TigerTwoTiger: Social Media without conversation isn’t social media - take heed, Nintendo.
Albert_Maruggi
· 1 year ago
I don't disagree, but let me pose a couple.
1) is a blog without comments social media?
2) Is Nintendo missing out on social media with sites like Penguin Club and Webkinz
3) Isn't participation where your customers play a good entry into social media, eg. Coca-Cola in Facebook with things like Coke Tags.
enjoyed the post and following you on Twitter.
All the best
tigertwo
· 1 year ago
Great questions, Albert and I thank you for posing them. I am sure that we each have a perception about what social media is although there is no hard and fast rules. I am of the opinion that without the interaction then the 'social' part has been removed and it returns to just being 'media'. There is nothing wrong with that of course. Where I have the issue is when an organisation embarks on a campaign using an avowedly 'social' site, but switches off the functionality that makes it such.
I am sure others will disagree, but in my opinion, no, a blog without comments isn't social media. It is a diary or a series of articles which are being broadcast but which aren't encouraging the social and community aspect of blogging. That's not to say there isn't a place for a blog without comments - I have seen several (although often a forum is provided instead) but I don't think it can truly encourage a community. My feeling is that as soon as you take away the ability for the audience to directly contribute, then you are back to broadcast. The fact that someone can talk about that blog elsewhere and link to it doesn't make it social, otherwise every static website on the web would then be classed as social media.
It is interesting, as both of the sites you mention are 'social' in the respect that they allow user interaction with one another (albeit on a limited level) in a 'game style' location. Not having children, I am not entirely familiar with the sites but just looking through them I see how they offer that social side without putting children in danger of passing on personal information. I think that Nintendo could easily make use of this model and with the strength of their pre-existing characters, could probably do it very successfully. My feeling is they would do better with something like this, as the limitations of the sites may not breach their company policy on no blogs, forums etc. However, this kind of limitation would probably only work for the younger audience. If Nintendo wanted to offer a community type site for an older demographic, then I suspect it won't be very successful limiting conversation and they once again find themselves in a position where people can talk.
Yes, participation where your customers play is an excellent entry into social media, but I do feel that in order to do so, there needs to be some adherence to the 'rules' (I use that term very loosely). The problem is, social media can bring huge benefits but with it comes risk. That risk takes the form of letting go of a measure of control to your audience. You can't control their contributions and you can't control what they are going to say. All you can do is provide guidelines and ensure that you remain involved. I get the feeling that Nintendo did want to participate and gain the benefit but they aren't willing to accept the concomitant risk that goes with that participation. As such, perhaps they aren't really ready to get involved with social media yet. The value that can come out of user contribution has been lost, and therefore so has the social part of it.
Your questions have really given me cause to think, so thank you again for them. I'm a regular Marketing Edge podcast listener so your comments here are really appreciated.
Nick Stamoulis
· 1 year ago
They are probably scared to receive some negative feedback. I'm sure they have the money to hire a moderator to approve comments.
Webkinz For Sale
· 10 months ago
This is a bizarre move by Nintendo. Surely the whole point of using social media is to encourage communication and interaction. Nintendo have got things completely wrong by using it as way to broadcast their advertising campaigns.
servantofchaos
· 3 months ago
Social media means different things to different people - and while I prefer my social media to be participative, that is not the same for everyone. Seth Godin, for example, doesn't allow comments, but he is clearly an active social participant.
This effort from Nintendo isn't stellar - but it is a first step from which I hope they learn.
All Comments
1) is a blog without comments social media?
2) Is Nintendo missing out on social media with sites like Penguin Club and Webkinz
3) Isn't participation where your customers play a good entry into social media, eg. Coca-Cola in Facebook with things like Coke Tags.
enjoyed the post and following you on Twitter.
All the best
I am sure others will disagree, but in my opinion, no, a blog without comments isn't social media. It is a diary or a series of articles which are being broadcast but which aren't encouraging the social and community aspect of blogging. That's not to say there isn't a place for a blog without comments - I have seen several (although often a forum is provided instead) but I don't think it can truly encourage a community. My feeling is that as soon as you take away the ability for the audience to directly contribute, then you are back to broadcast. The fact that someone can talk about that blog elsewhere and link to it doesn't make it social, otherwise every static website on the web would then be classed as social media.
It is interesting, as both of the sites you mention are 'social' in the respect that they allow user interaction with one another (albeit on a limited level) in a 'game style' location. Not having children, I am not entirely familiar with the sites but just looking through them I see how they offer that social side without putting children in danger of passing on personal information. I think that Nintendo could easily make use of this model and with the strength of their pre-existing characters, could probably do it very successfully. My feeling is they would do better with something like this, as the limitations of the sites may not breach their company policy on no blogs, forums etc. However, this kind of limitation would probably only work for the younger audience. If Nintendo wanted to offer a community type site for an older demographic, then I suspect it won't be very successful limiting conversation and they once again find themselves in a position where people can talk.
Yes, participation where your customers play is an excellent entry into social media, but I do feel that in order to do so, there needs to be some adherence to the 'rules' (I use that term very loosely). The problem is, social media can bring huge benefits but with it comes risk. That risk takes the form of letting go of a measure of control to your audience. You can't control their contributions and you can't control what they are going to say. All you can do is provide guidelines and ensure that you remain involved. I get the feeling that Nintendo did want to participate and gain the benefit but they aren't willing to accept the concomitant risk that goes with that participation. As such, perhaps they aren't really ready to get involved with social media yet. The value that can come out of user contribution has been lost, and therefore so has the social part of it.
Your questions have really given me cause to think, so thank you again for them. I'm a regular Marketing Edge podcast listener so your comments here are really appreciated.
This effort from Nintendo isn't stellar - but it is a first step from which I hope they learn.