<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is It Surprising that P&amp;G, Tide Struggle with Facebook Advertising?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ryanspoon.com/blog/2008/12/13/is-it-surprising-that-pg-tide-struggle-with-facebook-advertising/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ryanspoon.com/blog/2008/12/13/is-it-surprising-that-pg-tide-struggle-with-facebook-advertising/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 14 Mar 2010 06:26:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: freeware</title>
		<link>http://ryanspoon.com/blog/2008/12/13/is-it-surprising-that-pg-tide-struggle-with-facebook-advertising/comment-page-1/#comment-8378</link>
		<dc:creator>freeware</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jan 2009 00:13:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ryanspoon.com/blog/2008/12/13/is-it-surprising-that-pg-tide-struggle-with-facebook-advertising/#comment-8378</guid>
		<description>i think that facebook is one megasite that shouldn&#039;t really become an advertising network</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i think that facebook is one megasite that shouldn&#39;t really become an advertising network</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan Salem Baskin</title>
		<link>http://ryanspoon.com/blog/2008/12/13/is-it-surprising-that-pg-tide-struggle-with-facebook-advertising/comment-page-1/#comment-8202</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan Salem Baskin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Dec 2008 17:08:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ryanspoon.com/blog/2008/12/13/is-it-surprising-that-pg-tide-struggle-with-facebook-advertising/#comment-8202</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m with you, but it&#039;s hard to truly analyze the Facebook situation (or social media in general) if we&#039;re still using old definitions and metrics for branding.  Ultimately, &#039;brands&#039; don&#039;t matter much anymore...they were always shorthand for the knowledge, conversation, authenticity, and all the other attributes that were once impossible (mass media, one-way communication) but are now central to social media.  &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;So the very premise that ANY brand would accomplishing anything online without addressing those substantive qualities (however creatively and entertainingly, of course) is probably the WRONG place to start any campaign development (or analysis).  &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#039;Works&#039; needs some defining, too, doesn&#039;t it?  I&#039;d offer that it means SALES.  Everything is is a nice prelude or suggestion, but there are a lot of marketers who are going to find themselves out of a job once the holidays are over...having brilliantly delivered on one or more of the made-up metrics for brand value, yet failed to address anything measurable that matters to the reality of business.  The connection to selling can be multi-faceted, sometimes indirect, and even imprecise, but there needs to be a line and some math that connects ANY effort -- including conversational nonsense on Facebook -- with an ultimate business outcome.  &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I thought Randall&#039;s comments were spot-on.  So is his fiction writing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#39;m with you, but it&#39;s hard to truly analyze the Facebook situation (or social media in general) if we&#39;re still using old definitions and metrics for branding.  Ultimately, &#39;brands&#39; don&#39;t matter much anymore&#8230;they were always shorthand for the knowledge, conversation, authenticity, and all the other attributes that were once impossible (mass media, one-way communication) but are now central to social media.  </p>
<p>So the very premise that ANY brand would accomplishing anything online without addressing those substantive qualities (however creatively and entertainingly, of course) is probably the WRONG place to start any campaign development (or analysis).  </p>
<p>&#39;Works&#39; needs some defining, too, doesn&#39;t it?  I&#39;d offer that it means SALES.  Everything is is a nice prelude or suggestion, but there are a lot of marketers who are going to find themselves out of a job once the holidays are over&#8230;having brilliantly delivered on one or more of the made-up metrics for brand value, yet failed to address anything measurable that matters to the reality of business.  The connection to selling can be multi-faceted, sometimes indirect, and even imprecise, but there needs to be a line and some math that connects ANY effort &#8212; including conversational nonsense on Facebook &#8212; with an ultimate business outcome.  </p>
<p>I thought Randall&#39;s comments were spot-on.  So is his fiction writing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Three Reasons Facebook Doesn&#8217;t Work for Brands &#187; RyanSpoon.com</title>
		<link>http://ryanspoon.com/blog/2008/12/13/is-it-surprising-that-pg-tide-struggle-with-facebook-advertising/comment-page-1/#comment-8200</link>
		<dc:creator>Three Reasons Facebook Doesn&#8217;t Work for Brands &#187; RyanSpoon.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Dec 2008 05:42:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ryanspoon.com/blog/2008/12/13/is-it-surprising-that-pg-tide-struggle-with-facebook-advertising/#comment-8200</guid>
		<description>[...] I was unsurprised that P&amp;G was struggling to advertise on Facebook, 247WallStreet was convinced. Their reaction to the New York Times piece illustrating the struggles [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] I was unsurprised that P&#38;G was struggling to advertise on Facebook, 247WallStreet was convinced. Their reaction to the New York Times piece illustrating the struggles [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
