Homework 3

Buzzkill claims that a Coca Cola study found the buzz generated online has “no measurable impact on short-term sales.” However, this was tested on a very small set of brands in a specific segment of the population. Coca Cola is also having issues with their machines not being able to tell the difference between negative and positive buzz. “When we say it’s positive, the machine about 21% of the time says it’s negative.” So Coca Cola may have come to this conclusion, but there is no concrete evidence for that claim. Unilever Finds Social-Media Buzz Really Does Drive Sales claims that positive mentions in social media have been proved to drive sales for Unilever brands. This information was proven by Shawn O’Neal, the VP-global people data and marketing analytics for Unilever. O’Neal’s boss, Stan Sthanunathan, headed global market research at Coca-Cola in 2013 when Coca-Cola found that online buzz had no effect on short-term sales (in Buzzkill). Unilever also showed that ice cream is easier to predict than previously thought, finding the specific days of the week and weather patterns that drive ice cream sales. The last reading, McKinsey Finds Social Buzz Can Affect Sales – Negatively, “McKinsey found the relationship between negative buzz and a decline in sales when it ‘hand tabulated’ sentiment in social-media comments.” During the “Social Media Deep Drive” panel, there was proof that social media drives viewership of specific TV shows. There were a few cases that showed positive returns from digital advertising, however, there were no cases “showing direct positive impact on sales from social media buzz.” The overall theme in all three readings is that online buzz has not been directly linked to sales.

Sources

“Oreo: A Social Media Powerhouse – Martin-Wilbourn Partners.” MartineWilbourn Partners. N.p., 17 July 2013. Web. 12 Nov.