I live in a polarised world, particularly when it comes to social media. Not surprisingly, those I interact with on social media talk about it a lot. In the ‘real world’ when talking to mates in the pub or even meeting with business owners, there are still many people who are unaware of social media at all or have a very different perception of what it is and what the benefits might be.

This is important. I regularly see thoughts from the Twitterati asking “why doesn’t sport use social media more?” The answer for many sporting organisations is still – ‘that’s not where my audience is.’

While I can understand the frustration of social media evangelists, having been through a number of new technology cycles, I am not surprised at the adoption rate for new technologies. It was the same with the Internet and mobile phones.

It’s funny the business practises that stay with you. I remember a policy that employed by Procter & Gamble in Australia where I worked for a time. Senior Management were required to spend a number of days a month outside of the office and out in the supermarkets and pharmacies where the consumer made the ultimate buying decision. Many sales reps had a special route that showcased the stores where the companies products had maximum distribution or ceiling high displays. The problem with this was that management went away thinking that all was well.

At Unilever, a similar process was in place. Once off the road, as National Account Manager I used to demand that reps show me their worst stores. The ones where the competition always looked better, where the store owner refused to stock our products. Visiting these stores explained the numbers.

A similar thing happens with technology platforms. The early adopters who ‘get it’ start to convince everyone else that they should ‘get it’ too. They talk to other early adopters who nod and say ‘yes we are right’. Then you go and find examples to prove your point – clubs with millions of Facebook followers, and present it as proof. It’s very unfashionable to talk about the mass market, the majority who don’t use social media. And that’s just in the English speaking world.

Now try this exercise. Next time you feel like blogging about how a particular brand or organisation is missing out by not being on social media, don’t ask your followers and facebook friends if they agree with you – instead, leave your office, wander down to where the ‘real’ customers are and do a quick vox-pop. Ask them if they have ever heard of Twitter. Ask them if their favourite team had a facebook page whether they would use it to interact with that team.

Here are some quotes from real people from recent days. You might disagree, but they are what people think…

“I hate Facebook – too many old skeletons and people I don’t have any reason to talk to finding me. I don’t need Facebook to book tickets, I can use the club website or just call them.”

“Apparently there is this new one called LinkedIn which is meant to be for business, but I think it’s for small business – like lots of graphic designers and life coaches selling to each other. If you work for yourself I can see the point, but not in a corporate.”

“I just don’t get Twitter. It’s like code. Why would anyone care what I have to say? I like fans thinking what I might be having for breakfast without letting them down by telling them what I actually eat. Then you have all this techie programmer stuff to learn like RT and hashtag… it’s too hard. My blog works pretty well.”

“It’s all rubbish. What’s wrong with a good old-fashioned newspaper. Good writing, all the scores, portable, never runs out of batteries, I can read it wherever I want. Why do I have to interact? Most of the people who follow my team are morons. I wouldn’t want anything to do with them.”

Now instead of pushing social media, because that is your favourite thing at the moment, ask instead – Where is my audience?

If 90% of your fans have iPhones, then great – build an app. If 85% of them are active on Twitter, great fire up your Twitter accounts and engage. If however, your fanbase is talking on PHP-BB forums scattered around the country, then that’s where you should be talking to them.

Or why crowdsourcing is trendy, but not always good…

Seems that a lot of social media evangelists, many of whom have almost no business experience, are proclaiming that crowdsourcing will spell the end of advertising and branding as we know it. The fact that many of these self proclaimed experts lump advertising together with branding in the first place suggests that they don’t really have a handle on marketing in the real world and are merely spouting something they read in a retweeted link to a blog somewhere (just like this one).

Those who would sign the death warrant of the advertising agency cite social media stunts run by large brands where their agencies were dropped in favour of contributions from the wider world. One oft-quoted case is that of the Unilever brand, Peperami. Many of the Twitterati have lumped the project in with consumer-generated ‘new flavour’ polls and revelled in the oncoming doom for traditional agencies. There is no doubt that ‘traditional’ agencies are struggling to come to terms with the new world order and many are bereft of new ideas, but what most social media tub-thumpers have missed is that Unilever themselves believe that the creative will probably come from professionals rather than consumers.

Noam Buchalter, Marketing Manager for Unilever’s Marmite, Bovril, Pot Noodle, and Peperami brands said in a recent interview:

We’re not really keen on the idea of fully open and public sourcing, as Walkers did on their recent crisp flavour campaign, our undertaking is to enter into a rigorous and serious creative process.  The brief is relatively open, but people will have to work hard on their ideas, and part of the brief is also to produce print ads. It is open for everyone to enter, and we are hoping that many professional creatives will take part.

So in some cases, crowd-sourcing may lead to new ideas and the discovery of brilliant creative work. It’s also pretty cheap. The ‘prize’ offered by Unilever for the Peperami campaign was £10,000 and it’s hard to imagine one of Unilever’s preferred supplier agencies charging such a low fee.

Let’s not get carried away. Unilever have spent millions of dollars and tapped some of the best marketing talent in the world to establish the Peperami brand. It is therefore no surprise that creative minds can come up with new material given the brief. It would be a brave brand indeed that left their corporate identity to the crowd.

Incidentally, the ‘Walkers’ campaign alluded to was not so much a branding exercise as a mass-market focus group. There is no doubt that the internet and social media tools can help poll huge numbers of people very quickly, but how is a brand manager (a title also soon to be defunct according to some) to weigh a vote from Twitter user “sxychk25″ against letter writer; “Loyal customer from London”?

My own view is that crowdsourcing can reveal new creative talent in the way that the X-Factor reveals music stars, however these stars are probably not going to be ‘consumers’. Most brands aren’t lucky enough to have consumers that are so fanatical that they will give up their day jobs to do marketing for a large corporate without being properly compensated. While listening to your audience is important, the true marketing experts will still be required to synthesise the feedback and integrate it into the long term brand vision.

Brands that have established their core values will be able to take advantage of crowdsourcing in a more productive way, because consumers will be conditioned to working within the  confines of a brand personality that has been created through millions of dollars of traditional advertising.

Finally, there is always a danger that crowdsourcing will lead to a dull average. Brands that are not well understood by consumers and have a mass market appeal may be tempted to please everybody and as a result fail to differentiate themselves sufficiently.

Marketing is changing, and social media is providing a way for brands to engage their consumers and develop relationships with them. Branding by consensus though will ultimately lead to watered down, politically correct, boring marketing. The strongest brands will be the ones that give their consumers the perception that they have an input but who have the courage to set their own vision and follow it.