Read Douglas Holt's article, Branding in the Age of Social Media, published in the Harvard Business Review. Use the comments section to respond to the following:
1. What is the difference between crowdculture and mass-culture?
2. How has social media weakened the power of branded content from advertisers?
3. What effect has crowdculture had on art worlds? And how has this contributed to the failure of brand bureaucracies?
4. Holt calls for social media campaigns to shift from branded content to cultural branding. Explain what this means.
1. The difference between crowdculture and mass-culture is that, Crowdculture changes the rules of branding; which techniques work and which do not. Mass-culture is the set of ideas and values that develop from a common exposure to the same media, news sources, music, and art.
ReplyDelete2. Social media has weakened the power of branded content from advertisers by the rise of new technologies that allowed audiences to opt out of ads from cable networks to DVRs and then the internet made it much harder for brands to buy fame. Consumers have little interest in the content that brands put out. Very few people want it in their feed. Most view it as clutter as brand spam.
3. Crowdculture has turbocharged art worlds, vastly increasing the number of participants and the speed and quality of their interactions.
4. Axe, Old Spice, and Dove broke through in social media because they used cultural branding, a strategy that works differently from the conventional branded-content model. Such opportunities come into view only if we use the prism of cultural branding doing research to identify ideologies that are relevant to the category and gaining traction in crowdcultures.
1. Crowdculture works like a regular crowd funding platform* except for the fact that cultural workers also can seek financing from public funds through the system, digital powers, while mass culture is broadcast or otherwise distributed to individuals instead of arising from their day-to-day interactions with each other.
ReplyDelete2. He uses celebrities as an example by saying "celebrities are all garnering the superengaged community that pundits have long promised social media would deliver. But it’s not available to companies and their branded goods and services." People can't interact with products but they can with celebrities.
3. It has turbocharged the art world by vastly increasing the number of participants and the speed and quality of their interactions. Brand bureaucracies excel at coordinating and executing complex marketing programs across multiple markets around the world. But this organizational model leads to mediocrity when it comes to cultural innovation.
4. Holt pretty much wants and thinks companies do not need to use Facebook and other similar cites and instead creating their own "toward the real locus of digital power—crowdcultures."
1 Mass culture is the production and broadcasting of traditional mass media like news, music and art, through platforms like radio, television, newspapers etc. Crowdculture is different in that it includes the current trends and subcultures that are popular now, curated by digital users. The digital crowds are the innovators; creating, reviewing, remaking and evaluating content on digital platforms. Those crowds end up determining what cultural content becomes well-known.
ReplyDelete2 Social media makes it relatively easy for users to navigate the web ad-free. Since digital users can opt out of seeing ads, branding companies are forced to become users themselves and make content that they hope will catch the attention of the crowds as a new form of advertisement.
3 Through crowdculture, the number of participants in the art world cultures and subcultures has grown immensely. Ability to collaborate with others has become quicker, easier, and better overall, creating lots of great content that the masses of social media users love. Brand bureaucracies are talented at marketing, but not so much at cultural innovation. Most people of the internet view the content that brands create online as clutter and brand spam.
4 Majority of digital participants would rather not see branded content. The method by which campaigns can continue to advertise on social media is through cultural branding. “By targeting novel ideologies, brands can stand out.” If they pay attention to the current trends of crowdculture, and implement those ideas into videos or other media to post, their content has more of a chance of becoming popular.
1. In crowdculture digital crowd can effect and change culture. Mass culture is a set of values that emerge through media. Crowdculture also effects branding and determines what will work and what won’t.
ReplyDelete2. Anyone can now create content, and so people are less interested in the content that brands make. There is now content in almost any genre you can think of, and it can be produced for cheap.
3. Crowdculture has essential supercharged art worlds by allowing more people to communicate and collaborate with greater speed and quality, and by making it easier to create content.
4. Holt is saying that instead of just creating content companies should target these crowdcultures that are emerging, and to back up and promote the ideas of these crowdcultures.
1. Crowdculture is based on cultural innovations, where participants work together to generate creative breakthroughs, while mass-culture is a set of ideas and values from the same media with a more individual approach.
ReplyDelete2. Social media allows people to get what they want faster. They can connect with other communities and be part of cultural innovations, where brand content is not relevant anymore. As the article says, is more difficult for brands ”to buy fame” because what matters now, is direct and substantial cultural influence.
3. The effect of crowdculture on art worlds “is a new mode of rapid cultural prototyping”, where people can get many constructive critiques that help them to enhance their work, which later will be appreciated for others. All these in a cheap way. This effect of crowdculture on art world has contributed to the failure of brand bureaucracies because companies got stuck on promoting brand content, investing lots of money on its design and without thinking in culture facts.
4. This shift means that brand content is and old way to attract attention of consumers because they are not interested anymore in content. Now, is more effective creating social media campaigns based on cultural innovations.
1. Mass culture is the use of advertising across a broad population of people, through the use of telephone, newspaper, television and the internet.
ReplyDeleteCrowd-culture is the strategy of advertising through the use of trends on the digital mainstream.
2. Social media has created a platform for people to create and navigate intellectual property and information. The issue with this, for branding, is that there is no longer a need to see branded commercials in order to see what you want to see. One can simply scroll down, click next, or exit out of any brand that a company so desperately wants you to see.
3. Crowdculture has enhanced the art world of new ideas and innovations. This enables people to collaborate with others all around the world, which would have otherwise not been possible. This being said, brand bureaucracies are failing because no one is interested in a one sided vision or opinion. Cultural innovation has changed in such a drastic measure. The only way branding will appear to the common viewers eye, can only be done through innovating branding itself.
4. Holt states that in order for social media branding to be successful, advertisers must use cultural norms to engage the audience. For example, in order for Sprite to have a successful ad, they can't just say "Here, drink sprite". There must be something that triggers the audiences eye, whether it be humor, common similarity, or a call to action.
1) Crowd Culture is more informal since its based on cultural movements, trends and whatever is popular at the moment and Mass culture is more of a formal approach to broadcasting media through newspapers and television.
ReplyDelete2) Social media provides the option to avoid advertisements. Having this option can be an extreme threat to the advertising world. in social media, ad's have become more of an annoyance than an opportunity to sell.
3)Crowd culture provided more participants to the art world and influenced the speed and quality of their interactions making colloborations easier and more efficient.
4) I think what holt is trying to get accrossed is that advertising needs to step its game up with more relatable and clever ways to catch peoples attention. Instead of using old school methods of promoting product sales, maybe to embark on a more innovatative artistic way to achieve success.
1. Crowdculture changes the rules of branding- which techniques work and which do not. Mass culture is production and broadcasting such as film,television, radio,print media, fashion, etc.
ReplyDelete2. Branded content bass been weakened so much that consumers have little interest in the content that brands churn out. Very few people want it in their feed. Most view it as clutter-as brand spam.
3. Because consumers have little interest in the content that brands churn out. The problem companies face is structural, not creative. Big companies organize their marketing efforts as the antithesis of art worlds, "Brand Bureaucracies". They excel at coordinating and executing complex marketing programs across multiple markets around the world. But this organizational model leads to mediocrity when it comes to cultural innovation.
4. Companies need to shift their focus away from the platforms themselves and toward the real locus of digital power—crowdcultures. They are creating more opportunities than ever for brands. Simply put, we don't need the Facebooks, Youtubes, etc. There are many strategic ways to become successful and tap into an audience with good products and communication that speaks to them.
1. I understand these concepts, crowsculture and mass-culture, as kind of opposite terms because crowdculture is like a subculture created by individuals that influences in the today’s society due to the development of the social media, and conversely, mass culture is the set and broadcasting of ideas that develop from a common exposure to the same media, sources, music, art, etc.
ReplyDelete2. Social media has induced the birth of crowdculture and crowdculture superimposes the branded content. Internet and social media consumers have found more interesting the development of their projects, believes, ideas and cultures, even dreams, where the brands cannot compete. Most of all, because their activity in social media have a totally different objective, the commercial vs. the experiential of the crowdculture, which is so much money, knowledge and time for companies.
3. Crowdculture makes that art world evolves, innovates, changes, grows and interacts more than never seen before.
About the failure of brand bureaucracies, I could not explain it better: “The problem companies face is structural, not creative. Big companies organize their marketing efforts as the antithesis of art worlds, in what I have termed brand bureaucracies. They excel at coordinating and executing complex marketing programs across multiple markets around the world. But this organizational model leads to mediocrity when it comes to cultural innovation.”
4. Holt deeply analyses and explains that branded content is not providing of the good outcomes that big companies would deserve with the amounts of money they are investing in branded content. There is something (crowdcurture) that is demising the impact of branded content. As consequence, he proposes this shift in creating content with impact going through the crowdculture, called Cultural Branding.
1. Crowd Culture: Is what the digital culture and crowds have developed through social media and changed the rules of branding.
ReplyDeleteMass Culture: is broadcasting from the same art forms and culture.
2. Social media has weakened the power of advertising branding due to the fact that there is more competition and the platforms they were displayed, given sponsoring a movie or on tv and before things were streamed online.
3. Art worlds have become way more collaborative and easy to get into, increasing the number of participants in the art forms. There is no longer limitations to culture or geography with the development of the online world. This hurt branding because many subcultures formed and developed strong followings on social media, appearing more than corporate brands.
4. Holt explains how brands are being crushed by crowdculture and losing all the money they are putting into the corporate branding. He says that these corporate branders should be like Chipotle and start Cultural branding, meaning finding a crowdculture target and market towards them on social media.
1. Crowd culture incubates new ideologies and practices, and break new ground in entertainment. Crowd culture allows you to see what branding works and what does not through a digital crowd.Whereas Mass culture is more formal and traditional broadcasting.
ReplyDelete2.Consumers have little interest in brands on social media. Not many people want it in their feed, and it is viewed as clutter or as brand spam.Facebook realized this, and it began charging companies to get sponsored content into the feeds, also it is extremely easy for digital crowds to work around advertisement.
3.Art Worlds is vastly increasing the number of participants and the speed and quality of their interactions, cultural entrepreneurs come together online to hone their craft, exchange ideas, fine-tune their content, and compete to produce hits.Because this rapid amount of pop culture is coming and going so quickly and there is mass amounts of it, making it harder to brand your content or yourself .
4. Cultural branding in a way involves listening and by listening I mean listening to what people are saying and not traditionally branding but taking cultural innovation and combining it with your brand.
1. The difference between crowdculture and mass-culture is that crowdculture refers to digital crowds who innovate culture and decide if a company’s branding techniques will or won’t work. Mass-culture is culture that is created and distributed by mass media industries. Crowdculture is created by individuals whereas mass-culture is created by corporations.
ReplyDelete2. Social media has weakened the power of branded content because it gives a voice to the individual which allows for a more fair playing field in terms of social media success, instead of having companies overpower everyone else. It’s also much easier on the internet than on other forms of media, to ignore or block brands and advertisements from infiltrating your space.
3. Crowdculture has completely changed and expanded art worlds because of the amount of people now that have access online to communicate with others and collectively create something. This contributes to the failure of brand bureaucracies because now companies have to simultaneously compete with and advertise to crowdculture, when they are already, for the most part, an annoyance on social media.
4. Shifting from branded content to cultural branding means that companies should look towards connecting to cultural trends and ideologies, and evolving with crowdculture in order to better engage with its targeted audience.
1. With crowd-culture, crowds are viewed as servers who are very effective and prolific innovators of culture. Douglas Holt describes crowd-culture as changing the rules of branding. Mass culture instead is a set of ideas from the same source of media but with a
ReplyDelete2. With so many options to stream and the ability to skip advertisements, it’s becoming difficult for companies to brand their products. Online users dislike so many advertisements throughout their TV watching or while using social media.
3. Crowdculture has made it much easier for artists to collaborate with other artists in far off places. With crowdculture, these artists are able to help and play off each others ideas and make new things. Holt explains how mass-culture industries thrived by taking and recreating artists’ innovations. He explains with no longer needing to be part of a “local scene”, millions of people use the online world to create their own things. It is cheaply produced, all of this content.
4. Advertisers must keep up with the times. They are slow in the upkeep of what it culturally trending and have a hard time relating to their intended audience. With cultural branding, they can be recognized more and can gain more attention.
1.corwd culture is the crowed is viewed as our demographic that we want we the demographic of the crowd at a current time so like at a concert maybe 200 people. who ever mass culture refers to the culture of a mass number of people. and is more media based.
ReplyDelete2. with somany options for viewers like streaming tv sometimes on demand were you c an fast forward through a commercial. so advertisers have to work harder to brand and grab your attention.
3. artists now have a choice and a say who there advertisers are because of crowd culture now an artist can select a certain advertiser who will appeal more to his audience.
4. some advertisers need to keep up with what's relevant and important. stop wasting our time with advertisements that have no appeal to use as a whole group or on 10 percent of us care about.