Facebook मैन पैसे कमानेके आइसे 5 आशान तरिके ।
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- It’s good that big brands like Verizon Communications Inc. And Unilever NV are pulling ads from Facebook Inc.
CONSTELLATION BRANDS, INC.
As my colleague Sarah Halzack has written, the way to make the adtech giant change its approach to tackling hate speech and misinformation is to target how it makes money. (A similar effort worked at Google’s YouTube unit.) But Mark Zuckerberg and co. Will still make $77 billion this year from advertisers. If brands really believe in this crusade, they should get off Facebook entirely.
On Thursday, Verizon became one of the biggest brands to announce it will pull ads from Facebook in July, joining the likes of Patagonia Inc. And Recreational Equipment Inc. in a month-long campaign called Stop Hate For Profit. The movement is being led by groups such as the Anti-Defamation League and Color of Change, and is channeling momentum of the Black Lives Matter movement to realize real change. On Friday, Ben & Jerry’s, Hellman’s and Dove parent Unilever announced it would halt ads on Facebook and Twitter Inc. In the U.S. For the rest of 2020.
It’s a commendable effort to force Facebook to remodel its practices, but there’s a business incentive too: An ad appearing alongside a conspiracy theory is not a good look, particularly if a slice of the revenue goes to the maker of the video. A group of brands with a combined advertising budget of $97 billion is already pushing for better controls. More of them should follow Verizon’s lead, not least the handful of other telecoms operators in the U.S.
Arguably, the main reason Verizon even needs to advertise on Facebook is because its rivals AT&T Inc. And T-Mobile U.S. Inc. Are both doing so too. Since competitive intensity has been significantly reduced by pandemic lockdowns, now seems a particularly good time for mobile operators to cut marketing spend.
If firms are serious about upping the pressure on Zuckerberg, however, they should abandon their presence on the social network completely by deleting their Facebook pages. That might seem like a brand cutting off its nose to spite its face, but as long as it has a Facebook page, then the advertising boycott looks like an empty threat.
That’s because the ad spend will ultimately return after the boycott. There’s little point in maintaining a corporate Facebook presence without paying to promote content, due to the limitations of what’s known as organic reach, or how many users see a post without a company or individual paying to get it in front of them. Without paid promotion, just 1% of a page’s followers are likely to see a given post, according to digital agency Jellyfish.
It wasn’t always this way. In the early days, Facebook lured brands by showing how many customers they could reach by setting up a page. Then the Menlo Park, California-based firm changed its algorithm so that very few people would see a company’s posts if it didn’t pay for promotion. It was the classic Silicon Valley bait-and-switch.
UniCredit SpA, Italy’s biggest bank, bit the bullet and ditched its Facebook presence a year ago. It had already stopped paying for Facebook ads, which meant that very few of the 546,000 followers of its UniCredit Italia page actually saw its content — perhaps just 5,500. Its resolve is so far holding: It hasn’t returned to the social network yet.
Being on Facebook can also present more of a risk than an opportunity, especially for an incumbent brand like a bank or telecoms giant. UniCredit’s followers probably represented a significant cross-section of its consumer banking customers, which therefore served as a handy list of people for challenger banks like N26 or Revolut to target with ads and try to steal away.
Plus, if a company has a Facebook page, it still has to regularly post new content and interact with customers — both of which cost money. If it doesn’t, the page will likely fill up with customer complaints, which would show up at the top of online search results. The business reasons for big-spending incumbents to leave Facebook might be almost as good as the ethical ones.
Zuckerberg needs financial incentives to be more proactive about managing content effectively, partially because his lodestar has long been user engagement. And more polarizing content drives more user engagement. The Wall Street Journal reported in May that a report commissioned by Facebook in 2018 found the platform often did aggravate polarization and tribal behavior, yet the firm decided not to tackle the issue.
Regulating content directly often means impinging on thorny free speech issues. It’s a troublesome affair. Far better to find market-based, commercial incentives that mean the issue must be taken seriously. Will enough brands use these to make a meaningful difference? Probably not, but they have the opportunity to give Facebook the firmer poke it needs.
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
Alex Webb is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering Europe's technology, media and communications industries. He previously covered Apple and other technology companies for Bloomberg News in San Francisco.
For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.Com/opinion
©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
How To Get Bill Murray To Star In Your Ad; Facebook Boycott Gets Serious: Friday’s First Things First
Welcome to First Things First, Adweek’s daily resource for marketers. We’ll be publishing the content to First Things First on Adweek.Com each morning (like this post), but if you prefer that it come straight to your inbox, you can sign up for the email here.
The Dixie Chicks Drop the “Dixie,” While Disney Plans a Splash Mountain Overhaul
In what’s been called a “diversity revolution,” brands and organizations are continuing to shed elements of their past that are still rooted in problematic racial stereotypes. Most notable in today’s news were two decisions from the entertainment world.
The Dixie Chicks elected to drop the “Dixie” portion of their name, making them just “The Chicks.” The country music group did so quietly and without any official announcement, simply posting a statement on their website saying, “We want to meet this moment.”
Meanwhile, Disney Parks’ Splash Mountain is getting a long-overdue overhaul. The ride’s story is currently based on The Song of the South, a movie that the company has long disavowed due to its setting in the Reconstruction Era South and its many slavery-era stereotypes. The “completely reimagined” ride will instead be themed after The Princess and the Frog, which features a Black heroine who is also an entrepreneur.
Influencer-Led Apparel Brands Seemed Like the Future, but Execution Is Proving Complicated
Successful influencers fronting apparel brands seems like a logical next step, but running a clothing line is no easy task, and it can be difficult to achieve major monetary success in today’s rocky retail landscape. The reward, influencers are finding, may not be worth the effort, especially if they already earn good money on content creation. Julia Berolzheimer, for example, decided to end her successful Gal Meets Glam Collection after complications and disagreements with wholesale partner Maggy London. When a brand invests in a collection, it expects a return on its investment, which means the influencer doesn’t call the shots anymore.
Inside the rift: Learn how the divergence between a brand’s goals and an influencer’s can ultimately drive them apart, plus other challenges these influencers face.
Why This Facebook Boycott Is Different
Major brands including The North Face, Verizon, Eddie Bauer, Upwork, Ben & Jerry’s and more have been piling onto an advertising boycott of Facebook for the entire month of July. Initiated by racial justice advocates, the #StopHateForProfit campaign seeks to pressure Facebook to do something about hate speech and misinformation by users and world leaders on the platform.
The difference: Facebook ad boycotts are nothing new, but this effort is shaping up to be larger and more unified than previous ones.
News & Updates from NewFronts
According to Hulu’s Julie DeTraglia, consumers consider these four key points when deciding whether to subscribe to another OTT offering: content, user experience, connection to the content and the brand, and price.
With a rise in YouTube viewership on connected TVs, the company talked up a feature allowing marketers to buy only on television screens.
More than half of young and middle-aged viewers don’t see any difference between connected TV and cable or satellite TV, according to a poll by Toluna and Tremor Video. In other words, they simply call whatever they’re watching on their big screens “TV.”
TikTok has released TikTok for Business for its advertiser offerings. The company’s presentation emphasized that brands need to understand the platform before running ads, hence its core slogan: “Don’t make ads, make TikToks.”
Xandr presented findings from a survey of video buyers showing that only half of all media-buying teams are truly converged once marketing campaigns move beyond the planning phase. CRO Jason Brown said the challenges of converged buying are “more organizational than they are individual.”
KitchenAid and Digitas revealed “A Woman’s Place,” an upcoming documentary that follows three female chefs trying to make it in a male-dominated industry.
Quantcast, which has traditionally provided analytics service to publishers, is now extending them to marketers, who can run queries about audience types, viewership habits and purchase history.
More of Today’s Top News and Highlights
Chrysler CMO Reveals How He Got Bill Murray to Agree to a Commercial for the Second Time
Jeep’s Groundhog Day Super Bowl spot with Bill Murray was an audience and media favorite. It almost didn’t air, with the pieces falling perfectly into place to make it a reality. Then, Murray returned for a trio of follow-up spots in April and May with quarantine spin. It just so happens that it’s really hard to get Murray to star in ads, much less contact the notoriously tech-phobic actor. But FCA CMO Olivier Francois pulled it off—not to mention the challenge of shooting an ad during lockdown—thanks to more good luck, the clever use of material from the previous shoot and a good relationship with Murray.
How they did it: The stay-at-home, PSA-style messaging also allowed for some production savings.
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- It’s good that big brands like Verizon Communications Inc. And Unilever NV are pulling ads from Facebook Inc.
CONSTELLATION BRANDS, INC.
As my colleague Sarah Halzack has written, the way to make the adtech giant change its approach to tackling hate speech and misinformation is to target how it makes money. (A similar effort worked at Google’s YouTube unit.) But Mark Zuckerberg and co. Will still make $77 billion this year from advertisers. If brands really believe in this crusade, they should get off Facebook entirely.
On Thursday, Verizon became one of the biggest brands to announce it will pull ads from Facebook in July, joining the likes of Patagonia Inc. And Recreational Equipment Inc. in a month-long campaign called Stop Hate For Profit. The movement is being led by groups such as the Anti-Defamation League and Color of Change, and is channeling momentum of the Black Lives Matter movement to realize real change. On Friday, Ben & Jerry’s, Hellman’s and Dove parent Unilever announced it would halt ads on Facebook and Twitter Inc. In the U.S. For the rest of 2020.
It’s a commendable effort to force Facebook to remodel its practices, but there’s a business incentive too: An ad appearing alongside a conspiracy theory is not a good look, particularly if a slice of the revenue goes to the maker of the video. A group of brands with a combined advertising budget of $97 billion is already pushing for better controls. More of them should follow Verizon’s lead, not least the handful of other telecoms operators in the U.S.
Arguably, the main reason Verizon even needs to advertise on Facebook is because its rivals AT&T Inc. And T-Mobile U.S. Inc. Are both doing so too. Since competitive intensity has been significantly reduced by pandemic lockdowns, now seems a particularly good time for mobile operators to cut marketing spend.
If firms are serious about upping the pressure on Zuckerberg, however, they should abandon their presence on the social network completely by deleting their Facebook pages. That might seem like a brand cutting off its nose to spite its face, but as long as it has a Facebook page, then the advertising boycott looks like an empty threat.
That’s because the ad spend will ultimately return after the boycott. There’s little point in maintaining a corporate Facebook presence without paying to promote content, due to the limitations of what’s known as organic reach, or how many users see a post without a company or individual paying to get it in front of them. Without paid promotion, just 1% of a page’s followers are likely to see a given post, according to digital agency Jellyfish.
It wasn’t always this way. In the early days, Facebook lured brands by showing how many customers they could reach by setting up a page. Then the Menlo Park, California-based firm changed its algorithm so that very few people would see a company’s posts if it didn’t pay for promotion. It was the classic Silicon Valley bait-and-switch.
UniCredit SpA, Italy’s biggest bank, bit the bullet and ditched its Facebook presence a year ago. It had already stopped paying for Facebook ads, which meant that very few of the 546,000 followers of its UniCredit Italia page actually saw its content — perhaps just 5,500. Its resolve is so far holding: It hasn’t returned to the social network yet.
Being on Facebook can also present more of a risk than an opportunity, especially for an incumbent brand like a bank or telecoms giant. UniCredit’s followers probably represented a significant cross-section of its consumer banking customers, which therefore served as a handy list of people for challenger banks like N26 or Revolut to target with ads and try to steal away.
Plus, if a company has a Facebook page, it still has to regularly post new content and interact with customers — both of which cost money. If it doesn’t, the page will likely fill up with customer complaints, which would show up at the top of online search results. The business reasons for big-spending incumbents to leave Facebook might be almost as good as the ethical ones.
Zuckerberg needs financial incentives to be more proactive about managing content effectively, partially because his lodestar has long been user engagement. And more polarizing content drives more user engagement. The Wall Street Journal reported in May that a report commissioned by Facebook in 2018 found the platform often did aggravate polarization and tribal behavior, yet the firm decided not to tackle the issue.
Regulating content directly often means impinging on thorny free speech issues. It’s a troublesome affair. Far better to find market-based, commercial incentives that mean the issue must be taken seriously. Will enough brands use these to make a meaningful difference? Probably not, but they have the opportunity to give Facebook the firmer poke it needs.
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
Alex Webb is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering Europe's technology, media and communications industries. He previously covered Apple and other technology companies for Bloomberg News in San Francisco.
For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.Com/opinion
©2020 Bloomberg L.P.
How To Get Bill Murray To Star In Your Ad; Facebook Boycott Gets Serious: Friday’s First Things First
Welcome to First Things First, Adweek’s daily resource for marketers. We’ll be publishing the content to First Things First on Adweek.Com each morning (like this post), but if you prefer that it come straight to your inbox, you can sign up for the email here.
The Dixie Chicks Drop the “Dixie,” While Disney Plans a Splash Mountain Overhaul
In what’s been called a “diversity revolution,” brands and organizations are continuing to shed elements of their past that are still rooted in problematic racial stereotypes. Most notable in today’s news were two decisions from the entertainment world.
The Dixie Chicks elected to drop the “Dixie” portion of their name, making them just “The Chicks.” The country music group did so quietly and without any official announcement, simply posting a statement on their website saying, “We want to meet this moment.”
Meanwhile, Disney Parks’ Splash Mountain is getting a long-overdue overhaul. The ride’s story is currently based on The Song of the South, a movie that the company has long disavowed due to its setting in the Reconstruction Era South and its many slavery-era stereotypes. The “completely reimagined” ride will instead be themed after The Princess and the Frog, which features a Black heroine who is also an entrepreneur.
Influencer-Led Apparel Brands Seemed Like the Future, but Execution Is Proving Complicated
Successful influencers fronting apparel brands seems like a logical next step, but running a clothing line is no easy task, and it can be difficult to achieve major monetary success in today’s rocky retail landscape. The reward, influencers are finding, may not be worth the effort, especially if they already earn good money on content creation. Julia Berolzheimer, for example, decided to end her successful Gal Meets Glam Collection after complications and disagreements with wholesale partner Maggy London. When a brand invests in a collection, it expects a return on its investment, which means the influencer doesn’t call the shots anymore.
Inside the rift: Learn how the divergence between a brand’s goals and an influencer’s can ultimately drive them apart, plus other challenges these influencers face.
Why This Facebook Boycott Is Different
Major brands including The North Face, Verizon, Eddie Bauer, Upwork, Ben & Jerry’s and more have been piling onto an advertising boycott of Facebook for the entire month of July. Initiated by racial justice advocates, the #StopHateForProfit campaign seeks to pressure Facebook to do something about hate speech and misinformation by users and world leaders on the platform.
The difference: Facebook ad boycotts are nothing new, but this effort is shaping up to be larger and more unified than previous ones.
News & Updates from NewFronts
According to Hulu’s Julie DeTraglia, consumers consider these four key points when deciding whether to subscribe to another OTT offering: content, user experience, connection to the content and the brand, and price.
With a rise in YouTube viewership on connected TVs, the company talked up a feature allowing marketers to buy only on television screens.
More than half of young and middle-aged viewers don’t see any difference between connected TV and cable or satellite TV, according to a poll by Toluna and Tremor Video. In other words, they simply call whatever they’re watching on their big screens “TV.”
TikTok has released TikTok for Business for its advertiser offerings. The company’s presentation emphasized that brands need to understand the platform before running ads, hence its core slogan: “Don’t make ads, make TikToks.”
Xandr presented findings from a survey of video buyers showing that only half of all media-buying teams are truly converged once marketing campaigns move beyond the planning phase. CRO Jason Brown said the challenges of converged buying are “more organizational than they are individual.”
KitchenAid and Digitas revealed “A Woman’s Place,” an upcoming documentary that follows three female chefs trying to make it in a male-dominated industry.
Quantcast, which has traditionally provided analytics service to publishers, is now extending them to marketers, who can run queries about audience types, viewership habits and purchase history.
More of Today’s Top News and Highlights
Chrysler CMO Reveals How He Got Bill Murray to Agree to a Commercial for the Second Time
Jeep’s Groundhog Day Super Bowl spot with Bill Murray was an audience and media favorite. It almost didn’t air, with the pieces falling perfectly into place to make it a reality. Then, Murray returned for a trio of follow-up spots in April and May with quarantine spin. It just so happens that it’s really hard to get Murray to star in ads, much less contact the notoriously tech-phobic actor. But FCA CMO Olivier Francois pulled it off—not to mention the challenge of shooting an ad during lockdown—thanks to more good luck, the clever use of material from the previous shoot and a good relationship with Murray.
How they did it: The stay-at-home, PSA-style messaging also allowed for some production savings.
Comments
Post a Comment