Reading Hearn's article brought to memory Aziz Ansari's brilliant look at how we behave today. It is no longer acceptable for us to merely go to the store and buy a toothbrush. We must spend hours agonizing over the best bristle material and softness, ergonomic design, colour; the brand has to give a toothbrush to a child in Africa ... As consumers, we demand the "best." However, who is to say what is truly the best? In most cases, we are simply giving into the hype of the best marketed toothbrush. Even 20 years ago, we would probably be swayed if our friend with the perfect teeth swore by G.U.M. products. So many people are deceived into thinking that social media makes everything more visible and transparent, making it easier for us to get the most of our money. Social marketing capitalizes on this seeming transparency in surprising and startling ways.
This morning, while scrolling through Facebook, I came across a post by a friend, who had tagged The Toronto Star. My friend was upset by a printing error that left 25% of today's crossword's clues unprinted. Almost immediately she received a reply from the newspaper, offering to send her the PDF of the complete crossword. Many of her friends lauded the Star's customer service skills. This is exactly what Hearn speaks of in how companies try their best in every way to "foster a community of loyal customers." She shared this post to her 200+ Facebook friends. I wonder how many of them saw the post, and told more people about the Star's prompt response.
In my experience, people use social media to either complain about something or say how great something is. If they're complaining, it's usually with the hope that they get a refund or some sort of feedback from the company. If it's to compliment, they're usually getting some sort of kickback (monetary or otherwise).
When and why did "good enough" become insufficient?
No comments:
Post a Comment