Leveraging the social media paradox
Erik Qualman: "We don’t have a choice on whether we do social media, the question is how well we do it?"
Sometimes it pays to be a contrarian. During the Second World War, the US Air Force employed Abraham Wald, a statistician, to determine where to place reinforcing armor on bombers. The bombers were heavy aircraft so additional armor could only be used selectively and Wald’s job was to identify the most vulnerable spots. He analyzed damage on planes returning from bombing raids and identified the most frequently hit areas. Then he recommended armor be placed everywhere else.
Why?
Given that the planes he inspected had withstood being hit in the areas that he saw were damaged, planes hit elsewhere didn’t make it home.
It’s essential to maintain critical thinking and to consider contrary viewpoints when we use statistics, especially to understand social media. Numerous studies have tried to identify the “value of a Facebook fan” or the ROI of social media campaigns, but most studies measure ROI as the difference in consumption between fans and non-fans. Thinking contrarily, we should consider that the more someone consumes a brand, the more likely they are to become a fan. Correlation doesn’t imply causation.
The IPA landmark study, ‘New Models of Advertising Effectiveness,’ a meta-analysis of 254 campaigns concluded that “participation-led campaigns are good at market share defense but little else.
