Social media authorities, the ones I trust, have built up their reputations over time, through activities such as blogging, and podcasting. Continual engagement over a long period without any abuse of that relationship. And because of their long term commitment, they have my trust.

Why should brands be any different?

I know to know where are the examples of, again, the…

Brands, the ones I trust, that have built up their reputations over time, through activities such as blogging, and podcasting. Continual engagement over a long period without any abuse of that relationship. And because of their long term commitment, they have my trust.

You could follow people for other reasons, as I’m sure many people do. I like to think though that this is a system that people follow, and it’s a system that works.

Instead brands try to “cheat” the system, taking shortcuts to the top of the relationship ladder (for one reason because they can afford to). Companies may pay top bloggers to do reviews and market their products, so that the marketing comes from the people that you already “trust” (see paragraph one). Sometimes they sacrifice that long term trust equity they’ve built up, just to make a buck.

If brands were people, how would this look in the real world?

What if brands were made up of people? Well, this is the view I increasingly like to subscribe to, and I think others do as well. If that were the case then every brand already at some level, has the means, and ability to build trusted relationships with it’s customers. Since they’re made up of people as well, marketing practices that seek to ‘take advantage’ are out of line with the trust building methods that already work for people.

My point is that this system is good, and it’s built into the way we as people interact and form relationships with one another.

Don’t fuck with it.