Which Is Better? Social Media Marketing or Email Marketing?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Luke Owen on December 29, 2009 at 11:25am

I would rephrase the question and ask which is more important. It's tough to say which one is better. Social media marketing is focused on developing an audience that wants to listen to you and will give you permission to join their networks and even send them emails from time to time. But email marketing is more effective at bringing this audience back to you when it's most important (webinars, conference meet ups, special offers, etc.). Not everyone is going to be on twitter, facebook or linkedIn at the precise moment you send out your messages. But email will always be in the inbox and if you're a company they respect, you have a very good chance of getting them to return to you. But one of these tools is not as effective without the other. So therefore if you ask the question about importance, then clearly social media marketing is more important.

Email marketing is only effective if the people you're emailing are willing to listen to you. If you just buy a list and start blasting away, chances are you'll capture the ear of about 3% of the audience, if that. Even worse, you can ruin the reputation of the company as being the "spammers". What a dreaded feeling that is. But when you add in social media marketing to the mix, and you gather up a group of people through these efforts that like to listen to you, want to listen to you and actually sign up to receive your emails, then your email marketing campaigns start to become more effective.

Also, JJ, which group on LinkedIn was that? Since I'm not an active member of this group, the link you posted just steers me to my own list of groups.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by JJ Hornblass on December 29, 2009 at 11:37am

Will reply to your post in great depth shortly.

The group is actually a media group. Maybe you can get to the group overview here. Go here for the reference article for the discussion.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Jerry Goldstein on December 29, 2009 at 3:14pm

I agree with many of Luke Owen's comments, but also would like to add, it depends upon what your objectives are. Each form of communication can be a valuable tool, if used properly, and in support of specific objectives. E-mail, for example, might be a preferred method for communicating with existing customers and would not require a social media strategy in order to be effective.

One of our clients provides e-communication marketing services for banks and credit unions to assist them in educating customers and cross selling. They have found that on-going e-newsletter communications are a more effective tool than one-time direct marketing pieces for generating interest and leads.

Bottom line, both are effective tools that need to be integrated with the other elements of the marketing mix, just like any other marketing tactic, in support of an organization's overall objectives.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Eric Cook on December 29, 2009 at 4:07pm

I think that e-mail marketing is getting overlooked by many organizations for a couple of reasons, but the effectiveness of a well run e-mail marketing campaign to the "right" audience is one of the often most under utilized tools in any marketer's toolbox.

Reason One: Social Media is Cool...
Seems that all the buzz lately is swirling around social media and how it's the next best thing to market online. I agree with many of the comments shared thus far that SM is a great way to build relationships, but many have jumped in without a plan and I suspect are becoming (or have already become) frustrated with the lack of "results" because they never really knew what they wanted to accomplish in the first place. Fail to plan... plan to fail, if you will.

Reason Two: E-Mail Doesn't Work
Well, you may think that's the case based on your past experience, but have you really done e-mail the "right" way in the past? This does not mean sending messages to your entire database of customers using Outlook and the BCC field. Do you have your lists segmented with customer preferences and some unique characteristics identified (checking customers without mortgage loans, small business owners, etc...)? Are you using a system to track your success (such as Constant Contact, Vertical Response, Aweber, others)? When I hear customers say that e-mail doesn't work, they have typically done it the wrong way and not achieved any sort of success, or (heaven forbid) offended customers and and sent them in the other direction. E-mail is a great tool for speaking one-to-one with someone (or one-to-many of like characteristics) to get your message across in a measurable method. You need their permission, respect the opportunity and provide them with something of value or they will go away (just like in the real world).

Reason Three: It Part of the Process
If you are using e-mail the "right" way (with relevant, timely information delivered to someone that has a good chance of being interested and wants to hear from you), it can be a powerful way to get people back to your website or to your social media portal(s) to learn more and further engage with you. The challenge most people have (at least this is the case with me) is that I follow a lot of people on Twitter, have become Fans of many organizations on Facebook and have "relationships" in other ways via the SM cloud. But with all of this going on it's easy to let something slip through the cracks and e-mail is still the best way to deliver a message to someone (that's why all the SM portals still rely on it for notifications, alerts and other interaction).

So, I'm not sure if I answered the question of which one is better than the other, but hopefully I've posed a different question, in that people need to be sure they are using the tools the right way before passing judgment in either direction. I believe that an effective e-mail marketing strategy can significantly enhance anyone's social media efforts and get people further down the "know me - like me - trust me" path that is critical to earning someone's business (online or off).

Eric

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Ernest Garfield on December 29, 2009 at 4:24pm

Interesting discussion! Jerry Goldstein says it correctly, “Bottom line, both are effective tools that need to be integrated with the other elements of the marketing mix, just like any other marketing tactic, in support of an organization's overall objectives.”

To do less than what Mr. Goldstein says is a disservice! Unfortunately my friends in the media business are often so biased that they fail to appreciate the wisdom of his suggestion.

I own a list of about 70 million, opt-in/opt-out database of email addresses that I use for commercial and philanthropic purposes. I send out about 20 million messages a day. I combine it with social media.

Additionally, I help people start bank. So I am “blessed” because I walk both sides of this street.

I’m hesitant to put in what may be interpreted as a plug for my business, but see www.independentbankdevelopers.com.

My email list is much larger than the one used by President Obama’s campaign since they focused heavily on social media.

Lon Safko wrote The Social Media Bible. It covers the waterfront. I have told him it has everything in there that a person could possibly want for the next 6 months because the technology and use attitude will change and has already begun to do so since he first published. Good book! Buy it! No I have no connection with it. Although hopefully, he may pay for a lunch for me!

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Ron Shevlin on December 29, 2009 at 4:55pm

Which is better FOR WHAT? For relationship building? For notifying customers of account-related information? For sending sales-related messages?

Neither one is "better". Each has its own strengths and weaknesses.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by JJ Hornblass on December 31, 2009 at 9:45am

Everyone's comments are great, so thanks.

First, to address Luke and Ron: "Better" was the wrong word. I meant, which channel is more effective for securing and keeping customers, and selling them financial products? The discussion has naturally addressed this core question, so I won't belabor the point.

Taken as a whole, the comments skirt an important issue, yet don't address it head on. There is a fundamental difference between email and social media. In the case of email, you are talking at a person/customer. In social media, you are talking with a person/customer. In my view, that's a huge difference. Just look at this very discussion. We are communicating. The "email version" of this discussion would take the form of an article with the headline, "Five Differences Between Email and Social Media Marketing," and while dialog develops via email, it usually does not.

That's why return on social media marketing is harder to gauge. How do you measure the benefits of talking "with" a customer? Certainly, there is tremendous value, but you can't necessarily record the clickthrough to, say, a mortgage application. But I would suggest that sales after social media engages are there, and probably in greater numbers than via email marketing. Customers want to feel that their bank-partner treats them like a person, and people are the foundation of social media. I think of it like this: if a customer walked into a branch, a branch officer should say, "Hello." If a customer walks into a virtual branch (whether that is a corporate website, a Facebook group or a Twitter feed), a bank officer should say, "Hello." This is the essence of social media, in my view. Is there a conversion rate to that branch officer greeting a customer in a branch? Of course. Can we quantify it? Better yet, do we need to quantify something as basic as having a relationship with a customer? While the parallel is not exact online, the essence is similar. It's that fundamental.

▶ Reply to This