The great viral marketing hoax

Share this post

All marketers want their product or service to go viral and spread through social networks through word of mouth.  One senses that the accepted wisdom is that to achieve this you need to align the interests of friends, ie you need to get friends liking the same thing and therefore spreading it through their personal networks.

New Harvard research suggests this might not be the case.  The research followed the Facebook activity of over 1,500 college students to see how they behaved and how ideas and products flowed through the group. They found that peer influence was not very important at all when it comes to spreading tastes throughout social networks.  The key to how easily things spread is instead influenced by how people became friends in the first place.  The only exception to this rule were the sophisticated followers of jazz and classical music.

This warrants further attention.  After all, if ideas don't spread via our friendships it must cast significant doubt on our traditional notions around viral marketing.  Of course this isn't to say that ideas don't spread virally through social networks, merely that the suggestion is that this is not down to friendships.

 “How many of our close friends’ tastes don’t we share? How many friends of ours have tastes that we don’t know about or pay attention to at all? And of those tastes that we do share with our friends, how much of that is a consequence of diffusion and how much of that is because those shared tastes were part of the reason we became friends in the first place?” the researchers said.

All of which must surely strike a blow to any marketer that claims they can turn on the viral tap at their will.  It suggests that people don't really spread ideas and interests through their social network.  Instead they use social media to befriend people with the same interests as them.

Whilst this might strike a blow for pretensions of viral wizardry it certainly doesn't suggest that social media is useless for business purposes.  Far from it in fact.  Rather than looking at who influences who however the focus should turn instead to who knows who.  The researchers suggest that it's our social graph that is of value to brands as it provides a clear picture of just who we all are.  Because our friends tend to mirror ourselves this has the outcome of amplifying our personalities to watching marketers.

So rather than giving us new markets to plunder, it instead gives us a much better picture of the markets we already have.

7 thoughts on “The great viral marketing hoax

  1. That kinda makes sense. I've always thought that we seek out people that are like us rather than fresh ideas seeking us out.

    If that is true though I'd imagine that making virals would be quite easy. After all, you just need to find people that:

    a) like your stuff
    b) have big followings

    then they're likely to share it with their followers/friends, who according to this will be like them so they'll like it too, right?

    • I think that's the traditional view Nick, but the research suggests that people are friends because they already like the same things, thus ideas/memes don't spread through friendship groups.

      It suggests that the notion of viral marketing is far more complex and uncertain than many would have you believe.

  2. I'd love to see the 'success ratio' of many of these so called viral marketing experts. I suspect they achieve one great results and then trade off it forever after.

  3. Of course it doesn't stop people thinking certain people have the keys to the kingdom.
    http://adage.com/article/the-viral-video-chart-we

    Wieden & Kennedy, the creative force behind the "New Old Spice Guy" campaign and Chrysler's "Imported from Detroit" ad, was the top viral-marketing agency of 2011. The firm's social-video hits combined humor and visceral appeal to draw more than 191 million combined views, more than double the total achieved by second-place Deutsch, which was responsible for Volkswagen's "The Force" ad.

    • Quite. I think they'll need a few more hits before we can say they have cracked viral with any kind of statistical confidence.

  4. Pingback: 500 days of summer, luck and viral marketing | Adi Gaskell says...

  5. Pingback: Why it’s better for your tweets to be lucky than great | Adi Gaskell says...

Leave a Reply

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

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>