We Are All Media Companies Now - Research Paper Example

dear client, this is a rough incomplete draft and not yet the final paper. I’m still writing your paper. please give me just until today, Monday, to finalize the paper. I promise you that the paper will be of high quality and you will not be disappointed. I’ll inform you once the final paper has been uploaded. thank you =) sincerely, writer In 2009, technology researchers at Forrester published a report entitled We Are All Media Companies Now, that looked at how publishing firms were dealing with the shift from a distribution paradigm to one based on consumption. By 2014, the paradigm is being experienced not just by companies but increasingly by individuals. People who use Facebook and Twitter are for all practical purposes running little media houses, and face the problem of their much larger brethren, where will the next story come from? Originality is too time-consuming: emulation is inevitable. Fads ensue. What gets emulated? Anything that can contribute to social capital. The content must be easy to create but not as easy as photographing ones morning cappuccino. For example, someone in Toronto snapped a selfie with the controversial mayor Rob Ford. Overnight, hunting Rob Ford became a Toronto sport, and your face next to his became social currency across Canada. Its easy to write off these fads as simple stunts of digital narcissism, but they matter to marketing because they carry incidental meaning. It was not lost on Fords reelection team that media coverage on Facebook was as good as, perhaps better than, press coverage. Selfies with Ford carried the incidental meaning that he was one of the people, a fun-loving regular guy. He began to make himself selfie-friendly. Brands, too, ask how they can become incidental props in these viral stunts. The challenge that brands encounter, however, is that their involvement could come off as merely jumping on the bandwagon because spreadable stunts tend to carry no meaning beyond the stunt itself. Take "planking" for example. An early Facebook fad, planking is the act of lying face-down in an incongruous place. It is the epitome of digital narcissism and any hint of motive other than "look at me" just clouds the picture. By contrast, the ALS ice bucket challenge offers an example of a brand harnessing the energy of a narcissistic fad on social networks in service to the brand itself. The usual elements are there: an act that is incongruous, not easy to do, and screams "look at me." Yet here, the incidental meaning is not at all dissociated from the personal meaning. Im making myself uncomfortable for ALS. Im recruiting the anti-ALS cause to enhance my personal capital. Alas, for marketers looking for low-cost market impact, few commercial brands enhance personal capital. Few are as powerful as cause brands. How has it worked? As of Wednesday, August 20, The ALS Association has received $31.5 million in donations compared to $1.9 million during the same time period (July 29 to August 20) last year. This remarkable increase in their fundraising potential is largely due to the snowball effect of cause marketing coupled with a social medial fad. Celebrities are jumping in on the action. Sports teams are not far behind. In fact, almost everyone who is challenged by a friend, coworker, or family member joins in. The emergence of social media has drastically changed how people share and receive information. It has also altered how we learn about current events; keep in touch with family and even how we make healthcare decisions. In recent times, social media has also been seen to have a profound impact on global health and scientific research. In 2014, the third and fifth most searched for trending terms on google globally were “ebola” and the “ALS ice bucket challenge” respectively. Both of these events brought science into the spotlight and much of their exposure can be attributed to tremendous discussion over social media. Social media can be considered democratizing because it gives everyone a voice but at the same time can also be highly unregulated in its content. Platforms such as Twitter can only give snippets of information and are often glamourized or exaggerated to attract more attention. While this might be an effective platform for companies looking to market products or services, this may cause complications for those consuming information regarding scientific research and health. There is already extensive research done on how traditional forms of media such as newspapers and television often miscommunicate science to the public due to lack of understanding or stretching of the facts for a better story (1). Those members of the general public who post about scientific research without understanding the full story might further exemplify this issue. People may also be subjective to “confirmative bias” and be more likely to interact with information found on social media that agree with a particular personal belief regardless of accuracy (2). On the other hand, social media also has tremendous potential to garner huge amounts of public attention for global health. This could greatly benefit scientific research that is often not a top priority for government policy makers. There is a widely known 90/10 gap in research funding, 10% of funding is focused on conditions accounting for 90% of global disease burden (3). Particularly there are a group of neglected diseases that are concentrated almost exclusively among impoverished populations living in marginalized areas (4). Given their low profile, these conditions are often left out when public health agendas are formulated. Viruses such as ebola would have been considered a neglected disease prior to its outbreak in 2014. As seen in campaigns such as the ALS ice bucket challenge, social media can be used to raise tremendous amounts of awareness and funds for scientific research. However social media can also negatively impact global health as seen with the intense fear of an ebola outbreak in the fall of 2014. Perhaps a more promising example in 2014 for the potential of social media to be used in scientific research is the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge. The challenge involved one pouring ice water on them self and uploading the video to social media while nominating others to do the same while donating to ALS research. Over the summer of 2014, over $100 million was raised for the ALS society, a 3500% increase over the same period the previous year (11). This unprecedented increase in support for ALS research highlights the ability of social media to garner massive amount of public support for a variety of causes. Perhaps more importantly, the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge also underscores the importance of social media in the future of fundraising for nonprofits. A study by nonprofit consulting firms show that among 55 large nonprofit organizations, the size of email lists rose by an average 14% in 2013 while Facebook and Twitter audiences grew 37% and 46% respectively (12). “The Social Media and Non-profits” report has found that 91% of nonprofits analyzed were using Twitter and 86% were using Facebook while newer platforms such as Snapchat were used less than 4% of the time (13). Despite the relatively high adoption of social media by nonprofits, the report also stated that over half of the nonprofits surveyed were spending less than 10% of their time updating and checking their social media page (12). While perhaps it would beneficial for non-profits to invest more time into social media, Paul Gallagher of The Independent recommends that non-profits not invest all their resources trying to replicate the success of the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge and instead recommends that non-profits incorporate social media to raise long-term awareness of their cause (13). Many marketing analysts have attempted to break down the success of the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge. Despite many marketing firms offering steps to “create” a viral Internet campaign, there is really no predicting what is picked up by social media to become viral. This is a perhaps a downside of social media as dubious information can often go viral due to their shocking claims, as seen with the numerous celebrity death hoaxes that regularly circulate online. John Deighton of Harvard Business School attributes the popularity of the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge as a way to increase ones “social capital” or popularity on social networks. The challenge was successful because it was moderately difficult to do, had a significant “look at me” factor and was a charitable cause (14). Research has shown that social media users are more receptive to sharing and interacting with media that is a considered a charitable cause and are largely less receptive to sponsored advertisements or content pushed by for-profits companies (12). It has also been seen that messages with viral potential must trigger an emotional response in the receiver (15). However many also argue that the charitable message of the challenge was loss in favour of using the ALS cause to enhance “digital narcissism” and receive social media popularity (14). While the massive success of the campaign might be partially due to self-serving interests, it is without a doubt that the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge resulted in an immense increase of awareness for ALS and highlight how social media can have a profound impact on scientific research in the future. The emergence of social media has had a profound effect on many aspects of how society shares and receives information. In regards to global health, it has the potential to be a tremendous tool in reaching a broader audience than ever before but at the same time can be detrimental as voices of experts can be clouded by inaccurate information. It is vital health agencies have a strong social media presence to combat the dubious information being shared on social media. If used effectively, health agencies can use social media as a means to reach massive audiences in a short amount of time during times of crisis. It can also be seen that social media can have a profound impact of research funding, as it is able to garner massive public support. The ALS Ice Bucket Challenge suggests that the public is open to support science and funding agencies should be more open to promote scientific advances to the public through outlets such as social media. Read More