Facebook recently announced that users would now be able to tag brands in their photos. Some brands have considered this to be good news, whilst others are hesitant to enable it. Here, Kate Winthrop explores the benefits and pitfalls of this type of advertising...
On the one hand, "brand tagging" as it's become known could prove largely beneficial - it's going to expand on Facebook's advertising pages and ultimately, broaden the horizon of the "free marketing" element of this type of social platform.
It's essentially your brand "in practice"; whether you're in the retail sector or the food and drink market, and it's a great way to prove your brand's popularity and really "view" your market; it is in many ways another form of 'free advertising'. In principle this is an excellent idea resulting in a win win situation.
In practice however, this can result in completely the wrong type of advertising for your brand. Cadbury's Wispa bar has a fan page that consists of over 1.5,000,000 users. That's a fairly substantial fanbase for any brand. However, see Wispa's most recently tagged photos;
The majority of these images are in fact spam, and completely irrelevant to Wispa.
As there is no screening process for photos that have been tagged, you can't "approve" any images before they go live on your Facebook page. Again, a slightly dangerous position to put your brand in- particularly if you are a family-orientated brand as it means inappropriate content for your audience can be uploaded.
Victoria's Secret host a fan page for their fragrance 'Pink'. Their Facebook page's tagged photos features other brands, irrelevant content and not an image of their own in sight. It would appear that no one is monitoring this page or it's photos.
And, whilst none of it is offensive, to the viewer it decreases the credibility of the site. Ultimately, luxury brands are all about the exclusivity of their pieces, people aspire to own this type of brand, and these irrelevant images take away from the 'exclusive' feel of these brands.
Confectionary brand Skittles, however, have lucked out. Their brand tagging reinforces brand loyalty and demonstrates a great rapport between brand and consumer.
They have ensured the user images posted are for the most part - skittle related. This is due to a PR campaign they have launched across their Facebook page, called "Rainbro of the Week" where users upload their photos to be in with a chance to be the "Rainbro", where they feature as the Facebook Page's profile picture for the week.
So, should you disable the brand tagging option? It's a question I suspect many brands will explore. On the one hand, left unmonitored and unchecked, brand tagging can result in numerous irrelevant - and potentially inappropriate pictures - being posted and associated with your brand. On the other hand, it can be a great advertisement for your brand, especially when incorporated with regular features, such as Skittles 'Rainbro of the Week' campaign.
Ultimately, it comes down to your Social Media Management; a strong team who dedicate time to monitoring the various aspects of your Social Media should allow brand tagging, as should any inappropriate content appear it can be dealt with quickly. Alternatively, a brand that doesn't have the necessary resources to conitinually check on it should think twice before allowing this type of functionality.
Kate Winthrop is Thought by Design's in-house Social Media Strategist. She has worked primarily in the retail sector and has a vast wealth of experience in SM, running acclaimed fashion blog The Style BITE.
Got a question for Kate? .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) for all your Social Media questions.