Going viral vs creating a meaningful relationship

“‘Going viral is diametrically opposed to building that trust and relationship between a media property and an audience.  Brands spend all this time thinking about how to make something go viral when they ought to think about how to create a meaningful relationship.’” – Jim Louderback in the New York Times

Comments

  1. bcroke says

    I think this is a great quote Dave, thanks for sharing.

    To some extent I think you can have your cake and eat it to. For example if you create content that is easily sharable, or provides your audience with a reason they would want to share it can have a bit of "viral" built in.

    Sure there is the shallow, black swan viral hits like "the bed intruder song", but hopefully brands understand the difference between "viral comedy" and authentically remarkable content.

  2. says

    I think this needs to be caveated with Alan Wolk's Prom King Brands concept. If you have a brand where it might make sense to cultivate a relationship then more power to you – go do it. If you are Swingline it doesn't matter how cool you are, no one wants a relationship. In the Swingline case, great go viral, promote some freakish ability your staplers have or just have fun with some over the top superiority claims and raise awareness of your brand.

  3. Rob Wolfe says

    Great quote, I agree. But the NY Times article (http://nyti.ms/9dz45r ) captures how you can build meaningful relationships with customers and build a brand using a viral marketing approach. I think it's a matter of making “viral” part of the overall integrated marketing strategy, rather than just thinking about how to make something “go viral.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *