Twitter, Celebrities & Aids
First, Keep a Child Alive very much seems like a great charity and this is not a slag on it or its mission. This is a post about the power – and sometimes over importance – of social media, Twitter in this case, and our reliance on celebrity influencers.
It’s not rare that brands purchase the start power of athletes and celebrities for marketing campaigns. We see it in action sports, we see it in CPG, we see it in advertising for car dealerships. But is it worth it? That’s hard to say.
Not too long ago a host of celebs, including Lady Gaga, Justin Timberlake and Usher, agreed to give up Tweeting until fans donated $1 million to Keep A Child Alive. While they didn’t fail, their success did not come as quickly as some thought it would.
(sorry for the lousy pic – you can see the image here)
It turns out that one person donated the majority of the funds, which is great for the charity and the children involved.
But what does that say about celebrities, social media and their influence? Is Twitter just not as important to these celeb’s fans as we thought? Maybe these celebs are simply too annoying on Twitter, and even though they’re being “followed”, they’re not really following them?
Or maybe the fans aren’t all that altruistic? It’d be interesting to somehow do a comparison and see if a $10 donation meant you’d receive a signed picture from Lady Gaga, versus helping kids survive in Africa.
Again, it’s great the $1 million was raised, regardless of how. But in this seemingly ROI driven world, think twice before you base your decisions on raw numbers… regardless of if those numbers are based on the amount of Twitter followers a person has, their Google page rank or the circulation of a magazine. More doesn’t always mean better.
~ by doubleb on December 7, 2010.