Well, despite the fuss, I doubt our friends at Facebook are too worried by GM pulling its ads. If it affects the price of their $96 Billion IPO by a few $100 millions well hey, they’ll grin and bear it, I’m guessing, from San Francisco to Singapore.
And you can’t blame GM for trying – ads seem to work most everywhere else online eg Google – so why not on Facebook?
Well, even assuming the ads are great and the products too, there ought to be some red faces in-house and at their agency for assuming that, because their ads are appealing that they are also therefore engaging. As others have pointed out, social networks are for people to connect and, although there is a high tolerance of brands, especially amongst younger Western cohorts, they are not the real thing. Indeed, it’s a bit like being stalked. So it’s interesting that GM still want to be ‘friends’ via non-ad content.
But why is Google making a mint and avoiding the flak re ads? Simply, search is a whole different ball game – I’m not here to ‘hang out’ , I am here to find something so if your ads help with that, fine by me. (Your algorithms, mind you, are another matter.)
Coincidentally, Twitter has reported that some 140 UK brands are ponying up £20,000 or more each to have their tweets promoted for a day. Stand by for similar criticism of Twitter once this intrusion – especially in a mobile space – turns negative for a big advertiser.