Using traditional channels, like TV and print, Ad men have attempted to engage consumers with brands for decades. As you can see from the above short¹ Web 2.0 differs from traditional comms in that the flow of information between individuals and organisations is extensively democratised: Communication becomes an interactive, continually evolving process. In traditional forms of marketing comms a consumer is a largely passive receiver of brand messages and is usually the final link in a top-down chain of communication. With digital, the consumer becomes a de facto partner in communication spread and acts as an agent in creating dialogue about brands. Of course due to the networked nature of new media this dialogue occurs whether an organisation wants it to or not, which sometimes results in everything from minor PR gaffes to widespread calls for brand boycotts.
(more…)

1. Retrieved June 28, 2009 Web 2.0 An Intro in 5 minutes by Prof. Wesch at KSU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gmP4nk0EOE [↩]

After shelving my blogging efforts in the aftermath of a difficult MA thesis I find myself returning to the fold. I plan on building on my thesis work by continuing to explore digital marketing, media, business and culture. I’d also love to get some interesting discussion going too.

Researching online communities, viral spread and e-fluentials was rewarding but tricky. Armed with a background in psychology and statistics, a taste for the digital zeitgeist and a fascination for social media and marketing I attempted to pin down viral phenomena in all its glory.

During the course of the study I blogged about my investigations as a sort of record-cum-livejournal detailing the many-headed beast of a problem that viral research presented. (more…)