electronic word of mouth (ewom) on social networking sites and its effect on brand reputation...

Nottingham University Business School

MSc Programmes

MSC MARKETING

[DISSERTATION]

[Electronic Word Of Mouth (eWOM) On Social Networking Sites and

Its Effect on Brand Reputation Management.]

[ADITYA TIBREWALA]

Student ID: [4145050]

Contents

Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 3

Literature Review .................................................................................................................................... 5

Social Media

Product Recommendations and eWOM

Traditional word-of-mouth vs. Electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) marketing

Definitions

Methodology ........................................................................................................................................... 9

Selecting a Research Method

Selecting a Data Collection Method

Sampling

Procedure

Results ................................................................................................................................................... 14

Understanding and Usage

Brand Content

Brand News and Information

Analysis ................................................................................................................................................. 18

Recommendations ................................................................................................................................ 22

Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................. 26

Appendix ............................................................................................................................................... 27

References ............................................................................................................................................ 83

Electronic Word Of Mouth (eWOM) On

Social Networking Sites and Its Effect

on Brand Reputation Management.

Introduction

Communication is one such freedom that every individual enjoys. Every human being is free to have

an opinion and is equally free to voice it. The need to voice ones opinion to a larger set of people is

undying. Every day people want to reach out more persons around the world and this gives rise to

rapid communication evolution. Fire signals, Morse code, telegrams, telephones and today the

internet; are all forms of communication that man has evolved over time to reach out to a larger set

of people.

Within the internet, the social media space is a subset that has evolved recently that has changed

the way we look at the internet. It’s a space where people are free to connect and reach out to a

large variety of people with ease and communicate and voice their opinions even easier. And where

people are, there brands want to be present. Social media is the space where every large company

wants to make its presence felt. If people are giving their opinions and speaking out their mind, they

must also be speaking about companies, brands, products and services that surround their daily

lives. If people are so closely knit together, any negative opinion can spread extremely fast and if half

the world thinks badly about a brand overnight, it can be disastrous for any company. Hence, for

companies, the aim is to create brand communities on the social media space where the company

can effectively interact and share information with customers and be available to look into negative

information spreading. Any brand would not want unauthorised information doing the rounds of the

internet which may not be true and cause misunderstandings amongst its customers. Inaccurate or

negative information on a public domain has the potential to damage the brand to a large extent.

Well established and extremely reputed brands have faced large losses and lost consumer goodwill

due to this quick information sharing amongst consumers. Take for example Comcast, an American

Internet Service provider who did little to address consumer complaints for slow and inconsistent

internet. One of their customers, who had a 12,000+ Twitter following, criticised Comcast on the

micro-blogging website which hugely damaged Comcast’s reputation (Social Media Today, 2008).

Hence the rapid dissemination of information to a large audience can be damaging for a company,

especially if that information is not to the liking of the company. However, social media, if monitored

and used properly, can hold a host of benefits for the brand and the company. Take Dell Computers

for example, which actively scans the entire social media space looking for conversations that

concern or talk about the company. If any consumer is found providing inaccurate information, the

company calmly offers a rectification; if any consumer voices disappointment or a problem in their

product, Dell runs into action and volunteers to solve it (Mashable, 2009; Brand Autopsy, 2007). In

spite of the uncontrollable user generated information going on the internet, Dell has learnt to

tactfully manage and control it and make a profit out of it.

Due to these very concerns and development, brands and companies have had to rethink their

marketing strategy to incorporate social media and how to manage this unique space. It cannot be

ignored but needs to become a part of the company and its culture. This research question aims to

measure the various ways in which product recommendations on social media has affected the

marketing strategy of a brand or a company. The aim is to bring out the paradigm shift that this new

channel of communication has brought about, the changes a company must undertake to

incorporate it and what lies ahead for any brand. In order to fulfil this, the paper would research on

the consumer side and the brand side. On the consumer front, various users of social networking

sites would be interviewed and an in-depth understanding of consumer activity with respect to

brands would be understood. An extensive knowledge of the objectives a consumer thinks would be

achieved by posting brand-related content on the internet along with motives and intentions would

be deeply understood. On the brand side, the paper would understand from various brand managers

on the understanding that they hold with respect to consumers posting content on social networking

websites. The research aims to find a connection or disconnection between consumer motive and

the brand managers understanding and recommend solutions if necessary.

Literature Review

Social Media

The internet is a unique network that virtually binds together almost every human being on the

planet. Kaplan and Haenlein (2010) explain that the internet was initially conceived as a platform to

network and share information amongst users in a fast and efficient manner. Over time, the internet

evolved into a network much larger and far more complicated than it initially was. The advent of the

electronic mail, also known as e-mail, revolutionised the way in which marketers could communicate

with their potential audience. Phelps et. al. (2004) have indicated that although the e-mail helped

marketers initially in reaching out to a more selective audience, the overuse of marketer originated

emails have led to consumers ignoring such messages and hence trusting only e-mails sent from

known sources. Hence, the idea to trust peers and known persons over unknown sources started

growing more and more rapidly. Trusting the information sent by known people over unknown came

to be known as Viral Marketing or Electronic Word of Mouth (eWOM) (Phelps, et. al., 2004).

However, Modzelewski (2000) argue that viral marketing and electronic word of mouth are two

different concepts although eventually people will start associating both of them as one. According

to him, viral marketing is when the originator has a vested interest in bringing more people to buy a

certain product or service or join a particular network. On the other hand, eWOM deals with

consumers spreading the word of a particular product or service they have enjoyed using to other

people on the internet. The originator has no interest if more people indulge in the recommendation

and usually people are simply voicing their opinion.

The freedom to freely communicate amongst users was deteriorating with more and more one-way

content emerging on the internet which lacked heavy user interaction. The advent of social

networking websites such as Facebook, Orkut, Twitter, YouTube etc. have revolutionised the

internet sphere taking the virtual network back to its roots. Owing to its uniqueness and complexity,

Mangold and Faulds (2009) have termed the social media space as a ‘hybrid element of the

marketing mix’ (p. 359). They state that the media richness, the multiple objectives it is able to reach

has made it an essential tool for companies to use and invest in.

Social media is a space not only for brand-customer interaction but also for customer-brand

interaction as well as customer-customer interaction. The latter can be with existing and potential

customers and forms the crux which makes this platform unique (Mangold and Faulds, 2009; Kaplan

and Haenlein, 2010; Asur and Huberman, 2010). Although this platform at first glance does seem

more intimidating to brands since they lose control over the content that goes on these platforms, if

correctly harnessed, it can prove to be a massive opportunity for everyone equally (Asur and

Huberman, 2010). Clearly, social media does seem to be the new space for marketers to develop

and look into and this paper intends to identify how.

Product Recommendations and eWOM

Research on product recommendations in the internet space is not a new avenue for research.

Multiple authors in the past have looked into the influence of products recommended by peers and

other online purchasers and its subsequent influence on the final purchase decision. Senecal and

Nantel (2004) have researched into the influence of online recommendations and its subsequent

effect on the final purchase decision of the consumer. Their findings have indicated that consumers

are indeed influenced by recommender systems on the internet. So much so, these recommender

systems were found to be more trustworthy than human experts from the particular field (Senecal

and Nantel, 2004; Gruen, et. al., 2005). The depth and degree of influence of impersonal information

providing personalised information for internet purchase decisions was being tested. Gruen et. al.

(2005) explored how customer knowledge base when shared to other customers in a common

forum, can influence the purchase decision of a larger set of people. Electronic word of mouth

platforms were found to be a reliable source of information for customers, a finding consistent with

Bickart and Schindler’s (2001) findings. An interesting finding by Gruen et. al. (2005) was with

regards to the loyalty aspect that a customer attaches when recommending a certain product.

Consumers are either found to be loyal to a certain brand and hence heavily recommend the brand

of their choice or are under the impression that regular recommendations of a particular brand

would make them eligible for loyalty bonuses by the company. Either ways, product

recommendations by users was found to be highly influential on a consumers’ final purchase

decision. A similar research conducted by Bickart and Schindler (2001) has shown almost similar

results. A research was conducted wherein a group of consumers were asked to derive information

of a certain product from internet-based resources whereas another group of consumers were asked

to obtain information from non-internet based sources (Company information, advertisements etc.).

The researchers concluded that consumers who have obtained the information from internet based

sources have shown a greater interest in the product itself than the consumers who obtained their

information from non-internet based resources.

The general consensus on internet-based product recommendations has been the reliance of

consumers on other consumers’ choices, reviews or opinions over information given by company

sources or non-internet based sources. Past research has indicated that consumers prefer gathering

information from other consumers and not from company sources since they find the opinions of

consumers far more reliable over company claims. This opinion is shared in spite of the threat of

inaccurate information given by other users which might lead to faulty purchases. This research aims

at examining how a customer’s reliance on other customers’ opinions has forced a brand to rethink

its strategy in disseminating information on the internet. The constant threat of inaccurate

information spreading across the internet can be hugely damaging to a brand and customers will still

hold the company responsible over the user who recommended it (Kaplan, 2010).

Subramani and Rajagopalan (2003) introduce a framework which takes into account the network

externalities and the role of the influencer to determine the nature of the influence that a specific

website or technology holds. This framework proves to be useful for any brand or organisation who

can accordingly adapt their model if they are found to lie in a specific quadrant that they did not

intend to be in. The kind of influence discussed by the authors was classified as normative influence

or informative influence which plays a pivotal role for an e-commerce organisation if it wishes to

correctly place their product to have the desired kind of ‘influence’. The drawback of this framework

was that it failed to take into account feedback or ‘non-influential’ recommendations that a

particular user may do. Every influence made by a user may not be done with the motive to appeal

to the opposite user but could also be left behind for any future users that may have use of that

information. The compliance or non-compliance of the recommendation is a complex mixture of the

grid within the matrix that a brand falls under, the nature of the product and the website. The

classification of the influence as ‘normative’ and ‘informational’ is much in accordance with the

Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) developed by Petty and Capiocco (1986). The ELM model

introduces two ‘routes’ or methods to evoke ‘attitudinal change’ (p. 262). The two routes as

described by the author are the ‘central route’, akin to the ‘informational influence’ and the

‘peripheral route’, similar to the ‘normative influence’.

Traditional Word-of-Mouth (WOM) vs. Electronic Word-of-Mouth (eWOM)

marketing

Word of mouth marketing is not a relatively new aspect of marketing and has been around for a

sufficient amount of time. WOM marketing relies on consumers to spread the word about products

and services to friends and peers. Since this form of marketing completely relies upon the consumer,

the experience of the product or service that a consumer has must be exceptional for the consumer

to actively tell others about it. With the advent of the internet, this form of marketing has gained

tremendous attention and has been touted as one of the most promising and affective form of

marketing (Trusov, et. al., 2009).

Within eWOM, social networking websites are the most effective form of internet media when it

comes to word of mouth marketing (Dellarocas, 2003). Social networking websites are a more

superior form of word of mouth communication primarily for two reasons. Firstly, on a social

networking website, users are connected with a web of people between whom communication can

occur in a faster and more structured manner. It is easier to tell people about a new purchase on

such a website than anywhere else. Secondly, the people that a user is connected to are friends and

family or people that a user is acquainted with. Hence receiving opinions or thoughts about a certain

product or service from known persons is given more credit over opinions and reviews received by

strangers.

These two key features separate traditional word of mouth media from internet-based word of

mouth communication. In the traditional form, communication is slow and usually occurs on a one-

to-one basis. The slow diffusion of information spreads slower and becomes obsolete before it can

reach a substantial audience (Bickart and Schindler, 2001). eWOM manages to successfully address

these two issues and hence makes word of mouth marketing more affective and competent.

Definitions

The term ‘social networking website’ and its variations have been used in this text to refer to

websites which fulfil the definition of Kaplan and Haenlein (2010) where they define social media as,

“a group of Internet-based applications that build on the ideological and technological foundations

of Web 2.0, and that allow the creation and exchange of user-generated content.” Examples of social

networking websites are as follows but not restricted to Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, MySpace,

LinkedIn, Google+ etc. This definition also includes any website which allows user comments which

might influence the purchase decision of another consumer. Example, user comments on Amazon,

EBay etc.

The term ‘brand content’ or ‘brand related content’ and its variations have been used in this text to

refer to any mention of any brand, company, product, service or on some occasions even celebrities

on any social networking website. If any user mentions anything good or bad about any purchase

experience or any casual statement about a particular brand would come under this definition.

Methodology

Selecting a Research Method

The process of extracting market-related information can come from two sources, either via the

quantitative approach or the qualitative approach. The quantitative approach, as the name suggests,

quantifies the research in terms of numbers and gives an output accordingly. The quantitative

approach is used when one begins a theory or hypothesis and tests for confirmation or

disconfirmation of that hypothesis (Newman and Benz, 1998). Qualitative research, on the other

hand, entails the use and study of a variety of empirical data such as case studies, personal

experience, introspection, life stories, interviews etc., which describes the experiences and problems

of individuals in their daily lives (Denzin and Lincoln, 2005). Accordingly, qualitative researchers

employ a wide range of interpretative techniques for a better understanding of the problem at hand.

As mentioned earlier, this research is concerned with evaluating the reasons why consumers post

brand-related messages on the internet and other social networking sites and to understand from

brand managers on the prevailing strategy that companies employ to manage the reputation of their

brands on these places. Keeping in mind this objective, a qualitative research method was adopted

to further understand and analyse consumer experiences and perceptions. A choice existed between

conducting a quantitative research and a qualitative one over which the qualitative research method

was selected. This selection was done due to the nature of qualitative research which fulfils the

objective of this paper. According to Merriam (2009) qualitative researchers are aimed at

understanding people’s experiences and their interpretation of these experiences. They want to

understand social construct and how people interpret changes and activities that constantly occur

around them. Stake (2010) describes research as a complex science which has a measurable and an

immeasurable side to it. The measurable form is known as quantitative research which deals with

objects that are linear and can be quantified in numerical terms. The immeasurable form is known as

qualitative research which studies human perceptions and understanding which cannot be

quantified or given any numerical value since it is subjective from person to person. Hence to

understand the perceptions and beliefs of every individual which is hard to quantify, a qualitative

form of research method was used for this paper.

Selecting a Data Collection Method

Within the qualitative form of research method, in-depth interviews were selected as a means of

data collection. The research question was centred on personal beliefs and experiences and hence

this form of data collection was found to be most suited. The researcher had the option of selecting

other forms of data collection of which focus groups was seriously considered. However, this form of

technique for data collection was ruled out since the research question is centred on every

individual’s experiences which might not have come out in a focus group. In focus groups the

researcher discusses about an idea with a group of people and gauges their responses and makes

necessary field notes (Kvale, 1996). This form of data collection was termed as unsuited for the

particular research since every individuals personal experiences on social networking sites would be

different and hence further in-depth probing would not be possible. Hence, in order to gain a deeper

understanding of consumer behaviour, depth interviews was selected as the most appropriate

method for collecting data for this research.

Sampling

A non-probability sampling technique was adopted by the researcher. This conclusion was derived

after defining the characteristics and knowledge an individual must hold in order to become a part of

the sample size. This research is concerned with researching on the experiences and understanding

of two sides and analysing their reactions against each other. The two sides, as defined earlier, is the

consumer side and the corporate side which includes brand managers. The sampling technique used

for both sides were same although the requirements a respondent must hold in order to be a part of

the sample size were different for users and for managers. For users, the requirements, in order of

importance, are as follows:

Knowledge of social networking websites was extremely important. The research question is

centred around consumers’ brand related activity on social networking websites. Simple knowledge

of such websites and their functioning is not adequate if the user does not have any experiences to

share. Hence awareness and regular activity on any popular social networking sites is required.

Popular social networking sites are more important than the ones that are not popular. This study

aims at researching the consequences of users posting brand related content on social networking

sites. Brands would not be present on websites where user activity is low since interaction is less and

the chances of information going viral are also less. The more users a website has, the more popular

it is and it is on these websites that brand reputation is more sensitive due to close user connections

with increased chances of information spreading. Hence, even though a user interacts about brands

on a social networking site which is not popular, his/her activity would not affect brand reputation.

People aged between 18-25 years were the most frequent users of social networking sites.

According to Social Media Today (2010) Facebook, Twitter and MySpace are the three largest social

networking sites today in terms of user and user activity. As per demographic figures of these three

websites over the past 4 years, it has been revealed that users within the age bracket of 18-25 have

been most popular on each of these websites (Inside Facebook, 2010; Social Media Today, 2009; ZD

Net, 2006). Hence, with people of this age group being the most frequent users of social networking

sites, it became the preferred age of respondents. However, people outside this age bracket were

not ignored if they fulfilled all of the other criteria’s.

For brand managers, the criteria, in order of importance, are as follows:

The brand or organisation or company that the brand manager operates in should be actively

present on social networking websites. If the brand in question does not operate in this area, the

brand manager may not be able to give his experiences of the brands’ activities on social networking

websites. The brand manager might have adequate knowledge about social networking sites and

brand reputation management on this platform but yet may not qualify if the brand or company

he/she works for does not use this platform on a regular basis. Understanding the strategy a

particular brand is putting into place is vital.

Knowledge of the brands operation on social networking sites is necessary. Even if the brand is

present on the platform but the manager is not actively involved in its day-to-day functioning,

he/she would not be able to provide information of the brands strategy on social networking sites to

manage its brand reputation.

A convenience sampling method was employed since it allows the researcher to reach out to people

as per the researcher’s convenience (Lohr, 2009). Since a large number of respondents who fulfilled

the sampling criteria were easily available, it became the preferred choice. However, this method

was used only to select respondents who are users and for managers a different technique was

used. A judgemental or purposive sampling technique was utilised which allows the researcher to

hand-pick respondents due to a unique knowledge or understanding that they hold (Lohr, 2009).

Social Media Marketing being a specialised field within the area of internet marketing, there exists

limited number of people with adequate knowledge who would be willing to come forward for the

interview and hence this method had to be applied.

The sample size for the interview was not fixed with interviews coming to an end after information

being obtained was repetitive and does not add any extra value or understanding to what was

already obtained by the researcher in previous interviews.

Procedure

A total of nineteen respondents were interviewed of which seventeen were users and two were

brand managers. The respondents for user experiences mostly comprised of post-graduate

university students although there were respondents from elsewhere. Interviews were held in

closed comfortable environments and were free of any externalities. The researcher made sure that

external factors such as non-respondents probing participants, distractive elements or a noisy

environment were absent whilst the interview was being conducted. All interviews were voice

recorded and later transcribed. Each respondent was first asked basic preliminary questions which

ascertained that the respondent fulfils the criteria to give the interview. The respondents

understanding of social networking sites was understood along with their frequency of visiting these

platforms was noted. Respondents were read out a list of social networking websites which they had

to rank from 1-5 where one meant that the respondents were ‘unaware of the existence of such a

website’ or ‘are aware of its existence but do not use it at all or use it extremely sparingly’. Hence, a

rank of 1 defines none or negligible usage. Rank 5 defines maximum or ‘extremely frequent’ usage of

a particular website. Rank’s in between are of varying degree, starting from 1 and going up to 5.

These questions were aimed at understanding what kind of social networking websites respondents

most frequently visited. Some social networking websites are structured in a manner due to which

brands and company’s can create their presence on them and hence is more ‘brand-friendly’

compared to other websites which do not have any special features by which brands can create a

presence on those websites.

Further questions probed into the participant’s activity on social networking websites with respect

to brands and services. The interview was centred around understanding each participant’s brand

related activity on social networking websites along with their motives, objectives, psychology etc.

Further questions were built up as per the respondents reply and the nature of their networking

experience.

The final part of the interview dealt with respondents ‘following’ brands on social networking

websites. Many popular websites such as Facebook and Twitter have tremendous brand presence

where users can ‘follow’ brands and get regular updates on the brand. This is also used as a medium

of obtaining feedback from customers on their opinions of the brands products and services which

can then undergo modification to suit the customer demands.

Interviews with brand managers took place over video conferencing on the internet since managers

were from various parts of the world. Interviews with these managers were held after ensuring

there are no externalities that might hamper the interview and the manager is not facing any time

constraint. Initial preliminary information was collected about the manager after which a more

detailed discussion ensued. Managers were asked about their brand and its presence on social

networking websites. Further questions were related to the brand managers’ understanding of users

on social networking sites and steps the brand takes to effectively manage the brands’ presence on

these platforms. The questions were centred around the brand manager and the general

understanding within the company on the brands presence and objectives on the social media

space.

When the researcher found that additional interviews are giving repetitive information with no value

addition, interviews were not conducted anymore.

Results

The data thus collected from the interviews were transcribed and coded. Preliminary questions were

based upon gaining an understanding of what the respondents understood by the term ‘social

networking website’ and why participants visit these websites. For defining the term ‘social

networking website’, 15 participants have described it to be a form of communication between

friends and family. They defined it as a platform where they can connect with old friends and stay in

touch with new ones from all over the world. 4 participants have also described it as a method of

gaining information about developments from around the world, both personal and impersonal to

their friends’ life. 4 participants described it as a form of entertainment where one can play games

and kill time. 3 participants described it as a marketing platform that is fast gaining momentum. 2

participants described it as a way to meet new people and 1 person described it as a means to reach

out to the youth.

When asked why the participants access these websites, 8 respondents have mentioned that their

reason for using these websites was ‘same as above’ meaning that their understanding and reason

for usage is the same. 11 respondents responded with answers different than the previous question.

10 respondents mention that their need to be on social networking websites is to connect and reach

out to long lost friends and communicate with friends and family. 3 have defined it as a platform for

them to obtain news and information and 1 person mentioned that it is a form of entertainment for

them.

Hence, for the seventeen respondents, for most of them social networking websites is a way for

them to connect with people they have lost contact with and maintain relations and communication

with friends and family. Many have also mentioned it to good method to stay in touch with people

world over on a regular basis. Gaining information and news comes after communication and

connection followed by entertainment. Not many people see it as a form of entertainment where

they can play games and kill time.

The next question pertaining to frequency of usage, threw up results on users’ most and least

favourite social networking website. Table 1 presents the output for this question.

Website Net Score Mean Mode

Facebook 84 4.9 5

Twitter 39 2.3 1

Orkut 31 1.8 1

Google+ 29 1.7 1

YouTube 70 4.1 5

Flickr 28 1.6 1

Blog 36 2.1 3

MySpace 22 1.3 1

LinkedIn 38 1.6 1

StumbleUpon 19 1.1 1

Digg 17 1.0 1

Del.ico.us 17 1.0 1

Hi5 23 1.3 1

Tagged 19 1.1 1

Friendster 18 1.1 1

Others 21 1.2

(Table 1: Visitor Frequency on various social networking websites)

Facebook was the most frequently visited social networking sites by the respondents. 16 out of 17

respondents have rated Facebook as ‘5’ on the scale of frequency of usage. YouTube comes a close

second behind Facebook as the second most visited social networking website followed in third

place by Twitter. These findings were only partly compliant with other research results. According to

SEOmoz (2009) Facebook is the most popular social networking website for marketers to reach out

to their target audiences followed by Twitter.

When respondents were asked about their experiences about giving a feedback about any brand,

company, product or service on any social networking website, 8 responded positive, 8 responded

negative and 1 person said that they might have and can’t be too sure. As interviews progressed, it

was noticed that respondents understanding of feedback or opinion on social networking website

were not clear, with many giving incorrect or irrelevant answers. With continued explanation and

probing results were a bit different. Respondents were asked if they had criticised or praised any

brand in the past and replies were different than their previous answers for the feedback question. 5

respondents did not require further probing due to the nature of their answer to the previous

question. 6 respondents replied that they have never said anything about any brand on any social

networking website ever, 4 replied that they have after saying ‘no’ for the question where they were

asked if they had posted their feedback about brands on social networking websites. 2 respondents

were not sure and said that they might have done it sometime in the past.

This part of the interview was related to deeper questioning dependant on the respondent’s

previous answers. If they have replied positive towards posting any brand related content on any

social networking website, the exact situation (which brand, which website) was asked along with

the reasoning behind it. Respondents were asked what they thought the outcome of such a post

would be and what they wished to achieve with that post. If respondents replied negative for

posting any brand related content on social networking websites, they were questioned deeper on

why they would not want to post any such content on any such social networking website.

For respondents that replied positive for posting brand related content on social networking

website, 6 respondents attributed the reason behind doing so was to tell people on their social

network about their experience with that particular product or service and if they should try it or

not. These respondents wanted to influence the purchase decision of people on their network so

that they don’t make the same mistakes as them or have a good experience where the respondent

has enjoyed too. 2 respondents have mentioned that the reason for posting such content is simply

to speak their minds out at the moment and there was no particular objective that they thought

their post would achieve. 1 respondent has said that when it comes to charity and non-profit

organisations they would want to create awareness and spread the word as far as possible. 1

respondent also claimed that due to closer connectivity, it easy for them to tell people about their

thoughts about the product compared to word-of-mouth media. 1 respondent has said that a

company’s presence on a social networking site is an additional method to voice complaints and get

rectification from the company and hence that respondent uses social networking sites for this

reason.

For respondents who replied negative to having posted brand related content on social networking

websites, 4 respondents were of the opinion that their experiences with a certain product or service

did not matter to people around them and those people would purchase what they think is best no

matter what experience other people had. 2 respondents claimed they didn’t have the time or did

not think it was worth the effort to post such content online. 2 respondents said that if someone

asked for an opinion they would give but would not actively go and post messages to all their

friends. 1 respondent said that they would prefer keeping their opinion to themselves and did not

see it necessary to inform other of their experience. 1 respondent mentioned that they have never

posted any brand content in the past but would not mind doing so in the future when the

appropriate situation arises. 1 respondent felt it was irrelevant to post such content on the internet

and did not feel the need to give it so much importance. 1 respondent had no particular reason for

not posting such content and 1 respondent mentioned that they prefer using offline media and did

not feel comfortable telling everyone in their network about their experience.

For the final question set of the interview, respondents were asked if they were aware of what

Facebook Pages are and if they are aware about brands being present on social networking

websites. All of the 17 respondents replied positive to them knowing what Facebook Pages is and

that brands are available on social networking websites ‘to follow’ and to gain regular updates.

When asked if the respondents follow any such brands, 14 respondents replied positive to them

following brands, companies, TV shows or celebrities on various social networking websites. 3

respondents replied that they don’t follow any commercial organisations or celebrities on social

networking websites in spite of being aware of their presence. However, of all the respondents that

replied positive to following some particular brand or company, each had their own varying usage of

this feature. All of the 14 respondents responded saying that they follow these brands to gain the

latest information about their happenings, information, new products and offers. All of the

respondents replied negative when asked if they have or would want to communicate with the

company via their online social media presence. All the respondents unanimously mentioned that

they simply want news and information from the company and are not interested in giving anything

back to them.

Analysis

In order to analyse and review the data set and the findings, a thematic analysis approach was used.

Thematic analysis, according to Boyatzis (1998) is a method of encoding qualitative information by

identifying themes. A theme, as defined by Boyatzis is “a patter found in the information that at

minimum describes and organises the possible observations and at maximum interprets aspects of

the phenomenon” (p. 4). According to Boyatzis (1998) a theme can be derived from any one of the

following three methods, (a) theory driven, (b) prior data or (c) inductive. For this research method

the inductive or data driven technique has been utilised. This technique entails using the raw data or

information to draw out themes (Boyatzis, 1998).

Data which is similar or common to other questions are grouped together to form one theme. Thus

the themes identified through the data set thus obtained are:

Understanding and usage:

This data gives us information of consumers’ understanding of social networking websites and

usage. It may so happen that people might perceive social networking websites to be different than

what they actually use it to be and vice versa. This theme also gives us information on users’ usage

of social networking websites.

General user understanding for the term ‘social networking website’ has been a platform for

communicating to people from all over. Those people can be friends or family, old long lost ones and

new ones they just met yesterday. Social networking websites were built around the purpose of

bringing the world together into a smaller place and making connectivity and communication faster

and easier (Kaplan and Haenlein, 2010). Hence it is no surprise that users look at social networking

websites as a tool to communicate and keep in touch with people.

With connectivity comes information dissemination and hence a lot of users have attributed news

and information to be one of the reasons why they would want to visit social networking websites.

When one gets connected to people from world over, latest news and developments spread rapidly

and quickly and hence becomes the most convenient and easiest form of gaining knowledge of

current events.

Social networking websites are also seen as a popular form of entertainment and killing time.

Facebook, the world’s most popular social networking website had released data indicating that

their largest gaming application, Farmville had more users alone than its largest rival, Twitter

(Mashable, 2009). Twitter, on the other hand is focussed towards providing only communication

services and not offering anything beyond that. This leads to the question whether Facebook is more

popular because of its entertainment features as can be seen by the Farmville statistics?

The data set has clearly shown that communication is still the prime reason why users visit these

websites in spite of so many new additional features and options offered to users. Twitter is a

standing example that no additional services are needed and people’s sole concern on any social

networking website is to communicate with peers. Frequency usage statistics has also revealed that

Facebook tops the charts for frequency of usage followed by YouTube. These findings contradict

SEOMoz (2009) which suggests that Facebook is the most popular social networking website

followed by Twitter and not YouTube unlike this research. Yet, it must be kept in mind that results of

this research are only suggestive and not decisive in arriving to this conclusion. Respondents in this

research came from similar ethical, cultural and educational background and hence these findings

might only pertain to this class of people.

Brand content:

This theme pertains to users posting brand related content on social networking websites. Some

users would like to spread the word about their purchase experiences and others would not. Some

have a reason to do and some don’t.

Most of the respondents showed that they were unsure if they had ever posted any brand related

content on any social networking website. After extensive probing and explanations, most of the

respondents either replied positive or said that they might have had posted such content in the past.

With extensive communication occurring between users on a single website, brand related

communication is bound to happen amongst users. With close networks and easy communication,

extremely negative or positive brand messages fast gain attention and can rapidly become viral

(Leskovec et. al., 2008). Heavily viral conversations can positively or negatively affect the brands

online reputation which can subsequently have an adverse effect on sales (Ha, 2004).

Disgruntled consumers were found to have posted brand related content on the internet majorly to

let people on their network know of their experience. This holds true even for positive brand

experiences. Informing and creating awareness according to the respondents would let people

around them know which products to be avoided and which not. This has emerged as the leading

reason for posting brand related content on social networking websites amongst the participants.

One of the major aims of creating brand confidence and brand trust is to achieve sustainable

competitive advantage and thereby increasing business performance and efficiency. If a brands trust

is lost on social networking websites where content can become quickly viral, it can have adverse

effects on not only sales but also the company’s overall brand image and confidence. Hence a brands

close monitoring on social networking sites is a much required necessity which is displayed by the

high number of respondents asserting that creating awareness amongst their social network is one

of the prime reasons for writing about their purchases online.

Respondents that replied negative to posting brand related content on the internet responded that

the reason they do not wish to do so was majorly because they felt their opinion would not have any

effect on anyone. Facebook currently boasts of having over 750 million users on its social networking

website which, if it were a country, would make it the third largest country in the world behind

China and India (Facebook, 2011). With the massive user base and population, user newsfeeds are

usually subject to cluttering with extra information. This makes users’ posts and conversations prone

to being missed or skipped due to the information overload that users might experience. This

overload might lead to respondents developing an opinion that their thoughts and opinions don’t

really matter and people may not be interested in them. One respondent who was asked why they

think their opinion would not matter to others has said that there have been times where people

never responded back to the respondents content on a particular social networking website which

gave the respondent the perception that people are not interested in knowing about their purchase

experience. This experience might not be conclusive but indicative of why consumers would not

want to willingly come forward and post messages about their purchase experience.

Brand news and information:

Apart from simply posting information about purchase experiences, the social media space also

provides the facility for users to gain information and news updates from their favourite brands.

Some users may actively indulge in it while others may prefer to stay away from it. With the high

amounts of user traffic and communication occurring on one single website, brands were attracted

to be a part of Facebook to advertise to this mass audience and to control their brand reputation on

social networking websites. This slowly and steadily led to brands themselves creating profiles on

social networking websites and monitoring conversations and authenticating information.

Although all respondents were aware that they could gain brand related information on various

social networking sites, not all respondents indulged in it. The ones who did not follow any brands

on any social networking website have attributed it due to various reasons. The respondents have

claimed that they are not brand conscious and are not inclined towards receiving brand related

messages on a regular basis. For them, social networking websites is personal and should remain

personal by not getting cluttered with promotional messages from brands. Other respondents have

called brand messages as ‘garbage’ and do not want such messages to clutter their news feed.

Respondents that have replied positive for following brands actively on social networking websites

have attributed this to gaining the latest updates and news information about the brand. Unlike

brand managers’ strategy, all of the respondents replied negative to commenting or communicating

back with the brand and followed these brands only to gain information from them and did not wish

to give any back. Although brands do want their followers to actively communicate and respond to

their messages and communication attempts, all of the 17 respondents replied that they would not

want to do any such thing and simply extracting the available information is their sole objective of

following these brands. Celebrities and television series were seen as the most popular ‘brands’ that

the respondents were following. The news and information that the respondents were receiving was

perceived to be more interesting than regular brand content. Within brand content, users were

interested in knowing about sales and offers. Respondents have mostly responded by saying that

they follow these brands to gain the latest information on sales, discounts and deals that the

company is offering.

Recommendations

Recommendation source: Appendix 2.2 – Interview with brand managers

When we observe the first theme of the research, it can be seen that respondents’ need for being on

social networking websites is to socialise. Unlike brand managers who want to develop the social

media space as a new form of customer service communication, users are still using and visualising

this platform as a means to communicate with family and friends and not brands and companies.

Brands are attempting to create the space for a platform for wholesome communication whereas

users are still focused on socialising with people and not with brands. In light of this information, it is

recommended that brands focus on the right communication strategy with their target audience and

create communication that would motivate user replies and feedback. Simple brand focussed

messages would not garner any comments from users and in order to get into the communication

loop the communication content needs to be on the same level and thinking of the target audience.

This can be achieved by closely examining the demographics of the followers along with the targeted

demographics. If there is a variation in the targeted and the actual followers, there can be two

visible possibilities behind it. Either the brand image is not appealing to the actual followers or the

social media communication strategy is flawed. If it is the former, brand managers need to rethink

their overall strategy and try to correctly reach out to their targeted audience. If it is the latter, the

social media communication style and language need to be altered so as to correctly reach out to

the audience the brand is targeted to.

Social networking website demographics can become a helpful and efficient tool to inform brand

managers of their target audience’s details. People who may not be willing to reveal their true

personal details in manual surveys, may be less apprehensive on social networking websites to

reveal data such as likes, dislikes, true age etc. This makes the demographics data on social

networking websites more authentic and more detailed. This way brands can actually find out

exactly what kind of people with what form of likes and dislikes are communicating with the brand.

If the majority of users have an interest in a particular form of music, future products and services

offered by the brand can be designed in the manner to be more appealing to these people who

comprise the majority of the brands usage. This not only improves brand loyalty but can also

improve interactions and brand image within this segment of people.

The study collected data primarily from British university post-graduate students from South Asian

descent, although there were respondents from other ethical backgrounds and age groups. Due to

the common background of respondents, this study may be biased towards people of similar

upbringing. The fact that these students have placed YouTube as the second most popular social

networking website after Facebook is contrary to general statistics which has placed Twitter as the

world’s second most popular social networking website. This finding reveals and important piece of

data that social networking website usage is heavily dependent on the prevailing popularity within

friend circles and age groups. Any brand wishing to target this set of users who is actively using

Twitter to try and reach out to it target audience is probably doing a big mistake because its target

audience is not frequent and active on Twitter and hence the brand strategy has failed overall.

Brands need to have a clear understanding of its target audience and learning about the social

networking websites that are popular for its targeted segment. Being on a social networking website

which is not popular for the companies target audience would be a waste of time and effort and at

the same time reaching out to an audience that the company is not trying to sell to. Apart from

wasted resources, the brand would be connecting to the wrong set of customers which might bring

down the brand image and at the same time losing confidence in the actual target set since the

company is unable to reach out to them.

The second theme of the research which focuses on brand content relates to finding out if people

post brand related messages or not and why. Most respondents have responded positive to having

posted brand related content sometime in the past but it was observed that this has come only after

extensive probing and questioning by the researcher after which many respondents have said that

they ‘might have’ done so some time in the past. Respondents were not entirely confident of their

recollection of posting brand related content and may not have indulged in it actively. Out of those

respondents who have been posting brand related content regularly have been doing so to create

awareness amongst friends and family about their brand experiences. A positive feedback given on a

social networking website is much appreciated by brand managers where as negative feedback is

something they are afraid of.

Many consumers are sceptical about posting brand related content on social networking websites

with many being of the opinion that their messages does not matter either to the brand or people

around them. Brands need to motivate people more to put up positive feedback about their

company and at the same time building confidence amongst users that there are people listening

and reading their content. This does have a flipside that users might also post negative comments

and hence brands need to be careful to devise an intelligent strategy where only the positive ones

get posted and become viral on social networking sites with the negative messages not receiving too

much attention. That said, the negative messages cannot be left by themselves and not get brand

attention. Brands need to attend to all kinds of messages posted by users regarding their product

but the positive ones need to be spread on made viral whereas the negative messages need to

isolated from the rest of the audience. The user expressing an unhappy experience needs to be

resolved and turned into a consumer who would now speak positive about the brand. The company

needs to attend to the consumer’s problem and ensure that further negative information spreading

does not occur via this user by actively resolving the user’s issue. By doing this the company too

realises the flaws that its products and services are holding and may use this information to rectify

its own product and improve customer loyalty and relations. A resolved customer would might also

be delighted with the service received and may now speak highly of the brand with whom they were

speaking negative just yesterday.

Hence motivating consumers to come forward and post any thoughts they have about the brand is

vital for the company to progress. However these messages to need to get the focus of the company

and the people around them so that the user posting it may now feel that the brand is indeed

listening. The feedback may be good or bad and each needs to be resolved in its own specific

manner.

The third and final theme of this research deals with information and news that brands send out on

social networking websites. Brands are faced with false and malicious information spreading around

such websites which might harm and damage the company. People gain false hopes and impressions

from the brand. In order to curb such incorrect information, brands have found it necessary to be

present on social networking websites and posting information themselves rather than risking

incorrect user generated content doing the rounds of the website. Users can receive updates from

these brands if they like and this leads to online brand communities (Muniz and O’Guinn, 2001).

Respondents for this research have unanimously replied that they are aware of brands being present

on social networking websites and a majority of them have stated that they do follow some brands.

However, respondents have said that the sole reason they follow these brands is because they have

ease of information access and can know about multiple brands on one platform. However, the

respondents are not in favour of giving their opinions about the brands messages back to the brand

themselves and are only concerned with extracting information and not giving anything back.

Respondents who do not follow brands on social networking websites have claimed to do so

primarily because they are not brand conscious or fond of any specific company and its products or

services. They don’t want to see brand related content and offers clutter their newsfeed and want to

keep it as personal as possible. For such reasons, if a brand realises that its messages are being

classified as ‘garbage’ or unnecessary news and information, a modification of its content would be

needed where people would feel more connected or entertained by the messages. It should not feel

like unwanted promotional messages filling their newsfeed but informative, helpful and friendly

messages that they would not mind receiving and reading on a regular basis.

Brands need to identify social networking websites that their target audience is actively present on

and needs to give out information on those platforms. On selected websites, their content would be

valued and they might get good user feedback. If brands desire heavy user feedback for their

message postings, the messages need to be made more interactive and appealing to the users. Bland

and one-way marketing messages might not possibly motivate users to reply to brands and start

healthy discussions.

Conclusion

Social media is a space where brands and consumers alike have tremendous opportunity to

communicate and exchange. Brands can exploit this space for their benefit and generate valuable

consumer interaction which can be effectively harnessed towards low cost and accurate market

research information.

Being on this space can do equal harm as good to a company. In which direction a company’s social

media strategy would swing will be dependent on the way it manages its presence on social

networking websites. Incorrect or poor management of social media space can lead to heavy

negative brand reputation which can spiral out of control and have devastating effects for a brands

reputation. Consumers are having more and more faith in recommendations from users and friends

and less in brand communication messages and claims. Hence brands need to ensure a negative viral

message does not harm the brand reputation. Blocking or avoiding negative accusations on the

internet can be even more harmful. Converting a negative into a positive can generate goodwill and

can work in the brands favour in the long run.

Brand strategist need to understand the potential of their product or service on the social media

arena and learn to harvest it. Timing and good strategy is essential if a company wants to succeed

and use the space in the most effective manner. Hence brand managers need to learn this potential

and understand how to manage brand strategy with this target in mind. Providing suitable funds and

other resources along with an investment of time can yield many positive results.

It is all about harnessing this space properly and effectively which is fitting to the brands strategy

and objective. If a brand wishes to generate sales it must adapt a certain strategy which is more

fitting towards these targets compared to a brand that wishes to create positive brand identity.

Hence, social media is an effective, efficient and low cost public communication platform that

companies can use to create positive brand awareness, identity and valuable public communication.

Appendix

1.1 Interview questionnaire for users

PERSONAL DETAILS:

Name:

Date of Birth:

Q1. Are you aware of social networking websites?

Q2. What is your understanding of social networking websites?

Q3. Why do you use any social networking websites?

Q4. Out of the following list of social networking websites, please rate your frequency of usage from

1-5, 1 being ‘do not use’ and 5 being highly frequent.

1. Facebook

2. Twitter

3. Orkut

4. Google +

5. YouTube

6. Flickr

7. Blog (Blogspot, Wordpress etc.)

8. My Space

9. LinkedIn

10. StumbleUpon

11. Digg

12. Del.icio.us

13. Hi5

14. Tagged

15. Friendster

16. Others

Q5. Have you posted any feedback of any product/service/brand/company on any social networking

Website and/or internet website?

Q6. Have you ever praised any product/service/brand/company on any social networking website

and/or internet website?

Q7. Have you ever criticised any product/service/brand/company on any social networking website


Q8. Can you elaborate on the exact nature of the instance? [Question to be asked if respondent

replies YES to Q5-Q7]

Q9. What objective did you wish to achieve by posting your thoughts about a brand on the internet?

[Question to be asked if respondent replies YES to any question in Q5-Q7]

Q10. Why would you not want to post your thoughts about a brand on the internet? [Question to be

asked if respondent replies NO to any question in Q5-Q7]

Q11. Are you aware of brands being present on social networking websites such as on Facebook

Pages?

Q12. Do you follow any brands on any social networking website?

Q13. Why do you do so?

Q14. Do you also communicate with the brand on a social networking website by giving them your

opinion on a particular product or service or having general discussions?

Q15. Why not? [If reply to Q14 is NO]

Q16. What is the nature of these conversations? [If reply to Q14 is YES]

2.1 Transcribed interview recordings of users

PERSONAL DETAILS:

Name: Gaurav Sharma

Date of Birth: 15th August, 1988


A1. Yes I am aware of what social networking websites are


A2. My understanding of these websites is to connect to people, chatting with friends, getting close

to people from around the world. You can chat with people, be together, and meet old friends and

families.

Q3. Do you use any social networking websites?

A2. Yes I do



1. Facebook 5

2. Twitter 2

3. Orkut 1

4. Google + 1

5. YouTube 3

6. Flickr 1

7. Blog (Blogspot, Wordpress etc.) 1

8. My Space 1

9. LinkedIn 1

10. StumbleUpon 1

11. Digg 1

12. Del.icio.us 1

13. Hi5 1

14. Tagged 1

15. Friendster 1

16. Others None



A5. No

Q6. Have you ever praised any product/service/brand/company on any social networking website?


A6. No



A7. Might have

Q8. Why would you not want to post your thoughts about a brand on the internet?

A8. I don’t feel like, I think it doesn’t make a difference to anyone about what my experience was.

Q9. Why do you think your experience to other people may not count?

A9. I do remember posting such content some back but there were no responses from my friends and

I thought that maybe they are not interested in knowing what my experience was


Pages?

A10. Yes, I am aware.


A10. Yes but not actively, don’t read any updates.


A11. I feel associated with the brand but I don’t want to know on a daily basis on what they are doing

and not doing.



A12. No, I don’t

Q13. Why not?

A13. I usually don’t read their updates so the question of communicating with them doesn’t really

arise

PERSONAL DETAILS:

Name: Vandit Agarwal

Date of Birth: 29th July, 1989


A1. Yes

Q2. What is your understanding of such a website?

It keeps people connected like people away from home away from your city or away from your

country.


A3. Yes



1. Facebook 5

2. Twitter 1

3. Orkut 2

4. Google+ 2

5. Youtube 4

6. Flickr 1

7. Blogs 1

8. MySpace 1

9. LinkedIn 1

10. StumbleUpon 1

11. Digg 1

12. Delicious 1

13. Hi5 2

14. Tagged 1

15. Friendster 1

16. Other None



A5. No



A6. Might have spoken somewhere, sometime.



A7. No


A8. If someone asks me I will tell them but otherwise I don’t actively post anything. Don’t have the

time and I don’t see it making any sense.


Pages?

A9. Yes I am aware of such a thing.


A10. No, I don’t follow any brands or companies.

Q11. Why not?

A11. It clutters my newsfeed and besides I don’t know want to know what any brand is doing.

PERSONAL DETAILS:

Name: Tanvi Kamdar

Date of Birth: 25th June, 1988


A1. Yes


A2. Nice way to grab the youth’s attention. Not just youths but everyone’s attention and is also a

very good marketing tool. It is a good medium to connect to people too.


A3. Yes I am on Facebook



1. Facebook 5

2. Twitter 1

3. Orkut 1

4. Google+ 1

5. Youtube 5

6. Flickr 1

7. Blogs 3

8. MySpace 1

9. LinkedIn 5

10. StumbleUpon 1

11. Digg 1

12. Delicious 1

13. Hi5 1

14. Tagged 1

15. Friendster 1

16. Other none



A5. No



A6. Yes I do put my views about some service or product depending upon my experience if it is a good

one or a bad one.

Q7. Can you elaborate on the exact nature of the instance?

A7. No cannot recall anything as of now


A8. To know what others are thinking about it and to let other people know what I am thinking about

it and if I like something i want my friends to see it and why I like it and if they want to go for it. If I

don’t like it I don’t want them to use it.

Q9 Are you aware of brands being present on social networking websites such as on Facebook

Pages?

A9. Yea


A10. Yes


A11. To learn about sales, offers, getting information



A12. No

Q13. Why not?

A13. It’s far too much effort and why give the brand so much importance?

PERSONAL DETAILS:

Name: Nikita Tiwari

Date of Birth: 14th August, 1986


A1. Yes


A2. More of fun and a way to pass time and also to gain information.


A3. To stay in touch with friends you have lost touch with a long time ago.



1. Facebook 5

2. Twitter 1

3. Orkut 2

4. Google+ 5

5. Youtube 5

6. Flickr 1

7. Blogs 3

8. MySpace 2

9. LinkedIn 2

10. StumbleUpon 1

11. Digg 1

12. Delicious 1

13. Hi5 1

14. Tagged 1

15. Friendster 1

16. Other none



A5. No



A5. No never done it



A7. No, don’t think so either


A8. Doesn’t matter to companies or to friends what i think, everyone does what they think is best for

them


Pages?

A9. Yes


A10. Yes I do


A11. Giving a lot of updates about the stuff they have. I follow a lot of clothing brands so I get

updates on sales and offers of what is in and what not.



A12. No it’s only about taking information and not giving.

Q13. Why not?

A13. Just, I don’t feel like commenting back, it doesn’t really matter to them.

PERSONAL DETAILS:

Name: Hiten Udhwani

Date of Birth: 8th February, 1990


A1. Yes I’m aware of such websites


A2. It’s a social utility program where it encourages you to meet new people and make friends


A3. Just to keep in touch with friends from all over the world. After a while you have no source of

communication between them and hence these websites offer a good media of communication



1. Facebook 5

2. Twitter 3

3. Orkut 1

4. Google+ 1

5. Youtube 3

6. Flickr 2

7. Blogs 3

8. MySpace 1

9. LinkedIn 1

10. StumbleUpon 1

11. Digg 1

12. Delicious 1

13. Hi5 1

14. Tagged 1

15. Friendster 1

16. Other ibibo (1)



A5. Facebook about the Mac Book Pro, telling a friend my review because he wanted to buy one. It

wasn’t a general one but a specific one according to his usage and if he should purchase it or not.



A6. Yes, brand being an apple.


A7. When I first purchased the Mac Book Pro I also bought the iTouch at the same time. What I was

really fascinated about was that i could control my laptop through my iTouch which is known as an

iRemote. I don’t have to go to my computer to play a movie, click play it plays click fast forward it

fast forwards. It’s like a wireless remote control for my laptop and you control the resolution and the

camera, doesn’t lag or hang.



A8. Criticised it because it’s probably not the best thing I bought. It was a camera, either a canon or a

Casio can’t remember. It was hardly a 4MP camera but it was sleek and had a very small display and

that’s why I didn’t like it. It had good effects but I didn’t like the screen size.

Q9. Did you post this on Facebook?

A9. No on hi5, once upon a time when I was in Canada.

Q10. What objective did you wish to achieve by posting your thoughts about a brand on the

internet?

A10. I didn’t want everyone else to make the same mistake that I made and hence I tried to make

them avoid making bad purchases in the first place. With Apple I was encouraging people to buy

apple as compared to windows or Vaio although they might be cheaper but it’s a better thing to use

and cheaper in the long run.


Pages?

A11. Yeah, like groups and stuff.


A12. When it comes to communities I follow TV series like ‘How I Met Your Mother’, ‘True Blood’,

‘Entourage’ etc. I follow them to find out if any new episodes have come out.


A13. To find out when the new episode releases.



A14. Personally, no, no one is interested in my feedback. It’s just for me.

PERSONAL DETAILS:

Name: Siddharth Shah

Date of Birth: 4th September, 1987


A1. Yes, definitely.


A2. A place where you can communicate with a lot of people


A3. For the same reason, to communicate



1. Facebook 5

2. Twitter 2

3. Orkut 2

4. Google+ 1

5. Youtube 5

6. Flickr 1

7. Blogs 2

8. MySpace 1

9. LinkedIn 1

10. StumbleUpon 1

11. Digg 1

12. Delicious 1

13. Hi5 2

14. Tagged 1

15. Friendster 1

16. Other none



A5. None



A6. None



A7. Nope


A8. I don’t believe my opinion on any of these websites would make a very big difference

Q9. Tomorrow if you experience a product and your experience is bad, don’t you want to inform

other people of your poor experience and tell them not to buy it?

A9. I might, but then again it’s my personal opinion and if I have had a bad experience somebody else

might have a good one. So might as well not post it.

Q10. What about telling the brand that your product is not good so please change it?

A10. No I don’t believe in that. I believe that these companies keep developing their own product.

They already know everything you don’t need to tell them what to do or what not. They keep looking

for competition they see something happening they will go ahead and try to better their product. So

my opinion to them might not matter.


Pages?

A11. Yes I am aware


A12. No, not really

Q13. Why not?

A13. Social networks are supposed to be personal, not filled with brand related garbage.

PERSONAL DETAILS:

Name: Shilpa Dash



A1. Yeah


A2. Basically I see it as a good medium to connect with people with whom you cannot connect

through the telephone or meet. It has also developed as a good platform for marketing because a lot

of events and discussions are being started on Facebook.


A3. So that I can connect with people who are not close to me or staying close to me or who are in

faraway places so that I can connect with them easily.



1. Facebook 4

2. Twitter 3

3. Orkut 2

4. Google+ 1

5. Youtube 5

6. Flickr 1

7. Blogs 4

8. MySpace 1

9. LinkedIn 1

10. StumbleUpon 3

11. Digg 1

12. Delicious 1

13. Hi5 1

14. Tagged 1

15. Friendster 1

16. Other none



A5. No



A6. No



A7. Don’t think so, no.


A8. Why give it so much importance.

Q9. Shouldn’t you tell people not to go somewhere or buy a certain product because it’s bad?

A9. If someone asks me I might tell them what I think about it but I would not actively go and write

about it.


Pages?

A10. Yes


A11. Yes


A12. Twitter I follow celebs because they post interesting stuff. On Facebook I do follow some brands

because they post a lot of information on the happenings within the company and new launches,

sales etc. so if you like a brand you can remain informed about it by following them on Facebook.



A13. No, just read what they put up.

Q14. Why not?

A14. Just, I don’t think it makes any difference. I rather keep my opinions to myself

PERSONAL DETAILS:

Name: Sanchi Tibrewala

Date of Birth: 22nd May, 1990


A1. Yes


A2. It’s a place where you go online, meet friends, meet new people, chat, play games etc.


A3. To catch up with people whom I have lost touch with and to know what is happening with my

friends and their daily lives without actually having to meet them.



1. Facebook 5

2. Twitter 2

3. Orkut 3

4. Google+ 1

5. Youtube 3

6. Flickr 1

7. Blogs 3

8. MySpace 2

9. LinkedIn 3

10. StumbleUpon 1

11. Digg 1

12. Delicious 1

13. Hi5 3

14. Tagged 1

15. Friendster 2

16. Other none



A5. Yes


A6. Upon clothes on Facebook, I don’t remember entirely.

Q7. Was it positive or negative?

A7. I think positive.



A9. No, I guess not.

Q9. In future if you ever encounter a bad experience would you want to give your feedback on any

website?

A9. Not particularly


A10. I am not sure, there is no reason.

Q11. Wouldn’t you want others to know that you had a bad experience and make sure that they

don’t have something similar?

A11. Yes but that usually happens through some other medium, maybe offline.

Q12. Why not online?

A12. I don’t want to post it online if I have an issue I will go to the store and rectify it I wouldn’t want

to post it online.

Q13. . Are you aware of brands being present on social networking websites such as on Facebook

Pages?

A13. Yes


A14. Yes but I probably check on them very rarely


A15. To know about the latest trends and to know what is in and what is not in.



A16. It is more about taking information and not too much about giving back.

PERSONAL DETAILS:

Name: Mala Tibrewala

Date of Birth: 9th May, 1967


A1. Yeah


A2. Be able to catch up with all the conversation with friends and to know about the latest of what is

happening worldwide. It has made the world a small place.


A3. For probably the same reasons



1. Facebook 5

2. Twitter 1

3. Orkut 1

4. Google+ 1

5. Youtube 2

6. Flickr 1

7. Blogs 1

8. MySpace 1

9. LinkedIn 1

10. StumbleUpon 1

11. Digg 1

12. Delicious 1

13. Hi5 1

14. Tagged 1

15. Friendster 1

16. Other none



A5. Might have done



A6. I might not have given it on the internet but verbally offline.



A7. Could have, don’t really remember

Q8. Why not on the internet?

A8. It is too much to type and communicate.


Pages?

A9. Yes


A10. No

Q11. Why not?

A11. I’m not too much into brands

PERSONAL DETAILS:

Name: Dalia Nassar

Date of Birth: 20th July, 1988


A1. Yes


A2. Nowadays it is a tool for a good communication system. If you don’t have a proper use of it, it

can be time consuming for no use otherwise it can be very useful to connect with old friends. Just last

week i met a friend with whom i have lost touch long ago


A3. To keep my social network and to keep contact with everyone around the world. To learn about

new things and interesting news



1. Facebook 5

2. Twitter 2

3. Orkut 1

4. Google+ 1

5. Youtube 3

6. Flickr 2

7. Blogs 3

8. MySpace 1

9. LinkedIn 5

10. StumbleUpon 1

11. Digg 1

12. Delicious 1

13. Hi5 1

14. Tagged 1

15. Friendster 1

16. Other none



A5. No



A6. No



A7. No


A8. I prefer keeping it to myself

Q9. Don’t you want to tell your friends about your experiences?

A9. No not online

Q10. Why not online?

A10. Cause I don’t want everyone to know about it


Pages?

A11. Yes I do follow some celebrities.


A12. Some newspapers perhaps


A13. To keep updates and because I like them. To stay updated about what is happening around the

world.



A14. No I just get info from them.

Q15. Why not?

A15. Not sure, I just don’t feel like replying to them.

PERSONAL DETAILS:

Name: Mohit Gupta

Date of Birth: 4th November, 1988


A1. Yes, definitely


A2. A good way to stay in touch with friends and maintain contact with people.


A3. For the same reason and to share information I would want to share with friends



1. Facebook 5

2. Twitter 3

3. Orkut 2

4. Google+ 3

5. Youtube 4

6. Flickr 1

7. Blogs 3

8. MySpace 1

9. LinkedIn 1

10. StumbleUpon 1

11. Digg 1

12. Delicious 1

13. Hi5 2

14. Tagged 1

15. Friendster 1

16. Other none



A5. Yes, I have


A6. Whenever I try something new if I liked it a lot I might spoken about it.



A7. Don’t think so, no. If something very bad then I might have else not.


A8. If it’s something negative then it’s probably just to vent out anger. For charities ii try to create

awareness and tell my friends about it.

Q9. Is it also about telling your friends not to buy a certain product?

A9. No


Pages?

A10. Yes


A11. Yes TV shows, not sure about companies


A12. They keep me informed on what they are doing and what is new



A13. Only taking information, I don’t give back

Q14. Why not?

A14. I don’t think the brand wants to speak to me.

PERSONAL DETAILS:

Name: Harsha Rupani

Date of Birth: 2nd February, 1988


A1. Yes


A2. As a general understanding it’s a viral form of media which is fast spreading. A good platform to

exchange information right from something basic to something more advanced.


A3. I access it to get in touch with people around me and a nice platform to interact with everyone

around me.



1. Facebook 5

2. Twitter 5

3. Orkut 2

4. Google+ 1

5. Youtube 5

6. Flickr 3

7. Blogs 2

8. MySpace 2

9. LinkedIn 3

10. StumbleUpon 1

11. Digg 1

12. Delicious 1

13. Hi5 2

14. Tagged 1

15. Friendster 1

16. Other foursquare (3)



A5. Yes on twitter. It was mainly during the IPl


A6. The IPL is all about the ticketing and with the entire craze that is going on. We had booked tickets

online and we complained online to the authorities about our problem with the ticket.


A7. All my journalist friends are on twitter. It was the only informal way I could talk to them.

Q8. So you want to create awareness about your problem?

A8. Yes cause most of my target people are on twitter.

Q9. Do you want to tell people about your bad experiences and hence don’t do it this way?

A9. Yes and general awareness.


Pages?

A10. Yes like Blackberry and Apple.


A13. It is easier to gain info rather than opening the newspaper and gain info. It is frequently

updated and more convenient.



A14. No I don’t, I only like to read what they send out

Q15. If a brand posts a new product, would you want to tell them you like/didn’t like it?

A15. No

Q15. Why not?

A15. Twitter is simply a tool I use to communicate to people. I have no particular reason, never given

it a thought.

PERSONAL DETAILS:

Name: Salma Shahtit

Date of Birth: 29th October, 1989


A1. Yes


A2. One that connects people from all over the world together


A3. To connect to old friends, family and for entertainment.



1. Facebook 5

2. Twitter 4

3. Orkut 1

4. Google+ 2

5. Youtube 4

6. Flickr 3

7. Blogs 1

8. MySpace 1

9. LinkedIn 4

10. StumbleUpon 1

11. Digg 1

12. Delicious 1

13. Hi5 1

14. Tagged 1

15. Friendster 1

16. Other none



A5. On twitter.


A6. Back in Jordan I had once purchased a product from a telecommunication company with which I

was facing some problems. I kept telling them on twitter that I was facing a problem which they were

not fixing.


A7. To let the company know that I have been trying to contact them and nobody is responding to my

problem and to let others know their product is not good and sharing my experience.

Q8. Do you think companies would improve if a lot of people would start spreading the word like

this?

A8. Yes


Pages?

A9. Yes


A10. Yes


A11. Some of my friends ask me because they promote them and others because I’m interested in

their products.



A12. Only take rarely given back.

Q13. What if a company launches a new product and you don’t like it would you want to tell them?

A13. Maybe I will tweet but not directly tell them.

Q14. Why not?

A14. Only if I am extremely loyal and care about the product a lot I would else I won’t.

PERSONAL DETAILS:

Name: Guillaume Avranche

Date of Birth: 9th November, 1988


A1. Yes


A2. A social network is a mean to interact with other people in a fast way and to meet new people.


A3. It is very easy to chat and convenient to get info from others



1. Facebook 5

2. Twitter 1

3. Orkut 1

4. Google+ 1

5. Youtube 5

6. Flickr 2

7. Blogs 1

8. MySpace 1

9. LinkedIn 1

10. StumbleUpon 1

11. Digg 1

12. Delicious 1

13. Hi5 1

14. Tagged 1

15. Friendster 1

16. Other Dailymotion (3)



A5. Yes


A6. My thoughts about the situation like my interview with a company

Q7. Have you ever bought a product and liked/not liked it and went on Facebook and gave your

opinion about it?

A7. No I don’t think so, apart from Zara.

Q8. Was it good or bad?

A8. Zara is amazing, good of course

Q9. What was it about?

A9. I don’t remember but I’m sure I did it once

Q10. What objective did you wish to achieve by posting your thoughts about a brand on the

internet?

A10. Just because I felt like I wanted to say it because I was amazed.

Q11. Did you want to create awareness with your friends about Zara or were you just speaking your

mind out?

A11. A bit of both maybe, a bit of second more than the first.


Pages?

A12. Yes


A13. Maybe new movies, Zara and all fashion brands and magazine


A14. Because I just want to get informed of what is happening and what is new etc.

Q15. So you follow Zara, if Zara launches a new shirt, which you did not like, would you give your

opinion on the shirt?

A15. No I wouldn’t. I’m commenting when I’m in the store not online

Q15. So you won’t give your opinion?

A15. No, if I like it I would keep it to myself

Q16. Would you want to complain to a brand on social networks?

Q16. I think I would first want to call them directly rather going online and posting about it

PERSONAL DETAILS:

Name: Sharjeel Farooq

Date of Birth: 28th May, 1988


A1. Yes I am


A2. Social networking websites is a place where your friends family and relatives can be together

and they can share their views, photographs, comments etc.


A3. I use it for those relatives and those people that are there if they are not going to be there i have

no point being present on those websites.



1. Facebook 5

2. Twitter 4

3. Orkut 5

4. Google+ 3

5. Youtube 5

6. Flickr 4

7. Blogs 1

8. MySpace 1

9. LinkedIn 1

10. StumbleUpon 1

11. Digg 1

12. Delicious 1

13. Hi5 1

14. Tagged 3

15. Friendster 1

16. Other none



A5. Yes on Facebook I might have given it randomly. On Facebook I had once filled a survey where

they said that if I fill some forms I can win an iPhone and I gave it, twice.

Q6. If you buy a product and not liked it, would you come on Facebook and give your thoughts about

it?

A6. Oh, yes I might have done it multiple times. Restaurants, many times I have gone and given my

opinion. Many brands claim they are on sale but are actually not.

Q7. Are they mostly positive or negative?

A7. Most are positive because that is what people like to write about.


A8. It’s about sharing it, and telling people that you had a good time so why not share it?

Q9. Is it about creating awareness amongst people or simply speaking your mind out?

A9. It’s about showing people how much I’m enjoying

Q10. So it’s not about telling people that I had a good or bad experience and hence you should try or

not try this product?

A10. No I want other people to try it out and say no rather than me telling not to try something which

they might enjoy. But I will like to tell them what my experience was but not tell them not to try it

because of that.


Pages?

A11. Yes I am

Q12. Do you follow any brands or products on Facebook?

A12. Celebrities, yes, mostly Pakistani journalists and politicians.

Q13. What about any brands?

A13. Yes some brands like Burberry and House of Fraser


A14. To stay updated about new products or sales.



A15. I’m too lazy to give back it’s all about taking.

PERSONAL DETAILS:

Name: Saad Aamir



A1. Yes.


A2. It’s a place where people can network together and meet new people. You can network with a

variety of people and share information.


A3. Yes pretty much that is also why i use these websites, to connect to friends, colleagues and

family.



1. Facebook 5

2. Twitter 2

3. Orkut 2

4. Google+ 1

5. Youtube 5

6. Flickr 2

7. Blogs 2

8. MySpace 2

9. LinkedIn 3

10. StumbleUpon 1

11. Digg 1

12. Delicious 1

13. Hi5 1

14. Tagged 1

15. Friendster 2

16. Other none



A5. Yes I probably have.


A6. When I had once gone to a restaurant, it was a new one I had gone with my friends and we had a

good experience so I posted it on Facebook.

Q7.What objective did you wish to achieve by posting your thoughts about a brand on the internet?

A7. I think basically it’s because through these sites I can tell a lot more people about my experiences

and if I enjoyed something I want others to experience it for themselves too.

Q8. Is it all about speaking your mind out or also about creating awareness?

A8. I think more about letting them know about my experiences and hence you should either try or

not try it out.

Q9. Do you follow any brands on Facebook?

A9. Some celebrities but no products.


A10. I just find some of their things interesting.

Q11. Some people simply want to show that I follow them but some are genuinely interested in

them, where do you stand?

A11. I guess a bit of both but more on getting news.

Q12. Do you give back?

A12. No cause they won’t care.

PERSONAL DETAILS:

Name: Sweta Thakker

Date of Birth: 9th April, 1988


A1. Yes


A2. A place where people can communicate and stay in touch. Connect with people you have lost

touch with along with that being a form on entertainment.


A3. To keep in touch with people you have lost contact with it and communicate with friends.



1. Facebook 5

2. Twitter 2

3. Orkut 2

4. Google+ 3

5. Youtube 4

6. Flickr 1

7. Blogs 2

8. MySpace 1

9. LinkedIn 4

10. StumbleUpon 1

11. Digg 1

12. Delicious 1

13. Hi5 1

14. Tagged 1

15. Friendster 1

16. Other none



A5. Not on any of these

Q6. For example if you buy a new phone or go to a restaurant and you liked or did not like the

experience, would you post your opinion on the internet?

A6. I had bought a new Sony phone so I liked the page and that was probably the only interaction I

had with the brand. It was a way to get info and latest updates about the phone.

Q7. Thank you, but my question was slightly different. If for example your experience was bad would

you go to any of these sites and tell friends not to buy it?

A7. Yes I would do that but I haven’t done it yet.

Q8. Have you ever posted such content in the past on any of these websites on any brands?

A8. No cant recollect

Q9. You had mentioned that you won’t mind posting your opinion although you haven’t, why would

you do that?

A9. Because now everybody is on the internet and it’s easy to spread the word around.

Q10. So if your criticising a brand on Facebook, are you speaking your mind out, do you want to

create an awareness with your friends or are you trying to downgrade the company’s image?

A10. Speak my mind out

Q11. Are you also trying to indicate to your friends that you have had a good/bad experience and

hence they should try/not try a product?

A11. Yes

Q12. Like Sony, do you follow any other brands on any of these websites?

A12. Yes there are couple of TV shows and some celebrities that I follow.


A13. To stay in touch with latest updates, if I missed out an episode on a TV show I can catch up with

reruns.



A14. No, won’t make a difference. Random people add you and privacy is hurt.

2.2 Interview transcriptions of brand managers

PERSONAL DETAILS:

Name: Sanjay Mehta

Designation: Joint CEO

Organisation/Company: Social Wavelength Pvt. Ltd.

Q1. What are brands doing on social networking websites, why are they there to begin with?

A1. Every brand has its own reasons, the most common one coming from the marketing side.

Traditional ways of reaching their consumer have not been so attractive because it is not delivering.

Advertisement is not working because people are tired of ads everywhere. While the need to connect

to consumers still exists, the new means to do that is through social media. The consumer is spending

a lot of time there. Marketing is the biggest motivators but apart from that brands want to know

what consumers are talking about with respect to the brand and the company. Then there is online

reputation management. Brands want to create a positive impression by putting information

themselves out to brands on various platforms rather than allowing some unauthorised person to do

that.

Q2. What is more important for the brand, the marketing aspect or the reputation management?

A2. Both are equally important and for each brand they need to figure out where the big challenge

lies. For brands which have a heavy direct consumer contact, where there is a heavy service aspect

attached to it for example restaurants or hospitals where consumers would go back and talk about it

online, need to have more concern more about their online reputation than anything else. Services

are talked about much more than a physical product. There is an ideal thought that you would

recommend a brand to listen first before you take action. However, in reality it depends upon who is

signing the social media cheques. If it is the marketing guy then he would be motivated to go out and

do marketing efforts, if it is a PR person then they would want to manage their reputation first etc.

Q3. Are brands sceptical about the power of consumer complaints on the internet? How can a few

consumers complaining online on such a massive platform affect us?

A3. Its changing when there are examples where brands get hurt and hence other brands learn from

these instances and realise that consumer opinions on the internet are fast gaining importance. Its

like taking insurance against something which your not sure will happen or not. Some brands get

hurt and then learn from their mistakes whereas others proactively decide to take good measure

against disaster.

Q4. What do brands do to protect their reputation online?

A4. The brands listen to conversation and try to gauge consumer perception. They see what is being

written about them is it good or bad are there too many complaints etc. If there is a problem then

they want to respond back. Either you respond back on a one on one manner where a particular

consumers complaint is managed or you send out a general message for the entire crowd on a blog

or a public broadcast message. There is also an SEO angle, where if internet searches results throw

up a lot of incorrect or negative results; it can damage the brands reputation. Hence they want to

wipe out the negative ones by tackling them one by one and leave the positive ones to help build

reputation.

Q5. Tomorrow if a consumer posts a negative feedback about a brand, then the brand can come

forward and rectify it and help the consumer in some way but some consumers don’t want the

rectification and simply want to devalue the brands image because of a bad experience.

A5. What I believe is that anything that is showing up on social media is a reflection of what is

happening on ground. Consumers will not simply come and crib about a product for no reason,

something would have happened due to which people are not happy. There might be the extreme

cases where someone is doing simply out of hatred. If the volume of complaints increases, you need

to look at influencers rather than everybody. It might not be practical to track and solve every

problem posted on the internet and hence as a brand you need to focus on those conversations which

according to you can become viral quickly and has the potential to do damage to the brand. If a lot of

people are saying the same thing consistently everywhere, then that is the indication that something

is wrong and it needs to be rectified.

Q6. Has the social media space gained importance over traditional marketing?

A6. No absolutely not. There is a lot of time that people spend on social media but there are markets

and categories that the target market may not be spending enough time on social networking

websites. For brands whose target market regularly accesses Facebook, Twitter etc., there focus may

be on social media but this space cannot function by itself and still needs the support of traditional

marketing. Social media has gained importance but normal marketing efforts are still here to stay.

There is a trust factor built into social media where if a consumer says a good thing about a product

or brand to another person it is of more value than a company’s own advertisements.

Q7. Do you think there are certain brands that don’t need to be on social media and are present

simply to be a part of the bandwagon?

A7. It’s possible, this sort of thing always happens when a new innovation is unleashed and not just

companies but even people start buying a certain product even if they don’t need it. The platform

creates a lot of hype and buzz and there will be a certain percentage of brands that don’t need to be

on social media today but they might need to be there in future. In time, almost everybody, no

matter what business or company will find the need to be present on these websites. Today some

brands may be there due to the hype but right now they undergo the learning curve and can know a

thing or two about social media and accordingly to devise a future strategy.

References

Asur, S. and Huberman, B.A. (2010) Predicting the Future with Social Media

Bickart, B. and Schindler, R.M. (2001) Internet Forums as Influential Sources of Consumer

Information, Journal of Interactive Marketing, vol. 15(3), pp. 31-40

Brand Autopsy (2007) Dell and Social Media, Available at

http://www.brandautopsy.com/2007/09/dell-and-social.html, [Accessed on 22 July 2011]

Boyatizis, R.E. (1998) Transforming qualitative information: thematic analysis and code

development, London: SAGE

Dellarocas, C. (2003) The Digitization of Word of Mouth: Promise and Challenges of Online Feedback

Mechanisms, Journal of Management Science, vol. 49(10), pp. 1407-1424

Denzin, K.N. and Lincoln, Y.S. (2005). The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rd Edition),

London: SAGE

Facebook (2005) Facebook Statistics, Available at

http://www.facebook.com/press/info.php?statistics, [Accessed on 7th September, 2011]

Gruen, T.W., Osmonbekov, T. and Czaplewski, A.J. (2005) eWOM: The Impact of Customer-to-

Customer Knowledge Know-how Exchange on Customer Loyalty and Value, Journal of Business

Research, vol. 59, pp. 449-456

Ha, H. (2004) Factors Influencing Consumer Perceptions of Brand Trust Online, Journal of Product

and Brand Management, vol. 13(5), pp. 329-342

Inside Facebook (2010) Whose Using Facebook Around the World? The Demographics of Facebook’s

Top 15 Country Markets, Available at http://www.insidefacebook.com/2010/06/08/whos-using-

facebook-around-the-world-the-demographics-of-facebooks-top-15-country-markets/, [Accessed on

2nd September, 2011]

Kaplan, A.M. and Haenlein, M. (2010) Users of the World, Unite! The Challenges and Opportunites of

Social Media, Business Horizons, vol. 53, pp. 59-68

Kvale, S. (1996) Interviews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing, London SAGE

Lohr, S. L. (2009) Sampling: Design and Analysis, Sengage Learning

Leskovec, J., Adamic, L.A. and Huberman, B.A. (2008) The Dynamics of Viral Marketing, ACM, New

York, pp. 1-46

Mangold, G.W. and Faulds, D.J. (2009) Social Media: The New Hybrid Element of the Promotion Mix,

Business Horizons, vol. 52, pp.357-365

Mashable (2009) Facebook Slams Twitter: Farmville is Bigger than you, Available at

http://mashable.com/2009/12/02/farmville-bigger-than-twitter/, [Accessed on 7th September, 2011]

Mashable (2009) Presenting: 10 of the Smartest Big Brands on Social Media, Available at

http://mashable.com/2009/02/06/social-media-smartest-brands/, [Accessed on 22 July 2011]

Merriam, S.B. (2009) Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation, John Wiley and

Sons, San Francisco

Modzelewski, F.M. (2000) Finding a Cure for Viral Marketing, Available at

http://www.dmnews.com/finding-a-cure-for-viral-marketing-ills/article/68355/, [Accessed on 3

August 2011]

Muniz, A.M. Jr. and O’Guinn, T.C. (2001) Brand Communities, Journal of Consumer Research, vol. 27,

pp. 412-432

Newman, I. and Benz, C.R. (1998). Qualitative-Quantitative Research Methodology, SUI Press, Illinois.

Petty, R.E. and Capiocco, J.T. (1986) Communication and Persuasion: Central and Peripheral Routes

to Attitude Change, Public Opinion Quaterly, vol. 52, pp. 262-275

Phelps, J.E., Lewis, R., Mobilio, L., Perry, D. and Raman, N. (2004) Viral Marketing or Electronic Word

of Mouth Advertising: Examining Consumer Responses and Motivations to Pass Along Email, Journal

of Advertising Research, pp. 333-348

Senecal, S. and Nantel, J. (2004) The Influence of Online Product Recommendations on Consumers’

Online Choices. Journal of Retailing, vol. 80, pp. 159-169

SEOMoz (2009) Social Media Marketing Guide, Available at http://www.seomoz.org/article/social-

media-marketing-tactics, [Accessed on 6th September, 2011]

Social Media Today (2008) Social Media Disasters (Or Not Having a Social Media Strategy Can Hurt),

Available at http://socialmediatoday.com/index.php?q=SMC/37982, [Accessed on 22 July 2011]

Social Media Today (2009) Twitter Demographics, Available at

http://socialmediatoday.com/index.php?q=SMC/78505, [Accessed on 2nd September, 2011]

Social Media Today (2010) 40 Most Popular Social Networking Sites of the World, Available at

http://socialmediatoday.com/soravjain/195917/40-most-popular-social-networking-sites-world,

[Accessed on 2nd September, 2011]

Stake, R.E. (2010) Qualitative Research: Studying How Things Work, Guilford Press, New York

Subramani, M.R. and Rajagopalan, B. (2003) Knowledge-Sharing and Influence in Online Social

Networks via Viral Marketing. Communication of the ACM, vol. 46, pp. 300-307

Trusov, M., Bucklin, R.E. and Pauwels, A. (2009) Effects of Word-of-Mouth Versus Traditional

Marketing: Findings From an Internet Social Networking Site. Journal of Marketing, vol. 73, pp. 1-24

ZD Net (2006) Age Demographics of MySpace Visitors, Available at

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/itfacts/age-demographics-of-myspace-visitors/11967, [Accessed on 2nd

September, 2011]

electronic word of mouth (ewom) on social networking sites and its effect on brand reputation...

Documents

negative information

large company

inaccurate information

brand communities

brand autopsy

entire social media

quick information

information analysis