It seems this is a chicken or egg conversation at first blush. Do you need great content to stimulate conversation or can you generate quality conversation around mediocre content? That topic has been covered ad nausem for the past 2 years and it seems to be circular for sure.
This chat however, focuses on the value of social media for business. Are businesses more effective leading with quality content to genereate “buzz” or conversation around that content or are they better off simply being accessible to host any conversation? A couple of examples:
1. Was Domino’s video response (content) to the prank video effective? For a Fortune class company to go from zero to Internet speed in 48 hours was fairly impressive. The response was heartfelt from the President and seemed to subdue the incident. They tried to start a Twitter account but had little success from that effort.
2. I would argue that Zapposdoes not create much quality content, period. The employees of Zappos, however, are the most accessible in business and the results speak for themselves. Zappos’ value was created from a solid business model and more importantly great customer service.
As a company today, there are many ways to promote your Brand, improve customer service, address communications issues and generally run your business using social media. Does it start with content or conversation though? To help us this week is the Queen of Content, the Diva of Discussion, the Master of Annarchy, Ann Handley! Ann heads up all things content and conversation for MarketingProfs and is certainly the best person for this job. This week’s discussion will follow:
Content or Conversation. What drives more value for businesses?
1. Is social media about the art of conversation or the science of creating good content?
2. What drives conversion (assuming businesses need to generate profits)? Content or conversations?
3. Develop a blueprint to sustain either (content strategy or conversation) long term.
This chat will take place Tuesday 8/4 noon EST using the #socialmedia in Twitter or simply following the Live page on this site.
why is this constructed as an either or? isn’t it both. they guys at tippingpoint labs discuss this in a recent post
http://blog.tippingpointlabs.com/2009/07/social-media-experts-dont-understand-social-media/
from the post “Without content, conversation is mere networking. Without conversation, content is dead. It goes nowhere.”
looking forward to the discussion
Greg,
You have the gist of reason for this discussion. So many companies look to social media initiatives with blinders. They apply tools and have an intern post messages. The point of this is that without either content or conversation, then a company is only putting forth half an effort. I’m sure there are people in both sides of the camp that will argue to have one you don’t need the other. That is the where the good nuggets come from is a healthy discussion in working through this topic. thanks for the feedback! Keep it coming.
Greg and Jason,
Nice discussion starting here and I think that the difference in opinion probably lies in the fact that content can drive a discussion while a conversation can drive content. You probably have to do a bit of both to be really effective.
I just re-read that and it reads like one of those “ancient Chinese proverbs” that doesn’t mean much when you think about it… or does it?
Anyway, quality content proves that you’re an authority. While quality conversation gives you street cred. That’s my opinion.
Thanks guys for the discussion (and the quality content.)
Have a great weekend.