Thoughts on Social-Media Revolution v. Advertising

So last night I was watching TV, critiquing commercials via my inner monologue, as per usual, when I noticed something which is likely glaringly obvious to many but which I had only just realized: there is a disparity, a huge one, between the “social media revolution” that we’ve been inundated with these last couple years and traditional advertising.

Television advertising has largely stayed the same (discounting all the ads capitalizing on the trend towards living “green”): create a problem—real or imaginary—and present your solution to said problem, all the while appealing to your potential consumer, speaking to them about them. The most obvious of the me-centric advert format is the US Army campaign “Army of One”. Now, the army is a bit unique compared to the other me-centric ad campaigns, nevertheless completely exemplary of how television advertising and almost 100% of television programs are geared towards appealing to and enforcing the self-centered attitude that recent generations have been exposed to. Television in America teaches you that you are special, unique, you deserve whatever you want and you deserve the best. Life is about you and no one else—you are what matters most.

The interesting thing is comparing that with current trends in online media. Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, youtube, this very blog: all aimed at “sharing” with others, creating “community” (virtual as it may be). Facebook even changed the submit button on its status-input field to “share” rather than “post.” Social media is about (supposedly) connecting people (“connect” being another term that is thrown around a lot), creating connections where there were none before. On the surface, social media is about bringing down the walls that separated people, whether they be businesses and consumers, or simply peer groups. But the contrast between advertising and social media makes me wonder what is really at the core of this “revolution.”

Now, I’m not going to be stingy: social media has affected behavior, no doubt. It is being leveraged very well for purposes of creating customers and furthering companies’ brands, but is it really a “revolution?” I now know exactly where my friends are at any given time (Foursquare app on iPhone) should they decide to share that information. According to the good folks at Merriam-Webster, a revolution necessitates a complete and fundamental change of paradigm. It affects the way of thinking as well as the behavior.

But, if in spite of the social media “revolution,” the tendency towards self-absorption is still at the core, then what we’re talking about as it relates to social media is less a social revolution and more of a technological revolution. It has simply provided a new medium for our boundless narcissism to occupy. Even using the term “revolution” insinuates it is something very special, and you will, by association, be special if you become involved in it.

So why the gulf between TV ads like “Army of One” and the social? It’s simple: television advertising hasn’t veered away from its me-focused approach during the course of this social media revolution because it hasn’t had to. People are less focused on sharing and creating genuine community and more concerned with how they will personally be affected by things, and how best they can be served and satisfied. After all, we’re all very special.

***

Note: Ok, yeah there are commercials appealing to community, but not the vast majority of them. And despite the tone of this entry, I friggin love twitter and facebook and will be broadcasting this bloggins via social media.