<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why Skittles.com is a game changer for marketers</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.lewiswebb.com/2009/06/04/why-skittles-com-is-a-game-changer-for-marketers/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.lewiswebb.com/2009/06/04/why-skittles-com-is-a-game-changer-for-marketers/</link>
	<description>Your dose of friendly new media bacteria</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Sep 2009 10:09:45 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Sean B.</title>
		<link>http://www.lewiswebb.com/2009/06/04/why-skittles-com-is-a-game-changer-for-marketers/comment-page-1/#comment-181</link>
		<dc:creator>Sean B.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2009 22:06:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://socialprobiotic.wordpress.com/?p=288#comment-181</guid>
		<description>I agree with your thoughts that, particularly for a brand like Skittles, if you don’t have content to deliver on the Web page, why not provide a venue for conversation about the brand?

Ultimately though, I feel Skittles has fallen short of the mark. It’s not that people can see the negative comments, but because they’re not contributing to the online conversation with anything but a new conversation monitor. The “Buzz” they generate is purely about being able to do what you already can do with a simple search – but with the added step of going to the Skittles site. Therefore, traffic to their site is more for novelty purposes rather than brand engagement. If you’re trying to drive conversation, return visitors is the metric, not unique visitors.

I think this is just one in a million experiments going on with the phenomenon that is social media, and, while it’s bold, I wouldn’t call it successful. They don’t really push the envelope – they put a fancy stamp on the envelope and call it new media.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with your thoughts that, particularly for a brand like Skittles, if you don’t have content to deliver on the Web page, why not provide a venue for conversation about the brand?</p>
<p>Ultimately though, I feel Skittles has fallen short of the mark. It’s not that people can see the negative comments, but because they’re not contributing to the online conversation with anything but a new conversation monitor. The “Buzz” they generate is purely about being able to do what you already can do with a simple search – but with the added step of going to the Skittles site. Therefore, traffic to their site is more for novelty purposes rather than brand engagement. If you’re trying to drive conversation, return visitors is the metric, not unique visitors.</p>
<p>I think this is just one in a million experiments going on with the phenomenon that is social media, and, while it’s bold, I wouldn’t call it successful. They don’t really push the envelope – they put a fancy stamp on the envelope and call it new media.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

