Why “Like” Is a Four-Letter Word
“Like” is the four-letter word that outdoes them all.
I’ve been trying to figure out why I reacted so strongly to Facebook’s announcement that their “like” button is the new green.
OK, they didn’t exactly say that, but that’s what it amounts to, doesn’t it?
From now on, you won’t be able to “fan” a page on Facebook, you’ll “like” it. (Hello, Mashable, didn’t you get the memo?) You won’t become the fan of a brand, you’ll “like” it.
Image: Alba Danés, Creative Commons
When you go to CNN.com, for example, you’ll be able to see what other people have “liked;” when you shop, you’ll be able to see what your “friends” “like.” And so on and so on, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.
The best commentary I’ve found to date on this development is Robert Scoble’s. If you haven’t already, you should read it.
I get the pros for businesses and the cons for individuals. Heck, Google’s already taken over the world, why shouldn’t Facebook have its shot at it? So I’m not really going to bother with the whys and wheretofors of it. It’s here and it’s probably not going anywhere.
What sticks in my craw a bit is how ubiquitous the word “like” – and its implications thereof – has become.
Where did our passion go?
As a consumer, I don’t “like” Elvis. I LOVE Elvis. And Elvis Presley Enterprises benefits.
As an independent PR practitioner, I don’t “like” Tungle. I ♥ it big time. And Tungle benefits.
As a content-sharer, I don’t “like” Google Buzz, even though it forces me to use the word to signify appreciation for something someone’s shared. I hate it. And Google… well, Google doesn’t really care what I think.
Certainly, Facebook didn’t invent “like.” Stumbleupon‘s been doing that for a while, though at least they had the decency to add an exclamation point after, thereby giving it some pizazz.
But if all we’re going to do is get folks to “like” stuff, then we PR and marketing practitioners have our work cut out for us.
Because we need our audiences to do more than “like” us/our clients; we need them to be so motivated that they’ll actually DO something, whether it’s share, email, sign up, buy, donate, or take whatever action(s) it is we need them to take.
Apparently I’m not the only one who feels this way. Here’s what some of my Tweeps had to say:
To me, “like” is the four-letter word worse than many other four-letter words. Because it’s just… so… insipid, as Kathy Moore tweeted.
Seriously, with all the brainpower at its disposal, could Facebook not have come up with something better?
My friend Desi del Valle summed it up best in an email. She gave me permission to share this with you, so here it is:
What say you?
Of Cabbages and Kings and Measuring PR
We kicked off our first Twitterchat on measuring public relations yesterday, with the “queen of measurement” herself, Katie Paine. From 12-1 pm EST, we had an incredibly lively and vibrant discussion that surprised even me, the organizer – and I should know not to be surprised by anything on Twitter by now!
You might wonder why I borrowed from “The Walrus and the Carpenter” in titling this post. The thing is, Mr. Carroll’s poem is so full of beautiful whimsy, I can’t help but think it reflects some of the chaos we are still dealing with when it comes to measuring PR.
I write and speak often on this but really… why are we still going round and round in circles about something like AVE (ad value equivalency) which is essentially a measure of output when we know what’s really important to the C-suite is focusing on outcomes? Fortuitously, I stumbled across Pritesh Patel’s post on the subject of AVE as I was pulling this recap together, so do give it a read.
If I have one mantra when it comes to measurement – that’s it. Outcomes outcomes outcomes. Repeat after me: OUTCOMES.
But this recap isn’t (just) about me. So in that vein, here’s Sean Williams’ recap, which also looks at the AVE debate (or paroxysm, as he calls it). Below are some of the highlights of the chat, and you can find the entire transcript here.
The four questions posed were:
- What are the most common mistakes in measuring PR?
- How does a newbie get started in “smart” measurement?
- How has the PR measurement landscape changed over the years, or has it?
- Can you recommend some educational resources?
Here are just a few of the gems, and not just from Katie:
And those are just a few. I do hope you’ll read the transcript and share your thoughts via a comment below, or on Twitter using the #measurepr hashtag.
Katie – thank you so much for kicking off the inaugural #measurepr chat; I hope you’ll be back often as the featured guest!
A quick note on how we’ll proceed: these chats will take place every two weeks for now; if we see a great urge to increase (or decrease the frequency), we’ll do so, but for now, if you’re interested in PR measurement, do mark your calendars for the next one (February 16) from 12-1 pm ET, and every other Tuesday following.
And remember – we want to get your questions answered – so if you have questions you’d like to have discussed at a future chat, please email them to me at sburke (a) shonaliburke (dot) com – or, of course, you can always tweet me.
Until the next time – keep chatting and keep measuring!
More resources:
- The Institute for Public Relations has great resources on measurement
- I created a Twitter list of folks I think are leaders in measurement, so you might want to check them out
- As our featured guest, I think it’s only right to point you to Katie’s website and blog
- A presentation I made at PRSA09 on measurement, which may particularly help those of you at non-profits/with low or no budget
Image: Quinn Dombrowski, Creative Commons
Filed under MeasurePR, Measurement, Public Relations, Twitter
| Tags: #measurepr, allan schoenberg, justin goldsborough, kathy moore, katie paine, Measurement, PR measurement, pritesh patel, sean williams, twitterchat |
Comments (7)
