Multinationals resist the business logic behind Facebook ads.
Organizers of Facebook's ad boycott are now planning to expand the Stop Hate campaign globally, further forcing the social media company to remove extremist comments. Since the campaign launched earlier this month, more than 160 companies, including Coca-Cola and Unilever, have agreed to suspend advertising on Facebook in July. The boycott has also spread to other digital advertising platforms such as Twitter. Starbucks recently said it would suspend advertising on all social media platforms to "stop the spread of hate speech."
On the face of it, this is the company in order to show their attitude. But I think there's a business logic that works, it's also related to the special attributes of social media advertising, and even, it reflects a contradiction that social media (including WeChat, Voice, etc.) can face in front of traffic and advertising.
In other words, extreme speech is not limited to social media, but why do advertisers start by taking a shot at social media?
For digital marketing advertising, the main forms of display ads, search engine ads, video ads and social media advertising and so on. Where display ads and search engine ads in the marketing content display, the marketing content related to the page information content is known.
Advertisers can make presentation requests to websites and media platforms according to page content. For example, advertisements related to wedding products and services should never appear on news pages involving death, terror and accidents to avoid negative association with the brand.
But social media platforms are precisely unmanageable at this point, because the content on the platform is user-generated, resulting in a reading experience that is often unknown. Even the use of artificial intelligence technology is currently unable to determine the inclination of much of the content on social media, especially when it comes to a lot of abbreviations, slang and context.
For example, if you are brushing a friend's circle, with two pieces of implicit spitting information, with an enterprise advertisement in the middle, and it is related to this information, then the effect of the advertisement is likely to backfire.
And such uncertainty is precisely the natural enemy of advertising.
What would happen if Unilever's whitening shower gel ad appeared in a flood of anti-color discrimination tweets? So readers for Unilever hastened to announce the renaming of its whitening products, the use of "bright" and other statements should be very understanding of it. This is not a statement, but a concern that similar product advertising and page content in sharp contrast, corporate brands are "fishanded."
After all, at such an extraordinary time, it is almost impossible to avoid the relevant page content. This is a problem for user-generated content (UGC) platforms. Of course, this is also a double-edged sword, because the audit is too strict, will affect their own traffic, so this is the social media advertising business model paradox.
Similar problems have already appeared on YouTube. Like Facebook, the vast majority of content on YouTube is user-generated.
In 2017, media outlets discovered that some of the ads of well-known brands had been placed in pre-advertising positions in pro-extremism videos, prompting many companies to remove ads from YouTube. At its peak, there were as many as 250 advertisers who boycotted YouTube, including McDonald's, PepsiCo, Wal-Mart, Starbucks, AT?T, Verizon, Johnson and Johnson, Audi and Volkswagen.
So, from a purely commercial point of view, if social media platforms don't try to control the management of content on their platforms, they will "pollute" their traffic, further affecting advertisers' marketing efforts, and ultimately leading advertisers away.
However, this is another double-edged sword, and extremely strict measures against content can lead users to switch to other platforms.
From the platform's point of view, how to balance the conflict between user expression and content management, this is a must face the problem, technical means may be able to help. In essence, the emergence of these statements is not the platform's responsibility (and certainly not the advertiser's), but the embodiment of social contradictions.
But in any case, advertisers have used their money to show their attitude. In business, practice seems to be that not many businessmen are willing to be entangled in political and social issues, advertisers don't want to, and social media platforms don't want to.
However, the impact on domestic social networking platforms is clearly not serious, as each platform spends a lot of resources on the advance management of user-generated content.
Go to "Discovery" - "Take a Look" to browse "Friends are watching"
send to have a look.