ramifications of communicating with people under the age of 21 and is it any wonder that the average response rate for the Alcohol category is so low?

I could do this all day and poke holes in just about every single data point in this study. But, here’s what I think would be more productive. Check out the total mentions of “AT&T” on twitter here. Scan the first few screens and keep track of how many of the mentions deserve a response. Feel free to do the same for Bank of America on Facebook here. When you look at them or any other brand’s page, what’s the percentage of comments that deserve a response based on the Ohio State Social Media Communication Flow? 30%? 40% I can tell you this, it’s not 70% and it’s not 100%.

Look, we can all improve. We can all be better. We can all be more effective at turning frowns into smiles. But, let’s also be realistic. Let’s not be so Chicken Little. Let’s not fall for the linkbait and scare tactics. Let’s be pragmatic, not just as marketers, but as consumers. The spirit of what Socialbakers was getting out I can support all day long. The letter, the details and the specifics are just so misguided that I can’t possibly endorse the data or the insights.

Look, it would be great if we could scale social across the enterprise and response to every single person’s tweet, blog post, comment, etc. But, that’s not reality. Of course, most social media consultants, wouldn’t understand that…because they’ve never really been knee deep in a large enterprise, trying to scale social. It’s not easy. If it was…anyone could do it….then again, right now, it seems like everyone thinks they can.

We’re on a collision course. It’s going to be an epic collision. Not the type that everyone slows down to look at. Nope. Something far more catastrophic is going to occur. We’re consuming more and more “data” on our phones. There’s no sense in even referring to our devices as smartphones; the segment of people with “feature” phones is dwindling faster than our ice caps. As our phones become more powerful, the battery life longer and the ecosystem of apps more dynamic, it’s becoming second nature for us to be connected.

So we download an app. We check Facebook. We tweet. We check-in. We stream videos from Netflix. We instagram. And instagram. And instagram some more. We consume. We consume like crazy. And why shouldn’t we? The web is how we learn, discover, share, communicate and enhance our relationships. Today, we can do all of that, all the time, from anywhere. Our whole life fits in our pocket.

We’re moving forward like a turbo charged race car on a highway without speed limits. But, as we try to accelerate, as we try to enjoy the buzz that comes from speed, we’re getting read to hit speed bump after bump and eventually a wall. Those bumps and that wall are our antiquated wireless infrastructure. AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile and eventually Sprint are capping our access. Their data plans act like governors that keep us stuck in 3rd gear.

Consumers want to access the web on demand and on the go. As marketers we want to deliver content and information that enhances their experience. But, we can never realize the potential that comes from a unique situation where consumers want the same thing as marketers; the web…on tap. We talk about the power of the cloud. But, the cloud offers little value if we can’t access the cloud without fearing a data overage charge?

Could you imagine a world where Comcast throttled how much TV you could watch? A world where ever month you could only watch X minutes of TV? Of course not. And one major reason why you’ll never have to imagine that world is advertisers would never allow it. You can’t siphon off one of the largest pipes that allow advertisers to reach consumers.

TV is at scale. No one questions that. No one questions TVs ability to reach massive amounts of people quickly. That’s why I think we are headed for a collision. With smartphone penetration over 50% and consumption on a hockey stick growth curve, we’re going to see advertisers fight with service providers. It’s inevitable. For once, no one is disagreeing that mobile is the future. Where there is still disagreement though, is if the future is now. That disagreement is what allows the Verizon’s of the world to put up speed bump after speed bump and keep us all from fulfilling on the promise of mobile.

The collision is imminent. It’s approaching rapidly. But, it won’t happen because you, the consumer, wants a better mobile experience…wants unmetered data…wants an on demand and on the go world. Nope. It’s going to happen because advertisers will refuse to operate in a world where their ability to market to customers is being constrained by the “pipe” providers.

I heart Jeremiah Owyang. Have never met him in person. Would love to though. I think he works really hard at his craft. He understands the concept of riding waves. He left Forrester at the right point. He invested in social at the right point. He’s smart. He’s one of my favorite people to follow and I’ve learned a lot from him.

Recently, he wrote a great post that basically speaks to the CONSTANT reinvention by companies grappling with how to hold on the ever changing landscape of the Social Media space. Specifically, he was talking about pure play social media organizations getting into the media planning and buying space.

I’ve long said we need a social media sheriff. We need someone with the Klout (pun intended) to really call a spade a spade and not be fearful of bruising some egos.  As Philip Seymour Hoffman said in Say Anything:

My advice to you. I know you think those guys are your friends. You want to be a true friend to them? Be honest and unmerciful.

Frankly, we need more of that in this space.  We need an Angie’s List and a “please, run the other way, and never work this company/person” list.  Of course, love creating the former and sprint away from the latter.  Jeremiah and most analysts will focus on the Angie’s List. You’ll rarely, if ever, see an analysis where an analyst advises avoiding a company.

In the last 15 years in this business I’ve seen a lot while traversing the client and agency side of the business. I’ve sold and been sold. I’ve built social media offerings out of scratch for 2 agencies and listened nearly 1,000 different pitches from companies talking about their approach or solve for social. That’s not an exaggerated figure. I take all calls all the time. This space changes all the time and I never want to miss a potential opportunity.

In response to Jeremiah’s post, I left a comment on his site, but I think it needs a larger platform. It’s actually something that’s been on my mind for a few years now and in a stream of consciousness while waiting for a plane it all finally manifested into words.

With that said, here’s what I think about the state of social media.

We have a big problem. Not a small problem. It was a small problem 4 years ago. Not a medium size problem. It was a medium size problem 2 years. Today, we have a titanic sized problem in the industry that stems from a general lack of accountability. In Groupon’s recent 10K filing they stated something very profound:

We expect competition in e-commerce to continue to increase because THERE ARE NO SIGNIFICANT BARRIERS TO ENTRY.

It’s those lack of barriers that has allowed so many startups to enter the social media playing field. This isn’t just in the social software arena, where there seems to be a new Buddy Media or Hootsuite copycat. No, we’re also seeing large companies create social media spin off companies, departments or “revenue centers.” We’re seeing social media boutiques pop up all the time.  As a litany of companies enter the space, it becomes ever more challenging to understand which of these offerings are legitimate, credible and which are selling vaporware.

So, yeah, we have a problem.

But, make no mistake, we created this problem. As agencies we rushed to create social media/business offerings. As an industry we allowed consultants with no experience, but several books to call themselves experts and earn the ear of clients. As social media boutiques we offered buzz word after buzz word but nary a person who’d actually been in the trenches. As clients we turned to all of these companies and said fix it; we washed our hands of the problem by outsourcing it. But who did we outsource it to?

The reason there’s a lack of case studies has everything to do with the fact we still live in a world with risk averse clients, an impatient C-suite, shareholders demanding instant return and of course companies (social media agencies, holding companies, etc.) offering quick solutions. We allow Facebook to keep changing the system and offering almost zero data transparency. We bellied up to the table and kept spending without any concept of what we were buying.

Oh, we most definitely created this problem. And, what do we do in this post and the comments? We offer, at best, half-measured responses that skirt around the issue. We have allowed social media to become SEO industry; a collection of pseudo experts all promising a solution without the talent to do deliver.

Frankly, it’s depressing. I hope for better. But, until we actually are willing to be honest and take a stand against the bullshit being passed off as social media experts, companies and strategy; you aren’t allowed to complain. No, you can’t complain when you lose a piece of business to the smoke and mirrors boutique that has a book, fancy slides and manufactured metrics. We need better accountability. We need the analysts to do their job, step up and call bullshit, bullshit.

But, I get it. Right now, there is zero incentive to be brutally honest. The analysts would lose their connections. The agencies who took a stand would lose short term revenue. The clients would have to admit ignorance. And, well, all of us, with “personal brands” would of course lose all the social media juice that comes from the situation we created. We deserve better. This industry deserves better. Look yourself in the mirror and ask yourself, if you’re ready to stop perpetuating this situation. I bet you, the answer is no. That’s ok, just like SEO rose above a sewer like environment, so will social. When it does, history will remember your part and reward you accordingly.

Al Pacino, in the movie The Devil’s Advocate said, “Vanity is definitely my favorite sin. Self-love, the all-natural opiate.”  He’s right.  Today we have so many tools and platforms, many of them free, that lets us have not only a voice, but a means to distribute, share and syndicate that voice.  The problem is that many of us seem to think that just because we have a platform and a voice that we are now worth listening to…and ultimately rock stars in our own mind.

I’ve argued often that social “media” has created a clear class system where the “elite” simply exist to pat themselves on the back and rarely, if at all, hold each other accountable.  I challenge you to find a situation where a social “elite” has openly disagreed with another.  Good luck.  You might find the needle in the haystack, but that’s exactly what it is…an exception to the rule.  This could only be happening for one of two reasons:

1. All of these people think alike, in which case, we’re doomed by narrow minded thinking and a lack of progressive thought leadership.
2. The culture of the elite is to simply nod your head, pat one another on the back and never rock the boat.

I lean toward #2.

Enter Empire Avenue, the latest social networking platform to grace the web.  What is it you ask?  Well, in their own words:

Empire Avenue is the Social Media Exchange, where you can buy and sell shares in any social media profile, meet new people, unlock Achievement badges, and earn boatloads of virtual cash by being active and social online! Buy shares in your friends, your followers, people with similar interests, brands you love, celebrities – anyone! All using a virtual currency and all for free!

The first half of the description is really all you need to know.  Have we jumped the shark?  We’re now treating people like stocks, where we can buy, trade and sell shares in them?  Needless to say the social media elite club believe this is the next best thing since FlipBoard (by the way how is that colossal failure doing?) or Google Wave (I’ll withhold my laughing).

Empire Avenue, is exactly what’s wrong with the industry at the moment.  We have an environment, akin to high school culture, where the elite stick together, rarely let the non-elite in (well unless you’re a client, with money) and create systems that allow for the perpetuation of ego building.  Do you think Jeremiah Owyang will ever “downgrade” Robert Scoble’s stock?  Not gonna happen.  Let’s treat this like the stock market…what we’re going to see is an over-valuation of people’s social media stock, that’s reminiscent of the dot-com bubble and Enron, because the elite will simply inflate one another’s stock.  That’s not a free market.  That’s not a stock market.  That’s a popularity contest.

Clearly, I have a specific point of view.  And, let’s be honest, one that generally runs contrary to the social media elite.  However, unlike them, I’m open to alternate points of view.  Scott Monty does a great job of explaining the platform, offers his perspective on why some people are flocking to it and outlines some of the bigger implications.  Though I’m nowhere near as bullish as he is about Empire Avenue, I think Scott does a great job of breaking it all down and giving us a reason to consider why Empire Avenue could find a niche.

I think I’m just tired of the vanity that’s in social media.  If social media is supposed to be about connected with people, sharing, being authentic, helping, and all these other esoteric and good natured concepts, why do we keep creating, perpetuating an investing the culture that runs counter to all of that?

A few days ago the inter-web was all a flutter (especially on twitter) about Chrysler’s decision to fire, New Media Strategies, the company handling their social media engagement. An employee, who was subsequently fired by New Media Strategies, erred when he tweeted the following, “I find it ironic that Detroit is known as the #motorcity and yet no one here knows how to fucking drive.” on behalf of Chrysler.

AdAge did a nice job of covering the whole situation here . So I won’t rehash what they’ve already covered. What I will say, is that I find it hypocritical of Chrysler to:

1. Make enough mistakes that the government (and by the government, I mean ultimately the tax payers) had to bail them out. Think of the irony, this New Media Strategies employee, is technically keeping Chrysler afloat via his taxes, as part of the bail out, and gets fired for making a mistake.
2. Launch a new advertising campaign try to make us feel good about it being an American company and feature Emnem, a poster boy for mistakes and profanity. Is not a core part of our DNA as Americans to love the idea of redemption? Isn’t that what Chrysler is hoping resonates with the American public? That we would want to Chrysler to succeed through redemption?

You could argue the mistake could have been avoided. You could argue there was no reason to ever use profanity (by the way, if you’ve never used profanity, ever, please raise your hand). But, you can’t argue with the hypocrisy of not only Chrysler, but of New Media Strategies as well.

This is America. We make mistakes and when we do, we pick ourselves up, we acknowledge them and we move on. I guess Chrysler forgot that as they were creating cars “Imported From America.”