[robomartin]

There's another element of this that, to this day, I don't fully understand: Companies subverting their brands and actually promoting facebook.

What do I mean by this? The other day we were watching TV and a Charmin ad comes in. At the end of the ad they actually say "go to facebook.com/charmin"

What? They have a perfectly good and highly recognizable brand. And, they happen to have a great URL: charmin.com. Why send traffic to Facebook and diminish or even completely fail to promote your own bran?

OK, the other question might be: Who is visiting a Facebook page for toilet paper. The point is that I've seen this many, many times from all kinds of companies.

Maybe someone can explain? Maybe this is just sheep following sheep off the cliff?

[whalesalad]

No no no. What the hell is anyone going to do on charmin.com??? Download a guide on how to wipe your ass? How often will you go there? Once? Never? Exactly. Facebook on the other hand... It's fresh and new. When people go there, they like it and then they're essentially subscribed. As many others have said, they have 300k likes. That means whenever they push something it shows up front and center on the first thing people do when: they wake up, when they're poopin, when they're in line for coffee... Etc... It's push not fetch.

[thwarted]

What is Charmin going to put in their Facebook feed that has recurring value? New research on the best way to wipe your ass? I'll continue to get that from charmin.com, rather than risk a charmin app that posts to my wall that tells people I just learned how to wipe my ass.

[calbear81]

Coupons and offers which are built into Facebook now. "calbear81 just claimed an offer for $10 off 24 pack of Ultra Soft Charmin toilet paper".

[sbt]

It's shit like this that makes me cautious about Facebook for anything these days. An online newspaper I read have pictures of people who have 'like'd their paper on the front page. I notified a few of my friends about this and they were horrified and proceeded to unlike the paper. But the greatest atrocity was committed by Spotify when they put Facebook publishing of songs you listen to on by default. Afaik, they have it off now, but even Spotify goes out of 'private mode' automatically after 5 hours of inactivity. What is the world coming to? I've been a semi-active FB user since 2004 but now I am paranoid about the way their tentacles are infesting every part of the web.

[bigtones]

This thread is hilarious - awesome work.

[ebf]

It's a Facebook page, not an app, so they won't post things to your wall. It seems they have contests and media on their page, as well as coupons. Those things will show on 300,000 Facebook newsfeeds. I'd say it's better to drive traffic to their Facebook page rather than http://www.charmin.com/ .

[betterth]

Right, but you will see their content in your feed, and I think that was the point of the comment.

[bobwaycott]

    thwarted just learned how to wipe his ass.
    -- via Charmin (like | share)

Brilliant. I laughed aloud. :)

[theycallmemorty]

The same thing they put on TV when my wife is watching the Big Bang Theory.

[callmeed]

"Who is visiting a Facebook page for toilet paper."

Well, 300,000 people LIKE it so something is going on.

Based on what little I've done in the social realm and what I've heard from SM consultants, these thoughts are in play:

- "Every brand has a Facebook page so we need one"

- "Our website is just pages and all we can do it update copy"

- "On Facebook we can distribute coupons, run contests, and get people to interact."

[bobwaycott]

How exactly can #3 not be accomplished on Brand X's website?

People can then post said coupons and contests to FB, where they can interact with each other, using Facebook, instead of Brand X's website.

Why does Brand X need the interaction to happen on their site? It's not like FB is some magical land of coupons and contests that could not have been offered before.

EDIT: Also, why on earth do 300,000 people like a TOILET PAPER page? Is TP really THAT incredible? What business value comes from 300K likes on FB?

[callmeed]

First, I don't disagree with anything you said. I just was trying to demonstrate how non-hackers and marketing types think.

To be honest, I think they see Facebook as almost an "end-around" to having to deal with internal IT/web folks.

[envex]

"How exactly can #3 not be accomplished on Brand X's website?"

I think the whole point is, if charmin posts a new coupon on their website -- only normal visitors will see it.

Charmin posts a new coupon on Facebook and 300k people instantly see it.

[snowwrestler]

Pushing people to Facebook does not subvert the Charmin brand because Charmin's product is not a website. Now if LinkedIn pushed people to "go to facebook.com/linkedin", that would subvert LinkedIn's brand. Which is of course why LinkedIn does not do that.

[stephengillie]

How different is it from saying "Charmin can be found at your local Safeway" at the end of the Charmin ad? Or having an ad for both Transformers and Ford? AOL keyword Pizza Hut?

Maybe it's a "recession thing" which some companies do to spend less, or maybe Facebook is viewed as a marketplace - a kind of "social mall" where tweens hack and network, much like a suburban mall in which teeny-boppers used to shoplift and gossip.

From a marketing perspective, why not have an FB page? You could fill it with the same messages as the rest of your advertising channels, maybe do more with it, and maybe some people actually want to post on your brand's wall.

[iamdave]

OK, the other question might be: Who is visiting a Facebook page for toilet paper.

Question of a generation. I've had this same question in my head for a while; yes-social media can give you a very unique perspective into your customer base by way of what they like, who they're influenced by, et al.

But should you? "Who is visiting a Facebook page for toilet paper" might right off the cuff seem like a short, witty dismissive remark about a brand of toilet paper to some, but with the right pair of eyes you're able to see the deeper question: Just because social media is there, does that necessitate moving your brand to it?

I agree with everything you just said robomartin.

[jacobwyke]

It's a case of making it easier to get the customers permission to market to them in the future. More people will "like" your page on Facebook with a single click, than visit your website and fill in a form.

[tsurantino]

I think this is really a consequence of the effect that Facebook is having on the web.

Facebook is a looming spectre of sorts. Normally, we would use a web browser/computer to view the web and network, but Facebook has such a broad mission and reach that now brands reduce their exposure to Facebook pages. Facebook has such a broad and commercially internalized reach (so many people know about Facebook now) that for the consumer, it's just easier. To a certain degree, the concept of a "website" is disappearing. This may be extreme though.

[hakaaak]

I'm not a fan of social login buttons, but I've visited a lot more brand pages on FB than I have product individual sites, usually because those FB pages are running a promotion where you "like" them and then fill in a form to get some product for free. Sometimes I'll unlike them afterwards, but sometimes I leave my "like" as-is. However, neither FB nor branded product sites have really influenced my purchasing decisions. What does? A product that I research via the web, consumer reports, or Amazon ratings and determine is good, a product that is on sale or is more attractive or just "looks" better (or maybe even has a higher price), and for services and applications, I do the same- look at reviews and determine if there is a free product or service that I feel comfortable using instead.

Marketing and ads are a HUGE con game, as people mostly ignore them.

[joeld42]

If someone LIKES it on facebook, they now have a direct, reusable channel to communicate with an interested customer. That's worth a lot more than a website visit.

[bobwaycott]

No, I think what you get is an easier channel to communicate with an interested customer, where "easier" is defined as "'interested' customer doesn't even have to visit our site and fill out a form to get an email ... we can just inject messaging into their feed".

Signing up for a coupon, contest, or other deals list via email is already the best direct, reusable channel. FB didn't improve this. They simply created a method whereby companies can take advantage of doing what email marketing does without ever having to ask the user for anything more than a click.

And still, this serves to cement FB's brand and position in the market far more than the interested company's, I think.

[djt]

People are spending a lot of money on Facebook promo these days.

I have a lot of people that tell me the number of likes on their business pages boosts their credibility etc.

[camwest]

They have 300k likes on Facebook. Go figure.