IMC and the use of social media platforms
IMC AND THE USE OF SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS TO ENGAGE WITH CONSUMERS
Vu Tram Anh Nguyen - 1312116
Abstract
This paper analyzes the use of social media to engage with consumers in an IMC campaign. It cannot be denied some benefits of social networks such as the fast transmission, globalization, and cost saving but it also have the drawbacks. Hence, it is necessary to study why and how marketers choose to use them (especially Twitter and Scoop.it) to give an objective view on the establishing of social media in an IMC program. This paper includes the importance of engaging consumers before moving to some background information about Twitter and Scoop.it. Finally, it displays how social media affects consumers’ decision making process and its challenges in an IMC campaign.
Introduction
In recent years, marketers have many communication platforms used to engage with consumers. These mediums are listed as follows: traditional (print/broadcast media) and digital (the internet). Traditional media such as TV have served as cost-effective tools in reaching regional audiences with influential messages while the Internet has provided immediate, informative and interactive platforms for audiences in discussing and debating, globally. The objective of an IMC campaign is to understand pros and cons of those various medium and integrate them “to create synergies so that the consumers’ interest for the brand can be compounded” CITATION Law141 \p 341 \l 1033 (Ang, 2014, p. 341).
IMC is about developing a single message across multiple media vehicles to create a greater effect on the target audience. However, due to the globalization, Internet has been used as a main entrance to get into the world of information, entertainment, communicating, and trading. Within it, social media has become a popular phenomenon. It is defined as “a group of internet-based applications that build on the ideological and technological foundations of web 2.0 and that allow the creation and
Vu Tram Anh Nguyen - 1312116
Abstract
This paper analyzes the use of social media to engage with consumers in an IMC campaign. It cannot be denied some benefits of social networks such as the fast transmission, globalization, and cost saving but it also have the drawbacks. Hence, it is necessary to study why and how marketers choose to use them (especially Twitter and Scoop.it) to give an objective view on the establishing of social media in an IMC program. This paper includes the importance of engaging consumers before moving to some background information about Twitter and Scoop.it. Finally, it displays how social media affects consumers’ decision making process and its challenges in an IMC campaign.
Introduction
In recent years, marketers have many communication platforms used to engage with consumers. These mediums are listed as follows: traditional (print/broadcast media) and digital (the internet). Traditional media such as TV have served as cost-effective tools in reaching regional audiences with influential messages while the Internet has provided immediate, informative and interactive platforms for audiences in discussing and debating, globally. The objective of an IMC campaign is to understand pros and cons of those various medium and integrate them “to create synergies so that the consumers’ interest for the brand can be compounded” CITATION Law141 \p 341 \l 1033 (Ang, 2014, p. 341).
IMC is about developing a single message across multiple media vehicles to create a greater effect on the target audience. However, due to the globalization, Internet has been used as a main entrance to get into the world of information, entertainment, communicating, and trading. Within it, social media has become a popular phenomenon. It is defined as “a group of internet-based applications that build on the ideological and technological foundations of web 2.0 and that allow the creation and
References: BIBLIOGRAPHY Ang, L. (2014). Principles of Integrated Marketing Communications. Cambridge University Press. Asur, & Huberman. (2010). Predicting the Future with Social Media. Belch et al., B. K. (2012). Advertising: An Integrated Marketing Communication Perspective. McGraw-Hill Australia. Brodie et al., L. D. (2011). Customer Engagement: Conceptual Domain, Fundamental Propositions, and Implications for Research. Journal of Service Research, 252-271. Feick, L., & Price, L. (1987). The Market Maven: a Diffuser of marketplace Information. Journal of Marketing, 83-97. Hands, A. (2013, September 5th). Tech Services on the Web: Scoop.it. Technical Services Quarterly, pp. 439-440. Hausman, A. (2014, February 20th). Consumer Decision Making Process and Social Media. Retrieved from Hausman Marketing Letter: http://www.hausmanmarketingletter.com/social-media-drives-consumer-decision-making-process/ Hind Hoyer, W. D. (2012). Consumer Behavior 6th Edition. Cengage Learning. Jasen, B. Z. (2009). The commercial impact of social mediating technologies: micro-blogging as online word of mouth branding. Association for Computing Machinery (ACM). Jasen, B. Z. (2009). Twitter power: tweets as electronic word of mouth. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol.60 No.11, 2169-2188. Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media. Business Horizons, 59-68. Mullan, E. (2011, November 30th). What is Content Curation? Retrieved from E-content Mag: http://www.econtentmag.com/articles/articlereader.aspx?articleid=79167 Qualman, E Safko, L. (2012). The Social Media Bible: Tactics, Tools, and Strategies for Business Success. John Wiley & Sons. SEO. (2014). What Is Search Engine Optimization (SEO)? Retrieved from What is SEO: http://www.whatisseo.com/ Subrahmanyam, & Greenfield Twitter. (2014). Coca-Cola. Retrieved from Twitter: https://twitter.com/CocaCola Twitter, H Van Doorn et al., J. K. (2010). Customer Engagement Behavior: Theoretical Foundations and Research Directions. Journal of Service Research, 253-266. Wasserman, T. (2007). Survey gives good reviews to online product reviews. Brandweek, 12. Wasserman, T. (2012, November 1st). Gap Criticized For Insensitive Tweet During Hurricane Sandy. Retrieved from Mashable: http://mashable.com/2012/10/31/gap-tweet-hurricane-sandy/ Woollaston, V