social media hype? - kommunikationsforum

Social media hype? A critical assessment of corporate social media from a consumer perspective


1

Foreword

This thesis consists of 243,230 characters (excluding spaces) corresponding to 110.5

standard pages (2200 characters each).

The thesis is produced on the basis of a fully integrated group work, where all

chapters, sections and subsections are completed as a group effort. Hence, the

division of responsibilities should be considered guiding.

Moreover, the enclosed executive summary has a size of 3,001 spaces corresponding

to 1.3 standard pages.

Audio files of interviews conducted for this research are enclosed on a DVD attached

to this thesis.


2

Executive summary

This thesis has from a social constructionist stance provided a critical perspective on

the current literature that advice companies to incorporate social media in their

corporate communication strategies. A number of arguments and recommendations

discovered in articles, books and journals related to the corporate use of social media

have been reduced to three overall statements from which the problem statement is

constructed. 1) Social media allows companies to engage in dialogue with their

consumers. 2) Social media allows companies to learn about their consumers’ beliefs,

attitudes, and needs. 3) Social media allows companies to create and spread word-‐of-‐

mouth and brand-‐related-‐messages through non-‐marketers. The three statements are

assessed from a consumer perspective and the intention is to interpret and

understand the perceived attitudes and experiences from current users of social

media. Facebook functions as the social media site on which the research is founded.

Based on the intention to employ an interpretive worldview the data generated for

this research derives from five individual semi-‐structured life world interviews. The

five respondents are chosen based on their English proficiency and

professional/educational background. Furthermore, an initial expert interview

conducted at the beginning of the research process has contributed with inspiration

and input for areas of investigation.

Theoretical contributions combined with empirical data have highlighted a number of

elements that influence consumers’ perception of corporate social media.

Identity construction and self-‐presentation affect the respondents’

activities on Facebook. The [post-‐] postmodern consumer attaches symbolic values to

brands or companies and therefore consumes with the intention of constructing

identity by the means of cultural resources. The respondents make choices on

Facebook based on the associations they prefer linked to their online persona.

Quality and relevance are factors that influence the respondents’

motivation to engage with companies via Facebook. If content is considered spam or

irrelevant, the respondents are inclined to un-‐follow the corporate Facebook sites.

Consumers in time become literate towards marketing techniques and

the growing tendency in corporate use of social media indicates that this is the latest

development in the current branding paradigm. One respondent utters dissatisfaction

with companies that appear present on social media, simply due to its popularity in a

corporate context.


3

By combining the conceptual and contextual framework with the theoretical and

empirical contributions, four overall discussions have been constructed. All

discussions are combined in the final conclusion, which is aimed at answering the

problem statement that guides the research. The social constructionist approach to

knowledge production makes it impossible to generalize on the findings from a

qualitative study. However, the data from the interviews provides interesting and

complex perspectives on consumers’ use of corporate social media.

The link between the opportunities attainable for companies when

entering the world of social media is not as simple as the employed literature

indicates. The authors of this thesis do not deny that statement 1,2, and 3 are possible

through corporate social media, however a number of aspects that affect consumers‘

activities and interaction with corporate Facebook sites have been outlined.


4

Table of contents

1. CHAPTER 1: Introduction (C) ........................................................................... 6 1.1. Situational context ................................................................................................. 6 1.2. Motivation ................................................................................................................. 7 1.3. Problem statement ................................................................................................. 7 1.4. Thesis structure ...................................................................................................... 8 1.5. Delimitations and future research ................................................................ 10

2. CHAPTER 2: Methodology (C) ........................................................................ 12 2.1. Scientific approach (O) ...................................................................................... 12 2.2. Qualitative research theory (L) ...................................................................... 15 2.3. Qualitative interview research (L) ................................................................ 19 2.3.1. Ethics in qualitative research ............................................................................. 23 2.3.2. Alternative qualitative methodology ............................................................... 24

2.4. Expert interviews (O) ......................................................................................... 25 2.5. Validity in qualitative research (O) ............................................................... 26 2.6. Two researchers in one investigation (L) ................................................... 27 2.7. Chapter sum up (C) .............................................................................................. 29

3. CHAPTER 3: The conceptual and contextual framework (C) .............. 30 3.1. Consumer culture vs. the branding paradigm (O) .................................... 30 3.2. The [post-‐] postmodern consumer (O) ......................................................... 31 3.3. The rise of the internet (L) ............................................................................... 36 3.4. Web 2.0, UGC and social media (L) ................................................................. 39 3.5. Facebook (L) .......................................................................................................... 40 3.6. Social media theory (O) ..................................................................................... 42 3.7. The success and rise of social media (L) ...................................................... 45 3.7.1. The hype cycle (L) .................................................................................................... 47

3.8. Chapter sum up (C) .............................................................................................. 51

4. CHAPTER 4: The interview and its respondents (C) .............................. 52 4.1. Constructing the interview guide (L) ............................................................ 52 4.2. Sampling of research respondents (O) ......................................................... 55 4.2.1. Research respondents ............................................................................................ 58

5. CHAPTER 5: Qualitative data analysis theory (L) ................................... 60

6. CHAPTER 6: Statement 1 (C) .......................................................................... 65 6.1. Origins of statement (L) ..................................................................................... 65 6.2. Qualitative data analysis (L) ............................................................................ 69 6.3. Discussion (C) ....................................................................................................... 75

7. CHAPTER 7: Statement 2 (C) .......................................................................... 78 7.1. Origins of statement (O) .................................................................................... 78 7.2. Theoretical analysis (O) .................................................................................... 79 7.3. Qualitative data contribution (O) ................................................................... 86 7.4. Discussion (C) ....................................................................................................... 89

8. CHAPTER 8: Statement 3 (C) .......................................................................... 92 8.1. Word-‐of-‐mouth (O) ............................................................................................. 92 8.2. Origins of statement (O) .................................................................................... 94 8.3. Qualitative data analysis (O) ........................................................................... 96 8.4. Discussion (C) .................................................................................................... 100

9. CHAPTER 9: Interview with Preben Mejer (L) ...................................... 103 9.1. Empirical contribution (L) ............................................................................. 104 9.2. Discussion (O) .................................................................................................... 107

10. CHAPTER 10: Conclusion (C) ...................................................................... 109


5

11. Bibliography ..................................................................................................... 115 11.1. Books .................................................................................................................... 115 11.2. Journal articles .................................................................................................. 116

12. List of appendices ........................................................................................... 119 Authors: Line Hartvig Berg (L) Olivia Myrthue (O) Collaboration (C) List of illustrations and tables

-‐ Illustration 1: Basic qualitative design

-‐ Illustration 2: Two researchers in one study

-‐ Illustration 3: Social media by information half-‐life and depth, and

associated marketing objectives and purposes

-‐ Illustration 4: Classification of social media by social presence/media

richness and self-‐presentation/self-‐disclosure

-‐ Illustration 5: The hype cycle of innovation

-‐ Table 1: List of respondents

-‐ Illustration 6: Components of qualitative data analysis


6

1. CHAPTER 1: Introduction (C)

1.1. Situational context In a highly interconnected and constantly developing world, it can be difficult for

companies to find their footing. The days where TV, radio, newspapers, and magazines

dominated the media sphere are long gone and instead new forms of communication

and media channels appear regularly. It proves difficult for companies to both catch

up with the current development, but also develop the skill to realize which

communication channels are most appropriate to reach their current and prospective

consumers. Furthermore, the limitations and constraints that governed information

previously are slowly disappearing, creating much more connected, informed and

active consumers. It is now possible for consumers to easily locate and share

information on whatever they wish, which has resulted in a loss of control for

companies. This means that the current business world is highly influenced by

consumers. Therefore it is demanded that companies become much more consumer-‐

oriented in their corporate communication. In correlation with this, it is significant to

mention the reflexive state that occurs between the existing consumer society and the

related trends in branding activities (Holt 2002). It is argued that companies’

branding activities and techniques are determined by the current consumer culture.

The two areas are connected and highly influence each other. The alterations that

happens in one area pushes forward change in the other. In relation to this constant

influence and development between these two areas, it is interesting to mention the

notion of social media. Various social media platforms have enjoyed success in the last

years and have created a culture where it is natural for people to create and possess a

personal space online. Facebook is undoubtedly one of these platforms.

The notion of a postmodern and post-‐postmodern consumer has

cleared the way for the growing interest in social media. This consumer has become

more marketing literate than ever before and therefore companies are required to

employ alternative branding techniques. With the emergence of social media in the

consumer culture, more and more companies have included this communication

channel in their corporate communication strategies. The current business world is

saturated with the idea that companies need to have a presence on social media and

that “not to be on Facebook, is not to exist [..]” (Patterson 2011: 2). It seems that this

has created a business world where the corporate use of social media is inevitable

when wanting to connect with the contemporary consumer. However, with this thesis

we aim to question this conception, and offer a consumer perspective on corporate

use of social media.


7

1.2. Motivation

Being master level students and potential future practitioners of corporate

communication, social media has become an integrated part of our academic,

professional, and personal lives. The introduction of social media in a corporate

context has grown along with our years at the university. It is difficult to avoid this

medium in any discussion regarding corporate communication and integrated

marketing communication. Throughout the years, we have been presented with

literature on web 2.0, user-‐generated content and social media with the aim of linking

it to a business context. The focus on corporate social media has initially provided us

with a positive attitude and high expectations of this communication channel.

However, during a six month internship with a Danish digital advertising agency one

of the authors of this thesis experienced cases of disappointing implementation of

corporate social media and clients with false expectations of the opportunities and

possibilities available for their businesses. It appeared that some companies desired a

presence in the corporate world of social media, however were not willing to provide

the resources necessary to carry out the strategies, nor knowledgeable of its actual

potential. This experience has cleared the way for us to develop a new and more

critical attitude towards corporate social media and it has reminded us of another

concept called the hype cycle. New innovations deemed the ‘latest thing’ in business

tend to go through a certain hype cycle where the expectations of its possibilities are

exaggerated. It is often difficult for any innovation to live up to these inflated

expectations and eventually the understanding of the actual possibilities and

opportunities available will reach an appropriate plateau (Fenn and Raskino 2008).

We do not wish to place the implementation of corporate social media on the hype

cycle, however we intend to question whether the expectations of the concept have

been excessively inflated and its possibilities exaggerated in current corporate social

media literature.

1.3. Problem statement

The first step in our research process has been significant in the formulation of the

final problem statement that guides this study. We have conducted extensive research

within corporate social media literature and subtracted statements, arguments and

recommendations that all argue for the opportunities and potentials available for

companies when employing social media in their corporate communication practices.

These statements, arguments and recommendations have been condensed and


8

formulated into three overall generic statements, which will be challenged and

questioned throughout the thesis.

Problem statement:

This thesis will from a consumer perspective question three overall statements regarding

corporate use of social media evident in contemporary social media literature.

1) Social media allows companies to engage in dialogue with their consumers

2) Social media allows companies to learn about their consumers’ beliefs,

attitudes, and needs

3) Social media allows companies to create and spread word-‐of-‐mouth and brand-‐

related-‐messages through non-‐marketers

Based upon the desired outcome, a critical assessment of corporate social media could

have been addressed in a number of ways. We have chosen to assess the three

corporate social media statements from a consumer perspective. The aim is to inquire

current consumers active on social media regarding their interaction and engagement

with companies via social media. Due to its sheer size and popularity, we have chosen

to make Facebook the case study of our research. Many of the statements, arguments,

and recommendations evident in social media literature are based on the general

concept of social media, which therefore should make Facebook as good a platform as

any other. Besides the empirical data, we will assess parts of our research through

theoretical evidence and former studies conducted on the subject.

1.4. Thesis structure The structure of this thesis is governed by the three statements of corporate social

media, and therefore entails a different structure compared to the traditional

approach in which theory, analysis, and discussion are grouped together in three

separate parts. We have chosen to divide each statement into three separate analytical

chapters in which each will include a theoretical introduction, a theoretical or

empirical analysis, and a final discussion. Statement 1 and 3 will be assessed

empirically based on the data generated through qualitative interviews. Statement 2

will assessed both theoretically and empirically based on former research on social

media and our empirical data.


9

Chapter 1 covers the entire introduction including an explanation of the

situational context, which makes the production of this thesis relevant. Furthermore,

we clarify the motivation behind the chosen problem statement by relating the theme

of social media to our own professional experiences with social media. Finally, we

have outlined the delimitations and potential future research.

Chapter 2 is named methodology and explains and justifies the

methodological choices made throughout the research. At first we present the

scientific approach of choice, which is found within the interpretive worldview -‐ more

specifically social constructionism. The research method of this study is of qualitative

nature and we have conducted individual semi-‐structured life world interviews with

five participants. Each topic will be covered theoretically, as well as include an

explanation of how the interviews are conducted. This includes a discussion of

alternative qualitative methodology and the ethics of doing research. Finally, this

chapter includes a discussion concerning the validity in qualitative research, as well as

our perception of knowledge production in a study that involves two researchers.

Chapter 3 includes the entire conceptual and contextual framework of the

thesis. Initially, we introduce the reader to the concept of a postmodern and post-‐

postmodern consumer, which makes the notion of social media relevant altogether. In

order to discuss social media in a corporate context, we find it necessary to present

the foundation on which social media exists. We therefore make an introduction to the

emergence of the internet, web 2.0 and user-‐generated content. Afterwards the

characteristics of Facebook are introduced, followed by a presentation of two social

media models that provide an overview of the many facets of this medium. Finally, the

section will be concluded with a link between the sheer size and success of Facebook

and the hype surrounding the corporate use of it

Chapter 4 introduces the interview guide that has steered the qualitative

research interviews. Furthermore, the selection of interview participants will be

explained in the sub-‐chapter focused on sampling.

Chapter 5 presents the theoretical foundation for the method of analysis

applied to the empirical data generated. This chapter defines how data is reduced,

displayed and how final conclusions are drawn in the analysis.

Chapter 6 deals with the first of the three corporate social media statements

introduced in the problem statement of this thesis; social media allows companies to

engage in dialogue with their consumers. Firstly, the origins of the statement are

presented by introducing the authors and literature responsible for it. Following this,

the chapter will move onto an analysis of the empirical data generated from the five

individual qualitative research interviews. This analysis is structured around specific

questions asked during the interviews that provide particularly relevant data in


10

regards to statement 1. Finally, in a discussion the conceptual and contextual

framework is applied in relation to the statement and the corresponding analysis.

Chapter 7 revolves around statement 2; social media allows companies to

learn about their consumers’ beliefs, attitudes, and needs. Similar to the first statement,

the literature where this statement is evident will be presented. Afterwards, the thesis

includes a comprehensive introduction and analysis of theory in relation to self-‐

presentation and identity creation, which is relevant to include when questioning this

statement. This is accompanied by an analysis of the empirical data that will

contribute to the questioning of this statement. Finally, all this will be combined with

the conceptual and contextual framework in a discussion.

Chapter 8 concerns the final statement, social media allows companies to

create and spread word-‐of-‐mouth and brand-‐related-‐messages through non-‐marketers.

The chapter makes a short introduction and presentation of the concept word-‐of-‐

mouth. Afterwards, the literature and authors responsible for the statement will be

presented. Similarly to chapter 6, this statement will be assessed empirically by the

means of a qualitative data analysis. Finally, the chapter will be concluded in a

discussion that combines the statement with the conceptual and contextual

framework, word-‐of-‐mouth theory and analytical results.

In chapter 9 we have employed the results of an expert interview conducted

with futurologist and digital media consultant Preben Mejer. This provides interesting

insight into the development of social media and communication forms, as well as a

future perspective of the corporate use of Facebook. His input is combined with the

respondents’ opinions and attitudes on specific issues related to social media and

Facebook. Similar to the previous three chapters, this is concluded with a discussion

that returns to the conceptual and contextual framework of the thesis.

Finally, the thesis will be completed in chapter 10 with a final conclusion that

sums up all the chapters. Findings and discussions will be combined in an attempt to

answer the problem statement.

1.5. Delimitations and future research When studying a subject, it is impossible to assess it all possible perspectives and

hence, it is not feasible to include all elements that can be considered relevant.

Furthermore, this thesis is restricted by a maximum number of pages. Due to these

limitations, it has been necessary to narrow the scope of this thesis and thereby

exclude many topics. The following section will attempt to highlight some of the

aspects that could have provided appropriate information and dimensions, but have


11

been excluded. Nevertheless, some of these could provide interesting study objectives

in future research.

We have in this thesis not been able to assess whether it is possible to define which

industries are well suitable and perhaps most suitable for social media strategies. We

are aware that corporate communication strategies differ from industries, and

acknowledge that the use of social media in a corporate context will possibly be

affected as well.

It has not been the intention to suggest methods for companies to

evaluate their own position against social media strategy. Nor to provide

recommendations or how-‐to-‐guides focused on how to implement a social media

strategy.

A few months before embarking on this research, Facebook went

public. This was very anticipated and publicized, and did not produce the results that

many projected. This could have provided an interesting background and point of

research. However, this was not relevant for the purpose of this research.

The use of social media and Facebook naturally differs from country to

country, as other culture aspects do. Therefore, the thesis could have taken point of

departure in a specific country and thus make the conclusions culture specific.

However, this was refrained from due to universality of the literature employed. The

corporate social media authors have not outlined specific cultures relevant for social

media and neither will we.

We make a clear distinction between the use of corporate social media

in the aim of listening, following and monitoring, and the actual proactive presence on

social media. This makes a difference in the level of involvement for companies.

Therefore, the statements chosen from the social media literature are approached

from the perspective of an actual presence. Thus, this thesis does not evaluate on the

corporate possibilities in using social media for monitoring.

Finally, as will be outlined later in the thesis, there are numerous social

media platforms. In this thesis we have only focused on the social network Facebook,

and have in this regard focused the three statements in relations to this specific

platform. Consequently, it is likely the three statements would turn out differently had

the focus been on any other platform. However, we found it necessary to specify our

efforts on one specific platform and chose Facebook due to its size, prevalence and

media attention.


12

2. CHAPTER 2: Methodology (C) The following chapter will revolve around the methodology employed in this thesis.

When conducting research it is imperative to take on a scientific paradigm to the

production of knowledge. This approach will guide the research and the appertaining

methods employed to investigate. With social constructionism as the choice of

scientific paradigm, it was natural to take on a qualitative research methodology,

which is applicable in the aim of investigating the meaning construction of individuals.

By conducting five individual research interviews, we are able to co-‐construct useful

knowledge, in the aim of investigating the participants’ attitudes towards corporate

social media. Furthermore, we will shortly mention the ethical dilemmas that are

relevant to be aware of in qualitative research. Additionally, the chapter will present

focus groups as an alternative research methodology. Finally, we will consider the

validity in qualitative research and the impact two researchers have on one

investigation.

2.1. Scientific approach (O)

Egon C. Guba (1990) states that a scientific paradigm is “a basic set of beliefs that

guides action, whether of the everyday garden variety or action taken in connection

with a disciplined inquiry” (17). Simply put, a scientific approach guides the type of

inquiry and how to investigate this inquiry. Similarly, Ghauri and Grønhaug (2010)

state that a specific kind of research approach prescribes the relationship between

methods, data and theories. And with every paradigm follows different assumptions

about how to best access the knowledge of a field (Daymon and Holloway 2002). With

the following section we seek to explain and define the acquired scientific approach

for this thesis. This approach directs the general understanding of reality and

knowledge, and simultaneously has led to the chosen approach of method, data and

theory.

The scientific approach chosen for this thesis is social constructionism1. This goes

closely hand in hand with the chosen worldview orientation, interpretive. Similar to

the scientific paradigm the orientation of either an interpretive or realist worldview

guides the research questions and the choice of method to do research (Daymon and

Holloway 2002: 4). We have decided on the interpretive orientation, in that it seeks to 1 It is important to mention that the terms social constructivism and social constructionism are often used interchangeably. However, author Kenneth J. Gergen (1985) believes that there is a difference and agues for the use of constructionism instead of constructivism in scientific theory. Social constructivism is according to Gergen (1985) a concept used within perceptual theory. Therefore we will in this thesis rely on the term social constructionism.


13

explore the way people make sense of their life worlds and aims to understand what

their intentions, motivations, and subjective experiences are. Simply put, with an

interpretive stance we are able to understand the social reality of our respondents,

from their point of view (Daymon and Holloway 2002: 4). The interpretive worldview

draws upon the scientific paradigm social constructionism. At the core both challenge

the notion that reality is something that can be discovered ‘out there’. Instead, both

rely on the idea that ‘reality’ is what we live in and co-‐construct through cultural

interaction and shared history (Daymon and Holloway 2002). Contrarily, the realist

position is concerned with discovering universal laws in the world surrounding us

(Daymon and Holloway 2002). Similarly, the positivist notion assumes that by

observing these universal laws in nature, scientists can realize how things ‘really’ are

and how they ‘really’ work (Guba 1990). As Guba (1990) states, with this traditional

approach “[t]he ultimate aim of science is to predict and control natural phenomena”

(19). This view is in complete contradiction to social constructionism, where it is

believed that everything is perceived from a perspective, and therefore knowledge

cannot be based on one reality and there are no objective facts (Burr 1995). Social

constructionists do not intend to predict or control the ‘real’ world. Instead the aim is

to re-‐construct reality at the point in which it exists by the means of its constructors

(Guba 1990). With social constructionism, the traditional search for truth has now

been challenged with a new method.

According to author Vivien Burr (1995), the social constructionist

position does not consist of one single feature that can be defined as social

constructionism. However, based on professor Kenneth Gergen’s (1985) work she has

taken four key assumptions, and if research has its foundation on one of these

assumptions, it can be defined as a social constructionism approach. She refers to

these assumptions as “things you will absolutely have to believe in order to be a social

constructionist” (Burr 1995: 2). We will here shortly describe these key assumptions.

Firstly, social constructionists dispute the idea that reality can be

revealed through observation, as alleged by the realist worldview and positivistic

paradigm. Furthermore, they caution individuals to question the assumptions of the

appearance of the world. Secondly, social constructionists support the belief that how

one understands the world depends upon where and when one lives. This means that

people are products of the culture and history they exist in, and aspects such as

society and economics have a huge effect on one’s understanding. Therefore, the

knowledge that people have is artifacts of the time they live in. This means that one

way of understanding (also referred to as truth) is not necessarily better than any

other. Since social constructionists do not think of knowledge and understanding as

aspects to find in nature or in ‘reality’, the third assumption is related to where


14

knowledge then can be found. They believe that through social interaction, people

construct knowledge and understanding between them. With daily interaction with

people surrounding us, ideas of knowledge are fabricated. Consequently, the idea of

truth depends on the cultural and historic surroundings and is a product of the social

interaction individuals are engaged in with others. Furthermore, this rejects the

realist/positivism belief that truth can be found by objectively observing it. Finally,

the fourth assumption is related to the aspect that knowledge and social interaction

goes hand in hand. The possibilities are endless and with differing ‘negotiated’

understandings, abundant social constructs can be formed of the world (Burr 1995: 2-‐

5). As Guba (1990) mentions, reality exists in peoples’ minds, and therefore the

number of realities is multiple (26).

As the above paragraph reflects, social constructionists deny that

knowledge can be observed and captured in nature; hence knowledge is not a direct

replication of reality. With this notion in mind, the understanding of truth becomes

difficult (Guba 1990). From an interpretive and social constructionist orientation, a

notion such as meaning is not standardized, but instead comes from who we are as

individuals and from the social interactions we share. Shared meaning is then

something that is accomplished in unison and is a big part of shaping one’s reality

(Daymon and Holloway 2002, Burr 1995). A social constructionist does not view

knowledge as something that a person possesses, but something that happens in the

process of social interaction (Burr 1995). Therefore research results are not a report

or explanation of ‘reality out there’, but instead the research process itself is the

creator of the results (Guba 1990). This makes the social constructionist view highly

subjective. With this perception in mind, the qualitative method was a natural choice

of methodology. However, we will return to this choice in sub-‐chapter 2.2 of this

thesis.

Burr (1995) argues that social constructionism has emerged from and

is influenced by a number of disciplines and traditions. However, the intellectual

movement called postmodernism has set the scene for the emergence of social

constructionism. Postmodernism, which we will explain in more detail later, has its

focus on fields such as art, literature, architecture, and cultural studies. Shortly

explained, postmodernism emerged as a reaction to and questioning of modernism.

Modernism represents a time period where science had a focus on the search for truth

through reasoning and rationality (Burr 1995). As Burr (1995) explains it

“postmodernism is a rejection of both the idea that there can be an ultimate truth and

of structuralism, the idea that the world we see is the result of a hidden structure” (9).

Therefore, with the rise of postmodernism it became clear that there is no universal

knowledge and that science should not pursue this ‘one’ truth (Firat and Venkatesh


15

1995). With the unfolding of postmodernism, the road was paved for the scientific

paradigm social constructionism to arise.

Conclusively, with the idea that truth cannot be discovered or found in

nature, the aim of traditional research – uncovering the truth – does not apply any

longer. In social constructionism, there is an understanding and acknowledgement

that it is impossible to expose the truth about people or society and with this the goal

of research has been re-‐shaped. It is accepted that there are many possible constructs

of reality, and thus many ‘truths’. Instead, the purpose of research is the usefulness

the researcher’s interpretation of a phenomenon might bring (Burr 1995: 112).

Therefore, we acknowledge that this thesis will not uncover whether the statementss

that are proposed for the use of social media are ‘true’ or not, nor how consumers

‘really’ feel about companies’ use of social media. Alternatively, we will address the

current consumer perception of the corporate use of social media and thereby

broaden the knowledge on the subject. Rather than confirming or denying the

statements for corporate social media use, we will add a new dimension to its current

understanding through insights from individual consumers. With this, the thesis will

attempt to broaden the concept of corporate social media use.

2.2. Qualitative research theory (L) Introduction With the aim of investigating how consumers perceive and make use of corporate

social media, we have employed five individual qualitative research interviews. In

order to carry out qualified and useful interviews, it is necessary to understand the

theoretical bases for qualitative research and qualitative research interviews. In the

following section, we will highlight the contrasts between the objectivist and

constructionist research methods and address how each influence the role of the

researcher.

As mentioned in the previous chapter, the realist and interpretive

world views each entail different approaches to knowledge production and

interpretation. Realists adopt an objectivist approach in which a systematic set of

methods is assumed. These ultimately lead to discovery of the truth about reality that

in turn will produce testable theories. The researcher’s role is to observe, record and

analyze the data and therefore stand apart from the data. The interpretive world view

employs a constructionist approach. This method of analysis reveals how the subjects

construct reality. It does not assume a generalizable truth about the reality. The aim is

to identify the meaning construction of people as they interact. The role of the

researcher therefore requires interaction with the subjects. The researcher functions


16

both as a participant and observer and the data is therefore co-‐constructed between

interviewer and interviewee (Chesebro and Borisoff 2007).

In connection with the social constructionist approach to research, which is the choice

of scientific discipline in this thesis, it is relevant to introduce the foundation of

qualitative research, as well as the difference between qualitative and quantitative

methodology. The interest in qualitative research has grown rapidly over the past

decades. According to author Uwe Flick (2009) the relevance of qualitative research is

due to the ongoing pluralization of life worlds (12). This is an expression of the

growing individualization and diversity of the population where new subcultures,

lifestyles, and ways of living constantly emerge. This pluralization demands a greater

sensitivity to empirical studies. It has become more difficult in research to make

generalizations. Therefore, situational and temporally limited narratives are required.

The diversification of life worlds is increasingly confronting the social researcher with

the need for including the social context (Flick 2009: 12). Quantitative approaches to

research entail limitations, which have cleared the way for the growth of qualitative

inquiry. Quantitative methods express the assumptions of a positivist paradigm,

which holds that behavior can be explained through objective facts. Qualitative

methods originate in the phenomenological paradigm in which multiple realities exist.

Quantitative research seeks to explain the causes of changes in social facts, primarily

through measurement and quantitative analysis. Qualitative research is in contrast

concerned with understanding the social phenomenon from the actor’s perspective

(Firestone 1987: 16-‐17).

Features of qualitative research

Authors Steinar Kvale and Svend Brinkmann (2009) refer to the increasing use of

qualitative methods in research, as taking a so called qualitative stance. This means

that processes and phenomena of the world are described before theorized and

understood before explained. It involves focusing on cultural, everyday, and situated

aspects of human thinking, learning, knowing, and ways of understanding ourselves

(Kvale and Brinkmann 2009: 12). There are four overall features that characterize

qualitative research. These are: the appropriateness of method and theories, the

recognition and analysis of different perspectives, the researchers’ reflection on their

research as part of the process of knowledge production, and finally the variety of

approaches and methods (Flick 2009: 14). We will in the following section attempt to

outline each feature.


17

The appropriateness of methods and theories relates to how the

scientific disciplines correlate with the chosen methodological standards. By

establishing a scientific discipline, the methods become the point of reference for

checking the suitability of ideas and issues for empirical investigations. This

sometimes leads to ideas or issues being abandoned, because they cannot be assessed

by using a certain method (Flick 2009: 15). In this thesis, we assume the point of view

that individuals create meaning through their interaction with others and the

environment they live in. We have therefore adopted a social constructionist approach

to research. We have conducted five individual interviews with currently active users

of Facebook, with the aim of deriving their attitudes, perceptions, and experiences

with social media. The choice of individual interviews and search for meaning

interpretation has automatically led us to the qualitative research approach.

The recognition and analysis of different perspectives makes the

qualitative method a rich and contextual approach to research. It assesses the

subjective meaning of the participants and how they experience the issue or

phenomenon in their everyday lives. Qualitative research takes into account that

viewpoints and practices in the field are different because of the different subjective

perspectives and social backgrounds related to them (Flick 2009: 16).

In qualitative research the researcher will have to reflect on his or her

participation in the study and the outcome. This is the third feature of the qualitative

approach. Qualitative methods take the researcher’s communication with the field and

its members as an explicit part of the knowledge production. This means that the

subjectivity of the researcher and the participants becomes a part of the research

process (Flick 2009: 16). By adopting a social constructionist approach in this thesis,

we acknowledge our role as researchers in the co-‐construction of knowledge in

qualitative research.

The fourth and final feature of qualitative research is the variety of

approaches and methods. Qualitative research is not based on one integrated

theoretical and methodological concept. Various theoretical approaches and their

methods characterize this type of research (Flick 2009: 16). We will elaborate further

on the different basic approaches to qualitative research in the following sections.

Basic qualitative research design

According to Flick (2009), there are five basic qualitative designs that the researcher

navigates between when constructing a research design. These are divided between

the two dimensions of time and comparison. Often combinations of the different

designs are made. The model below features the five types of basic designs that

characterize qualitative research.


18

2

Case studies are useful when a precise description or reconstruction of a case is

needed. The term case should be understood as a broad term, which can include

persons, social communities, organizations or institutions. The main challenge in case

studies is to choose which aspects and dimensions of a case that should be

investigated. Cases studies are useful in capturing the process under study in a very

detailed and exact way. However, with case studies it is difficult to select a case that

permits general conclusions (Flick 2009: 134).

Comparative studies do not observe a case as a whole and in its

complexity, but rather a number of cases with regards to particular extracts. In this

design the challenge arises in the choice of cases or groups to be compared.

Furthermore, the degree of standardization necessary in the context of the subjects is

another element to consider. Comparative studies offer a focused analysis of issues in

a research process, but also make it more crucial and difficult to select the right

dimensions to study. Other aspects might be neglected, if the focus is too strict and

narrow (Flick 2009: 135).

Retrospective studies are used in the reconstruction of cases and are

often used in biographical investigations. Research is carried out at a point in time and

certain events and processes are analyzed for meaning for the individual or collective

life stories. This approach offers a consistent realization of a biographical perspective

and allows a process perspective to be taken on the events that have already begun or

are terminated. One of the dangers of retrospective studies is the potential overlaps

between the past or current events (Flick 2009: 136).

In longitudinal studies a process or event is analyzed again at later

times of data collection. Longitudinal studies can document changes of views or

actions by repeated collection cycles. This design is the most consistent way to

2 Illustration 1: Basic qualitative design (Flick 2009: 140)

Snapshots: Analysis of state and process

Case study

Longditunal study

Comparative study

Retrospective study


19

analyze development and processes. Longitudinal studies require considerable time

and resources (Flick 2009: 138).

Finally, snapshot analyses collect different manifestations of particular

fields and compare them to one another. The design is concerned with giving a

description of the circumstances at the time of the research. Snapshots allow the

researcher to run a pragmatically focused study, which is useful in describing the state

of affairs in a field. The problem with snapshots is the lack of process or development,

which can only be made by using retrospective questioning (Flick 2009: 137).

The research design of this thesis is a combination of two of the five

basic designs. A combination of a case study and the snapshot analysis is employed.

The five interviews conducted function as a snapshot of the participants’ use and

perception of corporate social medial, specifically Facebook. Subsequently, Facebook

is the actual case study of corporate social media. We recognize that the snapshot

approach makes it difficult for this study to trace the development of the respondents

use of and attitudes towards social media. We have attempted to add a retrospective

dimension by asking all respondents how their use of Facebook has changed over

time.

2.3. Qualitative interview research (L) So far we have introduced and conceptualized qualitative research theory and the

interpretive and constructionist approach to knowledge production and

interpretation. We have outlined the features and basic designs of qualitative

research, and will now focus our attention on the chosen qualitative methodology.

This is individual semi-‐structured life world interviews. The following sub-‐chapter

will illustrate interviews as a professional conversation with a corresponding

purpose. The main features of qualitative interviews will be presented, as will the

processes of constructing an interview investigation.

Kvale and Brinkmann (2009) address interviews as conversations. It is

a method of getting to know the participants and learn about their experiences,

feelings and, attitudes (Kvale and Brinkmann 2009: xvii). There are many types of

conversations that range from small-‐talk and chats to formal exchanges or

professional journalistic interviews. Each type of conversation has different purposes

and rules. Research interviews have the purpose of producing knowledge (Kvale and

Brinkmann 2009: 2). The research interview should be viewed as a professional

conversation, where knowledge is constructed between the interviewer and the

interviewee. It is a conversation that has a structure and a specific purpose (Kvale and

Brinkmann 2009: 3).


20

At the start of this research investigation, we found ourselves with a

number of questions regarding qualitative research interviews, such as how to

analyze the obtained data and how to carry out the actual interviews without

influencing the subjects with leading questions. Had this research been of quantitative

nature, it would have been simple to answer these questions with theory and

textbooks that cover standard techniques on how to make surveys and

questionnaires. However, when it comes to qualitative research the situation is

contrary, as there are few standard rules for this methodology. Qualitative research

interviews are often referred to as unstructured or non-‐standardized interviews, due

to this lack of rules and techniques (Kvale and Brinkmann 2009: 16). The challenge is

therefore to navigate between the qualitative spontaneous approach to research

interviewing and the rigid structure of the previously prepared interview guide.

During the thesis we will refer to the five interviews conducted,

transcribed and analyzed as semi-‐structured life world interviews. In this type of

interview the researcher attempts to understand the themes of everyday life by the

participants’ own perspectives. It seeks to obtain descriptions of the interviewees’

lived worlds. It resembles an everyday conversation, but is actually a professional

interview with a purpose and a specific approach. Therefore, the word semi-‐

structured connotes that it is neither an open everyday conversation nor a closed

questionnaire. The challenge for us as interviewers is to steer between the no-‐method

open conversation and the all-‐method strict questionnaire (Kvale and Binkmann

2009: 27).

The aim of our qualitative research interviews is to interpret how the

participants experience the phenomenon at hand, in this case their use of Facebook.

Our mode of interviewing has been inspired by phenomenological philosophy. In

qualitative inquiry, phenomenology is concerned with social phenomena from the

actor’s perspective and describes the world as experienced by the subjects and

thereby assumes that reality is what people perceive it to be (Kvale and Brinkmann

2009: 26). This relates to the scientific discipline of social constructionism where

reality is what we live in and co-‐construct through cultural interaction and shared

history (Daymon and Holloway 2002). Hence, the interaction of qualitative research

interviews is an appropriate method of gaining access to our participants’ perception

of reality.

Constructing an interview investigation

As mentioned earlier, there are no specific procedures or techniques for designing and

conducting qualitative interviews, as many decisions are made on the spot and based


21

on the progress of the conversation. However, Kvale and Brinkmann (2009) have

outlined a number of stages of an interview inquiry, which can assist the researcher in

structuring the progress of producing, analyzing and reporting knowledge. We will in

the following address the stages of designing and conducting the actual interviews, as

these processes are crucial in constructing a qualitative research. Furthermore, the

quality of the results generated by qualitative research interviews is highly dependent

on these initial stages.

Designing the interview Prior to designing a qualitative interview, it is significant for the researcher to become

familiarized with the subject matter. This entails developing a theoretical and

conceptual understanding of the topic under investigation. This is necessary in order

to establish a basis for which new knowledge will be added (Kvale and Brinkmann

2009: 106). As mentioned earlier, we have spent the first period of our thesis process

studying as much literature as possible on social media theory, social media strategy

and corporate communication. Based on these readings, we have developed the three

overall social media statements. During the research of theoretical and practical

literature available on contemporary social media, we experienced a growing and

more confident knowledge on the numerous aspects that should be considered when

working with social media in a corporate communication context. The five interviews

that represent the qualitative empirical basis of our thesis have been developed based

on the knowledge obtained through the above mentioned literature.

Designing an interview study involves planning the procedures and

techniques, also referred to as the ‘how’ of the research (Kvale and Brinkmann 2009:

109). Overview is an important element when conducting interviews, as it keeps the

knowledge production structured. When using standardized methods of doing

research such as questionnaires and tests, it is easy for the researcher to construct

and control the interview and make decisions about how the interview will be

conducted beforehand. However, in the open semi-‐structured interview, choices of

method may appear during the actual investigation (Kvale and Brinkmann 2009: 10).

In our case, we attempted to keep the interview semi-‐structured with prepared

questions, which can be found in the attached interview guide (appendix 1). However,

naturally each interview turned out to vary extensively in structure, form and

outcome. Most questions were succeeded with follow up questions looking to either

confirm or elaborate on the interviewees’ answers. These decisions were all made on

the spot, some with a more successful outcome than others.

Interdependence is another relevant factor to consider when designing

a qualitative interview. According to Kvale and Brinkmann (2009), there is a strong


22

interconnection among the choices made in the different stages. By choosing a certain

method of doing research interviews, it entails opportunities and limitations for how

to proceed further in the research process. For example, if the objective is to make

statistical generalizations of the findings of an interview, this will entail the need for a

large group of participants and a survey-‐like structure (Kvale and Brinkmann: 111). In

this thesis, the aim is to gain an understanding of the perceptions and attitudes of our

respondents towards corporate use of social media and Facebook. Based on this

objective, we have chosen to carry out five relatively long individual interviews, which

leave room for the participants to speak as freely from the heart as possible. This has

generated useful and rich data that will help us evaluate the potential of the three

social media statements that we have selected and sampled for this thesis.

Connected with the issue of controlling and keeping an overview of

interviews, is the concept of pushing forward. Push forward refers to clarifying the

meanings of statements during an interview, which will ease the process of analysis

later on. However, as mentioned before, it is difficult to predict the development of an

interview, as well as the questions and answers that will need clarification (Kvale and

Brinkmann 2009: 111). During each interview, we have employed specifying and

probing questions to clarify statements and opinion of the respondents. Qualitative

interviews are aimed at finding both explicit and implicit statements and by pushing

forward we were able to clarify implied opinions, which in turn have eased the

analytical processes.

Another interesting tendency when conducting research interviews is

the notion of spiraling backwards. The process of doing interviews is not a linear

progress, but more like a spiraling model. This should be understood in the sense that

an interview project is often characterized by jumping back and forth between the

different stages. Often when the researcher receives an extended understanding of the

subjects investigated, the earlier stages are usually reassessed in the later stages of

the research (Kvale and Brinkmann 2009: 111). One example in our research where

an earlier stage was reassessed occurred after having conducted the first of the five

interviews. It became obvious that the subject of word-‐of-‐mouth was not sufficiently

covered; hence the questions of the interview guide were reassessed.

Conducting the interview When conducting qualitative interviews, the setting is not an irrelevant factor for the

outcome of useful and interesting qualitative data. The setting should encourage the

participants to describe their point of view (Kvale and Brinkmann 2009: 128). During

the five research interviews, we have attempted to accommodate any anxiety of the


23

participants, by making the setting of the interview as comfortable as possible. For

example, the third interview with participant Stine was conducted at her apartment,

in order for her to be content. Furthermore, this required minimum effort and time

from her to participate. Another example is found in the interview with participant

René where a private meeting room was booked at the university, in order to ensure

privacy. These surroundings were chosen based in the experiences from the first

interview. This interview was conducted in a public area at the university, so the

participant could make use of her lunch break to participate in the interview and then

return to her studies. However, the lack of privacy and the level of noise did disturb

the interview at times, which highlighted the importance of setting.

Another way of making the participant comfortable is by briefing about

what will take place during the interview. The researcher describes the purpose of the

interview, the use of a sound recorder and makes sure that the participants are not

left with any unanswered questions before commencing the interview. Specific and

elaborated information about the aim and research questions of the study can in some

cases wait until the end of the interview. We decided to employ Kvale and

Brinkmann’s (2009) suggestion and omit the problem statement and research

questions until after the completion of each interview.

When constructing and conducting the qualitative interviews, it has

been helpful for us to make decisions on overview and interdependence prior to the

actual interviews. Furthermore, when pushing forwards and spiraling backwards

between the interviews, we have employed different types of follow up questions in

order to product sufficient data for the analysis. Finally, choosing the right setting and

briefing the participants about the purpose of the research is pivotal when making

them comfortable during the interviews.

2.3.1. Ethics in qualitative research

It is important to touch upon the ethical issues of qualitative interviewing. There are a

number of areas in interviewing that could pose ethical dilemmas. Kvale and

Brinkman (2009) have introduced some overall ethical guidelines that are relevant

when designing a qualitative interview (69). First of all, it is crucial to obtain informed

consent of the participants. This entails informing the subjects of the overall purpose

of the research and the main features of the design, as well the possible risks and

benefits from participating. Furthermore, the subjects need to accept participation

and be informed of their right to withdraw themselves from the study at any time

(Kvale and Brinkmann 2009.). We have attempted to accommodate these issues by

thoroughly explaining the purpose and process of our interviews and overall thesis to


24

the participants. During this explanation we have omitted the problem statement of

our thesis, in that knowing these could affect the answers and experiences of the

subjects. Finally, after the completion of the interview we have explained the problem

statements and main goal. All five respondents have agreed for us to move forward

with the data and employ it in our thesis.

2.3.2. Alternative qualitative methodology

As explained in detail in the above sections, the choice of qualitative research method

in this thesis is the individual semi-‐structured life world interview. However, prior to

designing the interview structure, we contemplated between the different types of

qualitative interview forms available. Eventually, the choice was between the semi-‐

structured one-‐on-‐one interviews and focus group interviews. There has over the

years been an increasing use of focus group interviews in academic studies.

According to Kvale and Brinkmann (2009) a focus group usually consists of six to ten

participants led by a moderator (150). It is characterized by a nondirective style of

interviewing where the main purpose is to encourage different viewpoints from the

participants. The aim of a focus group is not to reach consensus or agreements

between the interviewees, but to bring forth honest and potentially diverse

perceptions on an issue. Focus groups are useful for exploratory studies since the

collective and lively interaction creates a setting where spontaneous and emotional

responses are allowed to emerge. However, the dynamics of group interaction makes

it difficult for the moderator to sustain control and get around to all the desired

subjects (Kvale and Brinkmann 2009: 150). By conducting the interviews

individually, we were able to control the turn-‐taking and development in the

conversation. The unstructured, exploratory and spontaneous characteristics of focus

groups made this method less applicable to the goal of our study. Therefore, the semi-‐

structured individual interviews were deemed more appropriate for our objectives.

As we are searching for knowledge in relation to the three over-‐arching statements

that we have collected from social media theory, the content we want from the

interviews is very specific. Individual semi-‐structured interviews offer more control

for the interviewer in relation to the data generated; hence our choice of research

method.

In summary, the methodological considerations in this thesis have been

between focus groups and individual semi-‐structured interviews, the latter being the

appropriate method of choice. There are a number of choices to be made when

constructing a qualitative interview. The five interviews of this research were

deliberately designed rather structured, in order for us to properly address the


25

research questions from the problem statement and subsequently assist us in the

analytical process.

2.4. Expert interviews (O) An alternative source of information and knowledge on social media can be through

conducting expert interviews. In order to acquire relevant and up-‐to-‐date information

about this subject, we have carried out an expert interview with Preben Mejer. In

contrast to other types of interviews, expert interviews do not have the interviewee’s

whole person in focus. Instead the person’s capacities as an expert within the field of

profession are of main concern (Flick 2009: 165). We have used Mejer’s observations

and statements as inspiration for constructing the interview guide employed in the

five individual interviews with the respondents, as well as reflecting upon the

development in social media and specifically Facebook.

According to Flick (2009) there are differing opinions about the

definition of experts and likewise the question on who is an expert (p. 165). However,

Flick (2009: 165-‐66) supports the view that experts are competent specialists that

have certain in-‐depth knowledge and information about the field relating to their

specific professional position. They can therefore serve as authorities on certain facts,

realities and relevancies within the field (Flick 2009)

Authors Meuser and Nagel (2002) explain that two types of knowledge

can be obtained through expert interviews: process knowledge and context

knowledge. The first relates to information and knowledge in relation to a specific

situation, whereas the latter focuses on the setting and overall background of the

subject in question (Meuser and Nagel 2002: 76). For this thesis we will use the expert

interview to obtain context knowledge in order to understand the environment and to

get the expert’s views and knowledge on the subject corporate social media.

Finally, it is relevant to shortly introduce the expert. Futurologist

Preben Mejer has been elected as one of the ten most influential Danish IT persons

and is the chairman of the board of Innovation lab – a knowledge center, which he

founded, focused on the newest technology including social media3. The input of the

interview will be introduced in chapter 9. An overview of the entire interviews is

found in appendix 4 and specific paragraphs which are transcribed and translated are

found in appendix 5.

3 http://innovationlab.dk/labagents/preben-‐mejer (accessed 10 May 2012)


26

2.5. Validity in qualitative research (O) When carrying out a study of this size, it is always pertinent to consider how to ensure

its quality. Traditionally, the terms reliability and validity are employed regarding the

quality of research. However, these expressions are very quantitative-‐oriented in their

nature and with the increasing use of qualitative methodologies, several researchers

question the usability of these terms when judging the quality of qualitative work

(Daymon and Holloway 2004: 88). Certainly, the terms cannot be employed in and

applied to qualitative research equally to quantitative studies, which refer to the

objectivity, accuracy, and generalizability of the empirical data. The qualitative

researcher instead approaches the work subjectively with the intention to understand

and explain a phenomenon (Pyett 2003: 1170). The idea of valid qualitative work is

then if it manages to accurately represent, describe, and explain the aspects of the

phenomenon studied (Hammersley 1987 in Pyett 2003: 1170).

There are number of guidelines to help researchers aspire to valid

qualitative work, however there are seldom any tests or general methods to achieve

this (Daymon and Holloway 2004, Pyett 2003). Author and researcher Priscilla Pyett

(2003) argues that in the process of qualitative work the researcher needs to stay

constantly reflexive and self-‐scrutinizing, and ensure a continuous evaluation of the

data and elements in the research. In the aim of achieving a high quality in this

research, we have employed various suggestions presented by Pyett (2003) and

Daymon and Holloway (2004). Primarily, we have continuously assessed and

evaluated our approach to data generation and the corresponding qualitative data

analysis. Furthermore, we have continuously assessed each theoretical contribution

according to the overall conceptual and contextual framework of the thesis.

Albeit the methods to ensure this constant evaluation can be explained

and reported in the work, it requires that a third-‐party reader accepts the diligence

and integrity of the researcher. With this in mind, Pyett (2003) urges that the

researcher offers enough detail, context, and theoretical perspective for the reader to

properly asses the interpretation and trustworthiness of the researcher. Thus, we

have not only been continuously reflexive and self-‐scrutinizing throughout the

research, but have also employed various quality-‐improving-‐suggestions that in turn

will be presented to the readers, in the aim of providing them with sufficient amount

of contextual information to judge the quality of this work. A lot of work and

consideration was put into the methodological choices and sampling process carried

out. Both have been extensively explained in its respective sections, to provide the

reader with sufficient information to deem the quality of this work.


27

Daymon and Holloway (2004) suggest that negative results, meaning

data that goes against the working hypothesis, should be given prominence in the

work as well. In this thesis we identified some of the discrepant cases that occurred

and have analyzed them on equal terms. This has been accomplished in some of the

qualitative data analysis sections. It was significant to do this, in order to provide a

nuanced, authentic, and credible view on the consumer perspective of corporate social

media use.

Another aspect to consider when investigating the topic of corporate

social media, is that there are many different perspectives to examine. Depending on

which group of respondents chosen, the outcome of the study will be different. As

social constructionist, postmodern, and qualitative researchers we acknowledge the

that multiple realities concerning one subject exists. We have chosen to investigate

corporate Facebook use from a consumer perspective and as researchers it is our

responsibility to evaluate and explain the participants’ understanding of their life

world. In this connection, it is significant that we acknowledge that in a social

constructionist context we will have an impact on the outcome of the data and the

corresponding analysis. We are not able to separate ourselves completely from the

outcome, nor is this the aim. We therefore acknowledge that our role as researcher

has a large impact on the final work.

2.6. Two researchers in one investigation (L) In the social constructionist world, the knowledge that we possess are artifacts of the

time we live in. This means that one way of understanding is not necessarily better

than another. Knowledge is constructed through social interaction and in the

negotiated understanding that exists between people. The results generated from

qualitative research are not a representation of an ultimate truth. Rather they are

results from a research process connected to the individual researcher. Therefore, it is

not possible to replicate the results, if a different researcher were to carry out and

analyze a qualitative interview. We find this fact relevant to assess during the

methodological considerations of this thesis. If knowledge is created and qualitative

data generated via the social interaction of an interview, then we wonder how the

results are affected by the fact that this study includes two researchers.

Individual qualitative interviews are viewed as professional

conversations with a purpose. In order to fulfill the purpose with our interviews, we

have designed an interview guide, which guides the interviewer and makes sure that

certain themes and attitudes are discussed. The preparation and work that went into

the interview guide will be presented later in chapter 4. We have prepared the


28

interview guide in collaboration, however we chose that one researcher should

moderate all five interviews, in order to take advantage of the experiences that

improve this particular interviewer’s skills after each session.

Despite the use of a rather structured interview guide, we have to

acknowledge that had the interview been moderated by the other researcher the data

would have been different. It is not possible to prepare in advance for the follow up,

specifying and descriptive questions that the interviewer finds necessary to

formulate.

We have chosen to include this additional dimension as an extra level

in the knowledge construction that takes place between people in the social

constructionist world. In the illustration we have attempted to explain the knowledge

production processes of this thesis visually. At the lower level we have introduced

how data (D) is generated between the researcher (R1) moderating the interview and

the participant (P). In a research with only one researcher this data would be assessed

an analyzed based on the specific context and background in which he or she exists.

However, because this research entails two researchers we perceive the knowledge

production to include an extra dimension, as we have discussed and evaluated the

data results as a group. We have agreed upon interpretations and final conclusions,

which has provided each of us with new insight necessary to include.

4

In conclusion, we acknowledge that the researcher moderating our five qualitative

interviews has great influence on the generated data. However, the data is

subsequently and evaluated in collaboration. This discussion could be considered

problematic as different predispositions and backgrounds collide. However, we see

this as a positive addition to the knowledge production as two separate life worlds are

4 Illustration 2: Two researchers in one study


29

merged, and consequently we believe the final result will entail more complexity and

depth than if a single individual has assessed the data.

2.7. Chapter sum up (C)

In this chapter we have introduced the scientific paradigm that leads this research.

With a social constructionist approach to knowledge creation, the aim of the research

is to gain an understanding of the individual respondents’ perceived life worlds.

Furthermore, as social constructionists we acknowledge that there is not ‘one’ truth

that can be discovered ‘out there’. Instead, realities are co-‐constructed socially

between individuals. By taking a qualitative stance, the aim is not to form a

generalizable truth about the reality, but instead to identify the meaning construction

of people as they interact. With the five semi-‐structured life world interviews, we are

able to generate useful data between the interviewer and the interviewee.

Additionally, we have evaluated the possibility of focus groups as an alternative

research methodology, the question of validity in relation to qualitative research and

finally, the impact two researchers have on one investigation. In the following chapter,

the focus will be on the conceptual and contextual framework that guides this thesis.


30

3. CHAPTER 3: The conceptual and contextual framework (C)

In order to properly introduce the concept of social media and specifically Facebook, it

is important to start from the beginning. With this we refer to the development in

consumer behavior which has, among other things of course, lead to the rise of the

internet, web 2.0, user-‐generated-‐content and finally the success of social media. All

these concepts and aspects are inter-‐related and are important to give prominence to.

However, as these technological advancements and cultural developments have a

widespread affect, we will specifically state that our focus will be on how these

changes have an affect on the current consumer culture and in that respect the

advertising, branding and corporate communication activities companies carry out.

Also, this introduction to the above subjects plays a big role in the ability to thereafter

explain social media and Facebook in a comprehensible way. Furthermore, this will

give insight into why social media has become such a big success, and why companies

feel the need to use it in their business when approaching consumers. This chapter

functions as the conceptual and contextual foundation, on which the research is

developed and will be returned to several times throughout the thesis.

3.1. Consumer culture vs. the branding paradigm (O) Author and assistant professor at Harvard Business School Douglas B. Holt (2002),

will be employed several times throughout this thesis. His work on the natural and

mutually altering conditions that exist between the consumer culture and company

activities offer interesting perspectives to this thesis. Holt (2002) states that

“[c]onsumer culture is the ideological infrastructure that undergirds what and how

people consume and sets the ground rules for marketers' branding activities.” (80).

This means that all businesses work within a set of assumptions about the existing

consumer culture and based on these, companies employ a number of principles in

the attempt to build their brand. This is referred to as the branding paradigm. This

paradigm reflects a general approach to branding in a specific period. Between the

notions, consumer culture and branding paradigm, a set of contradictions exist which

pushes change forward in both areas. Guided by the current branding paradigm

companies compete to create added value in their brand. Innovative and creative

firms generate new techniques, which push the principles within the paradigm to the

extreme. This creates a contradiction within the consumer culture. Simultaneously,

consumers aim at achieving statuses and desires that are valued within the current

consumer culture. At the same time they become more skilled and knowledgeable,


31

which changes and inflates what is currently valued. Furthermore, as consumers

become more literate and understanding of branding operations, it creates a condition

that is reflexive and challenges the at that point accepted status of marketer’s actions

(Holt 2002: 80). Simply, as consumers get used to companies’ ways of marketing and

branding, they become familiar with the methods. With this, consumers can no longer

be affected to the same extent, and this requires that marketers evolve their

marketing activities.

We find the connected development within the branding paradigm and

consumer culture important to acknowledge. With the rise and popularity of the social

network Facebook, it has created an impression that all companies need to be present

on Facebook. With Holt’s (2002) perspective on the inter-‐connected nature between

consumer culture and marketing activities, it gives a small insight into the cause of the

mass influx of companies to Facebook. With this perspective in mind, we will in the

following describe how consumer culture has evolved and how companies now are

forced to re-‐asses their marketing and branding approaches to their consumers. This

provides us with the context and background needed in order to properly critically

evaluate the statements we have sampled and collected from contemporary corporate

social media literature. Therefore, we will now continue on to consider the concepts of

postmodernism and post-‐postmodernism in relation to consumer behavior culture.

3.2. The [post-‐] postmodern consumer (O) Society and specifically consumers constantly evolve and have through time evolved

through several paradigms and phases. In the aim of investigating the consumer

behavior culture, and how it has changed, it is relevant to employ the concepts of

modernism, postmodernism and post-‐postmodernism. Authors and marketing

professors A. Furat Firat and Alladi Venkatesh (1995) have in their work presented a

number of key ideas about consumption and consumers, and how it has developed

through the years. By presenting the principles of postmodernism and its liberating

potential, they simultaneously uncover the limitations of the paradigm called

modernism. They offer key differences in the evolution of consumers from modernism

to postmodernism, which makes it highly applicable in this thesis.

According to Firat and Venkatesh (1995) society is currently defined

as being postmodernistic. Postmodernism is a philosophical and cultural movement

that emerged as a reaction to modernism5. The time period defined as modernity

5 The terms modernity and postmodernity refer to specific periods stretching over time, whereas modernism and postmodernism respectively refer to the philosophical and sociocultural notions that are associated with these time periods (Firat and Venkatesh 1995: 240).


32

stretches over a long time from the western late sixteenth or early seventeenth

century up to the present (which at the time of publication was 1992) (Borgmann

1992: 22). Postmodernity is the period overlapping and following modernity. The

world-‐views that characterize these two periods are very varied, but share some

common themes. With the move from modernism to postmodernism, a vast number

of changes have taken place in the society and the sociocultural setting. As the cultural

setting also constitutes the notions of consumer and consumption, these have of

course been affected by the development in society (Firat and Venkatesh 1995: 240).

The modernistic time period is very much characterized in the

opposition of concepts, such as truth/no-‐truth, rational/experiential, male/female,

value creation/value destruction, science/art, rational/irrational etc. (Firat and

Venkatesh 1995: 245). Following this, consumption and production are also

dichotomies. Furthermore, consumption is regarded as a non-‐significant secondary

activity in relation to production, which was viewed as a sacred activity that created

value for society (Firat and Venkatesh 1995: 245). Consequently, this affected the

perception of consumers in this time period. Within the modernistic worldview

consumers are viewed as value-‐destroying people that purely consume (destroy) the

value that companies have produced. Thus, no value is created in the devouring action

of consumption (Firat and Venkatesh 1995: 242). Simultaneously as consumers were

viewed as value destroyers, the famous saying “the costumer is always right” arose

(Firat and Venkatesh 1995: 242). So even though this time period was riddled with

apparently clear contrasts, contradictions also existed because the world is not as

black and white as modernism set it out to be.

Firat and Venkatesh (1995) employ the work of recognized sociologist

Pierre Bourdieu (1984) on the symbolic processes that take place in consumption.

Bourdieu (1984) believes that humans’ social ‘reality’ is constructed by the economic

structuration, which is determined by the symbolic structuration. Simply put, he

states that as a result of these relations, consumer taste is not determined privately,

but instead socially. Furthermore, in postmodernism consumers use the consumption

action of various goods as a highly symbolic act, conveying messages about

themselves to other groups of individuals (Bourdieu, 1984). Thus, it is acknowledged

that the value of the good is not free of the symbolic gain. Therefore, the good’s value

does not lie inherently in itself, as suggested by the modernistic viewpoint. (Firat and

Venkatesh, 1995). With this, we return to previously dichotic nature of production

and consumption.

No longer is production viewed as the value producing activity and

consumption as the destruction of this value. Instead consumption is the moment

where much is produced and created. It is in reality not a private and destructive


33

moment, but a social event where symbolic messages are produced (Firat and

Venkatesh 1995). Consequently, the postmodern consumer is viewed as a consumer

and producer, and no longer destroyers. With every step of consumption, some kind

of symbol is produced of either the object, the consumer, the image, and etc. Therefore

the production and consumption phases are no longer separate concepts, but instead

are one and the same and occur simultaneously (Firat and Venkatesh 1995: 254).

Firat and Venkatesh (1995) include the notion that the

postmodernistic consumption society is free and fluid, leading to the possibility of

multiple consumption experiences. With this they connote that consumers are not

attached to a specific brand or company, but are instead attached to the symbols and

messages that are produced whilst consuming products from a specific brand or

company (Firat and Venkatesh 1995: 251). This is also referred to as fragmentation, in

that there is a lack of commitment to a certain brand or company (Firat and Venkatesh

1995: 251, Simmons 2008: 300). Fragmentation is a main theme within the

postmodern paradigm that is relevant to take into account when discussing the

consumer role. Within postmodernism, fragmentation is largely defined as the

separation of a whole into smaller parts, where a single reality has now become

multiple realities, which all demand legitimacy. In relation to consumer culture, this

fragmentation refers to both the freedom to move between brands and companies as

mentioned above, but also to the freedom to move in-‐between lifestyles, images and

sense of being. Simply put, commitment to one single ‘thing’ has come to an end (Firat

and Venkatesh 1995: 253). Because the consumer experiences are multiple and

disorganized, the consumer has a divided self. This has created a postmodern

consumer who is fragmented, de-‐centered and liberated from commitments (Firat and

Venkatesh 1995: 252 +259).

Several other authors have similarly discussed the notion of the

fragmented consumer. Psychologist and professor Kenneth Gergen (1995) argues that

in postmodernism the notion that a healthy human being needs to have a coherent

sense of self is challenged. Instead he reasons that the postmodern individual carries

multiple selves that can come into play in different social situations; hence, people

have multiple masks, for multiple purposes. With his work Gergen (1995) challenges

the previous assumptions that an individual’s sense of self is a fixed and stable part of

one’s identity. Gergen (1995) has researched how much people are able to change and

in which situations they are most likely to change. He realized that people are

influenced to take on different masks depending on elements such as the situation, the

surrounding people and the individual’s motivations. His research shows that the

pursuing of approval by the surrounding people visibly affects the self-‐presentation

and when the motives change, so does the mask. It is argued that the individual


34

therefore has much flexibility, and furthermore that this interchangeability of

identities should not be considered fake or inconsistent. Instead, the assumed mask

becomes the individual’s reality at that moment. As Gergen (1995) states “[w]e are

made of soft plastic, and molded by our social circumstances” (142).

Similarly, it is believed that people live within a society not as an

integrated self, but as an individual assuming different roles; roles as tax payer,

consumer, spouse, student etc. (Beck and Beck-‐Gernsheim 2002: 23). Therefore

people are not wholly integrated, but instead “[..] partly and temporarily involved as

they wander between different functional worlds.” (Beck Beck-‐Gernsheim 2002: 23).

It is therefore different versions of oneself that carry out the various responsibilities

of everyday life (Beck and Beck-‐Gernsheim 2002: 23). Gergen (1995) also argues that

with the social and technological turbulence individuals experience identity crises:

“an individual no longer can develop and maintain a strong, integrated sense of

personal identity” (Gergen 1995: 137). With the rapid development and large

influence of social media, the notion of multiple selves is an interesting perspective to

add to the discussion. The social media platform becomes an additional space where

consumers can create and pursue a certain identity. This will be assessed further in

chapter 7.

In connection with the notion that consumers produce identities,

symbols and messages through consumption as presented by Firat and Venkatesh

(1995), Holt (2002) argues that the postmodern consumer wants cultural resources

that are valuable to be used as ingredients to produce the self. And in order to be

considered a valuable ingredient for the self, the cultural resource must be thought of

as authentic (Holt, 2002). Naturally, this consumer notion affects the course of the

company strategy, as the principles and accepted assumptions of the consumer

culture affects the foundation of the way companies attempt to build their brand (Holt

2002: 79). The assumptions and conventions of businesses are based on the consumer

culture present at that time, and set the foundation for marketers’ branding

techniques and activities.

In this particular consumer culture consumers wish for an authentic

brand, and the postmodern consumers’ notion of authenticity makes it particularly

difficult for companies to achieve this. According to the postmodern consumer an

authentic brand must be disinterested. It has to be created by people that are

motivated by its inherit value, and not the economic possibilities (Holt 2002: 83). This

is the premise for the postmodern branding paradigm, which Holt (2002) presents in

his work. With the evolution of the postmodern consumer and their wish for an

authentic brand, a number of branding techniques were developed in order to

properly satisfy and reach the consumer (Holt 2002). The specificity of these methods


35

lie beyond the scope of the thesis, but we will however mention that these were

employed by companies with the aim of being perceived as authentic. This

development presents companies with new obstacles, as what was perceived original

and authentic years back, is no longer original because it has become a part of the

branding techniques of the time. As all companies use these branding techniques

founded on the aim to reach the postmodern consumer, the authenticity vanishes. So

as companies become more aggressive in the aim for authenticity, consumers

increasingly view this as yet another commercial technique, and will sort out the

companies that they do not trust (Holt 2002: 85).

As explained in the sub-‐chapter 3.1., contradictions arise between the branding

paradigm and consumer culture. Subsequently, these contradictions push and force

change in each area. Consumers get used to companies incessant conveying of

authenticity. It is no longer appropriate for companies to employ the same techniques

to be perceived as authentic, as these authenticity techniques have lost their meaning

with consumers and actual authenticity becomes scarce. By using techniques to

appear authentic, companies deny the economic motivations and the search for

authenticity instead become basic deceit. With this in mind, it is now appropriate to

move onto the next paradigm – post-‐postmodernism -‐ that exists according to Holt

(2002).

Similarly to what triggered the development from modernism to

postmodernism, a number of contradictions have appeared in between the

postmodern branding paradigm and consumer culture, which pressures for a change

in the postmodern branding paradigm. Brands are forced to act differently if they are

to stay relevant to the developing consumer culture. Where companies were

previously able to hide the profit intentions behind an apparent authentic exterior,

Holt (2002) predicts that brands and companies will no longer be able to hide the

economic and commercial motivations in what he deems the post-‐postmodern

branding paradigm. Consumers now demand an ‘authentic’ authenticity, where

companies need to reveal all, because consumers will be attentive to whether the

appearance actually matches the action of the company; if the company is walking the

talk.

In relation to the creation of identity, as we presented earlier in the

thesis, consumers will still seek cultural resources to construct identities, as well as

produce messages and symbols in the post-‐postmodern era (Holt 2002). However, it

will be more difficult for companies to provide original and relevant cultural material

that consumers can employ directly on their identity construction. Holt (2002)

believes postmodern brands are not ‘authentically’ authentic, and will therefore not


36

provide real value for consumers. The notion of socially constructing messages and

identities through the consumption process as presented by Holt (2002) and Firat and

Venkatesh (1995) fits with our overall theoretical approach social constructionism,

which is based on the fact that reality does not exist in isolation, but instead is socially

constructed between individuals’ social relations. Furthermore, the view of creating

identity through the symbols that brands represent will be elaborated much more

upon in sub-‐chapter 7.2.

With the constant reflexivity between the branding paradigm and

consumer culture, companies are forced to leave old habits behind. Companies that

are not able to do this, make room for new organizations that understand the

emerging principles of the consumer culture. This constant development ensures that

the market rejuvenates itself and never gets ‘stuck’ (Holt 2002).

After introducing postmodernism and post-‐postmodernism, it is

important to explicitly state that we will not attempt to assess whether we are

currently living in the postmodern or post-‐postmodern paradigm. Instead we have

included the notions of both, to ensure that we do not overlook one or the other.

Furthermore, the really interesting aspect to take away from this introduction to the

[post-‐] postmodern6 consumer, is the belief that the consumer culture and branding

culture seem to be connected to each other in a reflexive state, meaning that the

development of both push the other forward in its evolution. This links back to the

corporate use of social media, which is one of later developments within the current

branding paradigm and consumer culture. Changes in consumer culture, such as the

need for social networks, have affected the use of social media in the current branding

paradigm and vice versa.

3.3. The rise of the internet (L) Along with the revolution in consumer culture and consequently the forced change in

the branding paradigm, the widespread use and success of the internet has created a

new communication environment, where consumers are more in more control than

ever (Kietzmann et al 2011). There has been a removal of, what is referred to as

friction. Friction refers to the restrictions that have previously existed in the media

space, where the news belonged to the TV and newspapers, radio spots were only on

the radio, and TV-‐shows only on TV. This is no longer the case, and the friction that

existed in the spread of information has been nearly completely removed, making

6 In order to ease comprehension, we will henceforward refer to the current consumer and consumer culture as being [post-‐] postmodern. We consider to the two notions (postmodernism and post-‐postmodernism) as one overall and continuous development.


37

information easily available for all (Meadows-‐Klue, 2008; Evans and McKee 2010: 5-‐

6). As authors Evans and McKee (2010) appropriately put it: “Information wants to be

free, and in these new markets it is: free of constraints on place, free of control on

content, and free of restrictive access on consumption” (xvii)”. Consumers are now

able to get the news in the newspaper, on TV, various places on the internet and

straight to their smartphone.

With the removal of friction, consumers today have easy access to an

enormous amount of information, transforming them into more connected, informed

and, active consumers (Pralahad and Ramaswamy 2004). Consumers have

transformed from “silent, isolated and invisible individuals, into a noisy, public, and

even more unmanageable than usual, collective.” (Patterson 2011: 1). Furthermore,

with a friction-‐less information landscape consumers have the ability to control their

own media consumption and its impact, in that they are able to filter and select their

use of media like never before (Meadows-‐Klue 2008, Vollmer and Precourt 2008: 5).

This has naturally affected the way consumers consume and has consequently,

created difficulties for companies and the traditional ways of communicating with and

advertising to consumers. Even though companies have more communication

channels than ever, consumers now have the ability to tune companies out if they do

not want to be interrupted (Vollmer and Precourt, 2008). As author and journalist

Danny Meadows-‐Klue (2008) states the typical and interruptive method of marketing

where companies shout until listened to is no longer viable, as the number of people

that are willing to be shouted at decreases (248).

Meadows-‐Klue (2008) mentions that even though the previous

interruptive marketing approach worked for ages, it created consumers that became

much more media literate and were more prone to respond to marketing messages

with skepticism (246). This notion correlates very well with the constant reflexive

state existing between the consumer culture and branding paradigm that we

presented previously. Companies develop certain ways to craft and send their

messages, which become part of the branding paradigm. When companies enter the

branding paradigm (make use of the same communication/marketing activities as the

rest of the market) there is always the risk that consumers grow tired of the lack of

originality and realize the commercial intentions. And the previously effective method

now ends up working against companies in the end. Furthermore, consumers no

longer find companies credible and do not trust them any longer. Instead, consumers

rely much more on friends, than corporations and institutions (Meadows-‐Klue 2008).

With this development, personal recommendations or online reviews have instead

become the most trusted form of advertising worldwide (Pookulungara and Koesler

2011). However, interestingly enough Meadows-‐Klue (2008) expresses that with or


38

without the internet, something was bound to change. The internet simply accelerated

a change that was already taking place.

In correlation with the authenticity-‐seeking [post-‐] postmodern

consumer mentioned previously, consumers are now becoming more literate within

advertising and branding messages, which results in marketing that does not have the

same impact as before. With this the power has now been put in the consumers’ hands

(Meadows-‐Klue, 2008). As marketing professionals and authors of the bestseller

“Always on” Christopher Vollmer and Geoffrey Precourt (2008) express “[w]e are now

in the beginning of a consumer-‐centric digital age in which the traditional approaches

to marketing products and services are no longer viable” (5). So not only are

companies now faced with the challenge of losing control and having to be more

consumer-‐centric, with the rise of the internet new technologies like web 2.0, user-‐

generated content and social media have arisen. These have created a new way of life

for consumers and have affected aspects within the consumer culture, such as the

purchasing decision process (Mangold and Faulds 2009: 358). Consumers are

increasingly using these new opportunities as tools in their shopping experience. With

the popularity of web 2.0 a new world of collaboration and communication has been

generated (Pookulangara and Koesler 2011). With the enormous amount of accessible

information on the internet, it is easy for consumers to find information about

whatever they need. And furthermore, with the success of social networks consumers

now have a platform where they not only can find and ask for information from their

network, but they have a way to advocate for companies and brands that they love

(Pookulangara and Koesler 2011). This means that the traditional purchasing decision

process that companies have worked from and relied on for years, has now been

severely altered and demands new thinking from the companies (Pookulangara and

Koesler 2011).

With the rise of the internet, consumers live in an environment where

they are ‘always on’ as Vollmer and Precourt (2008) describe it. With numerous and

continuous media surrounding them, they are constantly searching for new

opportunities and value. Consequently, consumers are continuously bombarded with

more and more media, in many different formats. The ‘always on’ environment exists

for marketers as well. Due to the continuous changing nature of the audience and the

ways of connecting with them, marketers do not have the option of taking any

downtime. Companies need to stay alert by experimenting and innovating for the

potential of necessary shifts in strategy (Vollmer and Precourt 2008).

It is clear that there is a need for marketing activities to change, if companies

expect to stay relevant and ahead of the competition. The previous pages clearly state,

that with the consumer evolution and rising consumer power, companies need to


39

cater to the consumers’ needs and wishes. This brings us to the subject of focus in this

thesis: social media. Many of the authors and their work included in this paper, offer

social media as the golden ticket for companies to stay relevant and connect with

consumers. However, as is obvious with the previous many pages the consumer

culture demands authenticity and honesty from companies. With consumers

increasing media, digital media and marketing literacy, consumers are able to realize

if the use of social media is authentic or only for commercial intentions. As author and

SEO and social media professional Liana Evans (2010: 10) states, consumers no longer

want to be marketed at, and have grown suspicious of companies’ move onto online

marketing – and even more with the move onto social media. This makes it extremely

important for companies to consider the approach to social media.

Before we can move onto the statementss sampled and grouped from a large

amount of social media theory, it is important to go into more detail with the concepts

of web 2.0, user-‐generated-‐content and social media. These three are closely inter-‐

related and the following few pages will focus on explaining them.

3.4. Web 2.0, UGC and social media (L)

Despite its popularity, confusion still exists on the actual definition of social media.

With this follows a comparison and often interchangeability with other similar terms

(Kaplan and Haenlein 2010). As authors Bruce Weinberg and Ekin Pehlivan (2011)

point out, the terms web 2.0 and social media are still and often used as substitutes.

However, it is important to know that these two terms do not cover the same subject,

but are nevertheless linked. Weinberg and Pehlivan (2011) highlight the importance

for businesses to understand the differences, in order to use it strategically.

Furthermore, the concept of user-‐generated-‐content (UGC)7 is important and is

significant to understand, when discussing web 2.0 and social media. Authors Andreas

Kaplan and Michael Haenlein (2010) state that the concepts of web 2.0 and UGC

provide a backstory to todays’ social media, and with a clarification of web 2.0 and

UGC and its relatedness, the concept of social media can properly be explained.

Consequently, the following paragraphs will shortly cover the explanation of the

concepts web 2.0 and user-‐generated-‐content (UGC) and finally, how this relates to

social media.

We will start out by explaining web 2.0, as it is considered to represent

the ideological and technical foundation of social media. The term was formed in 2004

7 Literature regarding UGC uses concepts such as consumer-‐generated-‐content, user-‐generated-‐content and consumer-‐generated-‐media interchangeably. We have employed the phrase user-‐generated-‐content (or UGC) continuously to refer to the same phenomenon; the act of non-‐ marketers producing content online.


40

to cover how software developers and end-‐users made use of the internet. With the

introduction of web 2.0 the content and application were not necessarily created by

individuals, but instead created and updated in a collaborative and participatory way

by all users. Web 2.0 does not refer to a specific technical update, but a number of

basic functional characteristics that are important for its functionality. The specific

plug-‐ins and platforms that make up web 2.0 are not important to clarify further in

this thesis. However, what is important is that Kaplan and Haenlein (2010) consider

web 2.0 as the platform necessary for the evolution of social media.

The term user-‐generated-‐content (UGC) was created in 2005 and

refers to the content that individual end-‐users have created for all to see (Kaplan and

Haenlein 2010). Kaplan and Haenlein (2010) present three basic requirements for

content to be considered user-‐generated. Firstly, it needs to be publicly available on a

website or available to a select few on a social networking site. Secondly, it needs to be

creative in the sense that it cannot simply be a repeated message. Finally, it must not

be have been created with professional and commercial intentions in mind.

Furthermore, it is interesting to consider the notion of UGC in connection with the

evolution from the modern to [post-‐] postmodern consumer. As mentioned earlier,

consumers were previously considered only as value destroyers. Similarly, within the

online world, users were only considered as precisely that -‐ users or consumers. The

idea that users can and do create content, followed a time where they were only

believed to be the users and not creators of online content (Dwyer 2007 in

Pookulangara and Koesler 2011: 348). However, it has become apparent that this is

far from the truth. With the characterizations of web 2.0 and UGC in place, the

following section will shortly define social media.

Kaplan and Haenlein (2010) consider social media to be a number of

differing internet based platforms that are built upon the functionalities of web 2.0,

and that make it possible to create and share user-‐generated-‐content. With the move

from web 1.0 to web 2.0, the world is now highly interactive. Social media and UGC

give consumers the power to dictate the nature, the amount and the context of

marketing exchanges (Hanna, Rohm and Crittenden, 2011; Kietzmann et al, 2011).

Social media will be elaborated in detail following the introduction to the social

network Facebook.

3.5. Facebook (L)

Despite the existence of many social media platforms, this thesis focuses on Facebook,

which has according to Weinberg and Pehlivan (2011) gained the most attention of all

the platforms. Since the thesis focuses on this specific platform, it is appropriate to


41

briefly explain the characteristics and functions of Facebook. There are a number of

features and aspects that are an important part of the Facebook terminology, which

we will refer to many times throughout the thesis. A dictionary of the main features

and activities of Facebook has been attached in appendix 2. This is an aid that can be

consulted when in doubt.

As defined in the following sections, Facebook is labeled a social

network. Through social networks such as Facebook, users are able to post personal

information through their personal profiles and status updates, share and upload

photographs, send and receive messages, comment on other users’ photos and

updates, create events and groups, join groups, and become fans of brands, bands and

movies. With Facebook it is now possible for old acquaintances to easily re-‐connect

and follow each other’s lives. Researchers and authors Sanjukta Pookulangara and

Kristian Koesler (2011) describe social networking sites as a virtual meeting place,

which has become a popular place for consumers to meet, converse and share

information. One’s social network consists of a number of friends that at some point in

time agreed to be friends through a friend request. This means that in order for two

people to be friends on Facebook, one of them has to send a friend request, which the

other one confirms. Within this network of friends, everything posted can be viewed.

Furthermore, in order to properly comprehend the analysis and

discussions of the individual qualitative research interviews, it is relevant to include a

number of concepts related to the use of Facebook. First, it is relevant to shortly

explain the idea of frictionless sharing. This term refers to the notion that information

and activity is transparently shared without actually choosing to share it. This creates

a more frictionless experience, where activities such as reading articles or listening to

music via applications on Facebook, is shared with the social network automatically.

This brings us to the social reader and social video applications that

are present on Facebook. With the introduction of these, it is now possible for users to

read articles and watch videos through Facebook, whilst their social network is

notified of this activity. However, before users are allowed and able to utilize these

services they need to accept the application’s terms and conditions of service. This

means that users often have to disclose information to the producers of these

applications and furthermore give them access to the personal profile in some extent,

in order to make use of the features. There are many of these types of applications on

Facebook. Nevertheless, with the introduction of the social reader and social video

applications, the notion of frictionless sharing has been added to consumers’

consideration.

Yet another service that makes use of frictionless sharing on Facebook

is the music service Spotify. Spotify is a music service, where users are able to listen to


42

unlimited amounts of music for a fee each month. However, it is also possible to use it

for free, but the experience will be interjected with various commercial entries and is

only available via an internet-‐connected computer. Facebook and Spotify have entered

into an agreement, where these two are integrated. This means that in order to use

Spotify, customers need to sign up via their Facebook account, and these two will

therefore be linked together8. This integration results in yet another frictionless

sharing experience, similar to social readers and social video applications. If users do

not actively remove some features and aspects of this integration, elements such as

current song, most listened to songs, playlists etc. will be displayed and visible to the

social network.

In the above section aspects important for the understanding of

Facebook have been explained. Furthermore, features such as frictionless sharing,

social reader and video applications and Spotify have become integral to the Facebook

experience, and therefore demanded an introduction. The following section will relate

to theory concerning social media and the characteristics and functions that separate

the differing platforms.

3.6. Social media theory (O) Following the short introduction to Facebook, the following pages will focus on social

media in general. In terms of presenting and explaining social media, it is important to

firstly explain that social media consists of many types of different platforms. These

have different characteristics, functions and purposes, and users employ them for

various reasons. With the rapid success and rise of social media, people have not been

fully aware of the vast number of differences, and consequently all platforms have

been grouped together leading to the belief that social media is a unitary phenomenon

– especially in terms of impact (Weinberg and Pehlivan 2011: 278). But all social

media tools are not the same, in terms of technology, functionality, and utilization.

Also, it is clear that with so many types of social media, users naturally employ them

in different ways for different purposes. This is essential for companies to realize, if

they want to employ social media. With this in mind, we will move onto the next

section where various models and theoretical concepts that give insight into the

complex world of social media and its differences are introduced.

In order to explain the differences in social media platforms it is

appropriate to present, explain and utilize the model created by Weinberg and

8 In certain countries, users are able to sign up to Spotify without a Facebook account. Additionally, there are methods for everyone else to register for Spotify without connecting via Facebook. However, these are methods to trick and ‘cheat’ the system.


43

Pehlivan (2011). This model has been illustrated below. Social media varies in many

ways, and they have chosen two factors that can help explain the variations that exist.

These two factors relate to the depth and longevity of information when presented on

social media platforms. The first factor is the half-‐life of information, which relates to

the time span in which information is accessible and viewable. This is connected to

both the function of the medium and the content. The second factor depth of

information pertains to the richness of the message (Weinberg and Pehlivan 2011:

279). These create two dimensions forming four social media platform types; Blogs,

micro-‐blogs, communities and social networks.

9

Weinberg and Pehlivan (2011) have used this model to show the variety between

several big social media platforms, and have placed Facebook in the social network

category, which has a short longevity of information and deep depth of information.

This is due to the fact that a persons’ newsfeed updates every time someone in the

social network posts something. Furthermore, they argue that social networks have a

deep information depth, in that a lot of information can be posted with a status update

(63,206-‐character limitation), and that Facebook can collect a rich, diverse and large

amount of information on a topic. In comparison Weinberg and Pehlivan (2011) have

placed Twitter, which is another social media giant, in the category micro-‐blog.

Similarly to Facebook, Twitter has a short longevity of information. This is due to the

fact that the more people followed, the shorter time the tweet will be visible on the

screen. Furthermore, people often tweet several times a day. This means that a lot of

information shows up and disappears on a person’s newsfeed in a day. Which is a

9 Illustration 3: Social media by information half-‐life and depth, and associated marketing objectives and purposes (Weinberg and Pehlivan 2011: 279)


44

similar situation to Facebook. However, the depth of information on Twitter is shallow

which is due to the restriction on the number of characters allowed in one tweet

(Weinberg and Pehlivan 2011: 279-‐280). However, it can be argued that the longevity

is longer than short for both platforms since the content can always be accessed when

visiting the person or company responsible for the message (assuming the content

was not removed on Facebook). Weinberg and Pehlivan’s (2011) work has been

included, as it is possible to make a clear distinction between the various social media

platforms. Furthermore, it provides further insight into the features of Facebook.

Similarly to Weinberg and Pehlivan’s (2011) work, Kaplan and Haenlein (2010) have

created a two dimensional model that relies on theories within the fields of media

research and social processes – which they believe are the two key elements of social

media. For the media related element of social media, they employed social presence

theory (Short, Williams and Christies, 1976) and media richness (Daft and Lengel

1986). The first relates to the degree that media differ in relation to ‘social presence’

and the amount of contact that is possible to achieve in-‐between the two

communication partners. The emergence of this presence relies on the intimacy and

immediacy of the medium. Media richness refers to the amount of information that is

possible to be transmitted in a certain time period (Kaplan and Haenlein 2010). The

second component of the model is the social dimension, which consists of the theories

on self-‐presentation (Goffman 1959) and self-‐disclosure (Schau and Gilly 2003). The

first element works from the theory that with every type of social interaction, people

wish to control the impression that others form of them. This concept is closely

related to self-‐disclosure, which is the conscious or unconscious unveiling of personal

information that is in line with the image one would like to present (Kaplan and

Haenlein 2010).

In illustration 4 below, Kaplan and Haenlein (2010) have presented

social media according to what they believe to be the most important two factors of

social media – the media functionalities and the social practices. They believe that

with the use of this model it is possible to systematically categorize the different types

of social media. As can be seen below, with this model six overall types of social media

have been found based on the degree of social presence/media richness and self-‐

presentation/self-‐disclosure. These types are blogs, social networking sites, virtual

social worlds, collaborative projects, content communities and virtual game worlds.


45

10

Once again, Facebook is defined as a social network, which makes it a high self-‐

presentation/self-‐disclosure that has medium social presence/media richness. This

classification makes Facebook a medium where users are able to reveal a lot of

information about themselves, but simultaneously have the opportunity to control the

impression people have of them. Via liking and sharing certain things, and at the same

time refrain from liking and sharing other things they do not want to be associated

with, a message or image of the individual is sent to the social network. In relation to

media richness, Facebook offers its users to share and find a lot of information, and

people are easily able to connect with each other through personal messages and

posts on walls.

The above section shows the wide variety of different social media platforms, and

serves as a foundation for understanding the differences that lie between each type of

social media, and the corresponding functionalities of Facebook. With each type of

social media platform a number of implications follow when companies want to use it

in a business connection. The characteristics of each type of social media platform

should be considered and evaluated when companies want to enter the social media

sphere, and whether the chosen platform is appropriate for what the company wants

to achieve.

3.7. The success and rise of social media (L) After the introduction of the [post-‐] postmodern consumer, the internet, UGC, web 2.0,

social media and finally Facebook, it is now applicable to finalize the chapter. This

following section links the growth and success of social media with the argument that

companies should employ this in their online marketing strategies. With the help of

the hype cycle the employment and excitement of corporate social media is

questioned.

10 Illustration 4: Classification of social media by social presence/media richness and self-‐presentation/self-‐disclosure (Kaplan and Haenlein 2010: 62)


46

With the change in consumer behavior, rise in consumer power and increasing use of

the internet and social networks, the consumer landscape has been fundamentally

altered. Due to the popularity of social media, authors believe that companies needs to

get on this bandwagon. Pookulangara and Koesler (2011) believe that for companies

to stay ahead of the game and preserve relevance, it is imperative to incorporate

social networks into the infrastructure. According to Pookulangara and Koesler

(2011) companies need to adapt to the emerging trend and shift in consumer

behavior immediately. Through already established social networks such as Facebook,

it is possible to reach a large collection of consumers that are already congregated.

Therefore, they argue that the majority of the online effort should be focused on

participating and encouraging conversations with these consumers on social

networks.

Pookulangara and Koesler’s (2011) view correlates to what Lon Safko

(2010) claims in his book “The Social Media Bible”. He presents a trinity of social

media, which consists of the three most important tools in corporate social media.

These include blogging, micro blogging and social networks. However, Safko (2010)

presents social networks as the most important one and highlights that companies

should sign up for all types of social networks immediately (708). He even sets this

advice up as a so-‐called commandment with “[t]hou shalt create profiles and groups –

Go to the most popular social networking sites and create profiles and groups before

someone else takes your name.” (Safko 2010: 43). He claims that companies need to

have a presence on nearly every social network platform they know, as it is free to

sign up and it is important to acquire the profile name before someone else takes it

(Safko 2010: 694). Furthermore he argues “I want you to amass as many customers

and prospects as Ashton and Ellen” (Safko 2010: 691). Even though Safko (2010)

refers to the social media platform Twitter11 with this statement, he still vividly

exemplifies the opinion of social media present in today’s business world. With this

statement Safko (2010) manages to both express how important he believes social

media to be for businesses and simultaneously conveys how essential he believes the

number of followers is. He suggests that companies’ twitter profiles need to have as

many followers as actor Ashton Kutcher and comedian and TV-‐show host Ellen

DeGeneres12.

Similarly to Pookulangara and Koesler (2011) and Safko’s (2010)

views of what companies need to do with social media, author Phil Bradley (2010)

believes it is more a matter of ‘how’ to engage in social media, rather than if

companies ‘should’ engage in social media. With his article, he places importance on 11 Ashton Kutcher and Ellen DeGeneres are some of the most followed accounts on Twitter 12 As of 22 July their number of followers were 11,542,854 million for Ashton Kutcher and 12,469,693 million for Ellen DeGeneres


47

companies being where the conversations happen, and with more and more people

joining social media platforms it makes sense that this is where the conversations

happen. Bradley (2010) uses this development and argues that the conversations will

take place with or without the company, and therefore companies need to make the

choice if they are to be involved in the conversation or not. He believes that companies

at least should use social media to listen to the conversations taking place13, but in the

ideal world, all companies would also use it to engage in these conversations (Bradley

2010: 249). He states: “You need to have at least one Twitter account and you need to

be very clear on how you intend to use this account.” (Bradley 2010: 249). Even

though this statement concerns the platform Twitter, it clearly shows which point of

view Bradley (2010) has towards social media. He works within an absolutist and

fixed perspective that has no concern for the relative factors that exist in today’s

business world.

3.7.1. The hype cycle (L)

As introduced in the early sections of this report, the notion of hype surrounding

corporate use of social media partly motivated us to write this thesis. In the business

world exists a sense that social media is an important part of commerce and in order

to stay relevant companies need to get on board (Weinberg and Pehlivan 2011: 275,

Lon Safko 2010, Bradley 2010). Furthermore, author and researcher Anthony

Patterson (2011) believes that due to the sheer number of members on Facebook,

“not to be on Facebook, is not to exist [..]” (2). This statement gives a clear insight into

today’s perception of social media and Facebook. The hype cycle first introduced by

Gartner Inc. offers an interesting viewpoint of the type of development taking place in

today’s business world. The following section will be used to describe the cycle and its

implications in relation to the use of social media in corporate communication. This

thesis will not specifically place social media along the cycle, but instead the concept

of a hype cycle within technological and innovative advancement will be explained,

and used as a backdrop for social media development.

According to authors and Gartner Inc. fellows Jackie Fenn and Mark

Raskino (2008) the business world is full of ‘the latest things’ – technological

advancements that are perceived as such great innovations that companies that do

not implement it will perish, whilst all other enjoy great success due to the application

(7). However, when the new advancement does not deliver the promised effect,

13 As mentioned previously, this assignment focuses purely on the dialogue and relationship building functionalities that authors prescribe in the use of social media – a more active presence on social media. Therefore the listening and observing possibilities – a more passive use of social media -‐ will not be discussed in this assignment.


48

everyone that before was hopeful and enthusiastic has instead become disappointed

and unhappy with the lack of results. According to Fenn and Raskino (2008) this

phenomenon happens so often that it has been named the hype cycle. The hype cycle

describes the phases that technological advancements and innovations go through,

from the initial enthusiasm and hope to the disappointment that follows and finally

perhaps market acceptance. Therefore, the hype cycle is a visual representation that

companies can use to evaluate where a certain innovation is heading and whether or

not the innovation is merely over-‐hyped due to enthusiasm or if there is basis for

hype. Furthermore, it will indicate if the innovation will reach market acceptance

within an acceptable period. This model can help companies plan strategically and

avoid unnecessary risks (Finn and Raskino 2008).

With this hype cycle in mind, it is interesting to look at social media

and its sudden explosion into the market. We do not hypothesize on the success of

social media in general, but instead attempt to make a connection between corporate

social media and hype. Basically, the offset for this thesis was an initial assumption

that the benefits of corporate social media use may have been excessively hyped. By

including the awareness and existence of the hype curve in our conceptual and

contextual framework, it offers an interesting perspective on how technological

advancements often appear as a ‘game-‐changer’. As Fenn and Raskino (2008) state

“[s]ome innovation comes along that captures people’s fancy, and everybody,

including the media, joins the parade with great fanfare and high expectations” (7).

However, when the new innovation falls short and does not deliver what promised,

the cloud of hype and enthusiasm often disappears. Fenn and Raskino (2010)

nevertheless express that often the new advancement does contain value, but the

problem is that it is difficult for companies to find and obtain the value before the

actual situation has set in. They believe that in order for this ‘latest thing’ to be

successfully employed and executed, it requires a lot of persistence and patient

experimentation (Fenn and Raskino 2010: 9). With this in mind, we will now move on

to explain the five phases that are present in the hype cycle and that can be viewed in

the model below.


49

14

The first phase is the innovation trigger. This phase is initiated often following some

sort of public presentation or breakthrough where interest is spiked. It follows either

a short or long period of development. The main aspect of this phase is that buzz and

excitement of the innovation’s possibilities is generated. Following this phase, the

innovation enters the peak of inflated expectations. This is where the early movers

employ the new technology before competitors. The effects and success stories spread

and other companies want to join, so they are not left behind. This creates the so-‐

called bandwagon effect, where all companies try out the innovation in all types of

settings. With the excitement spreading to the media, it creates the illusion of a need

to either follow or be left behind. This leads to the downfall of the innovation in phase

3: the trough of disillusionment. In this phase companies get impatient for the lack of

results. Companies realize that the use of the innovation is not as easy as first

expected or conveyed, and they struggle to find value in employing it. But as just

explained, most innovations do offer something of value – the problem is extracting

that value and attaining the skill to do so. This leads us to the next stage, the slope of

enlightenment. This is where the early adopters begin to see the real benefits of the

innovation and have the ability to overcome the initial difficulties. With a shed illusion

and presumption about the innovation, an understanding of the actual possibilities

and best practices appear. Finally, the innovation reaches the plateau of productivity.

With greatly reduced risks and real benefits demonstrated, companies begin to accept

and employ the innovation. As value of the innovation materializes, the adoption of

the innovation greatly enhances (Fenn and Raskino 2010: 8-‐10).

It is interesting to have the hype cycle in mind when considering the

success and sudden explosion of the use of social media. Academic journals, books and

newspapers alike have hailed social media as a ‘game-‐changer’ for the world,

businesses and corporate communication. Companies have jumped on the social

14 Illustration 4: The hype cycle of innovation (Fenn and Raskino 2010: 9)


50

media wagon, perhaps in the fear of being left behind as numbers from a recently

released research collection shows. According to the Networked Business Factbook15

published by the Danish corporate world, many companies have in the last few years

joined one or more social media platforms. Furthermore, of the companies that have

not joined, about half of them are planning their initiative for social media presence.

In relation to the Factbook from 2011, there is an increase of about 70-‐80% in

companies that expect to use it in the future16. The large increase of companies that

both use and expect to use it in the future could be due to precisely the hype that

currently surrounds social media.

With the possible development of a technological advancement or innovation that the

hype cycle suggests, it is important for companies not to become infatuated with the

apparent power of social media. There are many options and possibilities on the

internet that can help a company achieve their objectives and goals. It is important for

companies to not jump on the social media bandwagon because everyone else is.

Other tools might be more pertinent to include in an online strategy, besides social

networks or even social media. Furthermore, as Evans (2010) argues it is important

for companies not to fall in love with a specific platform. Customers might not be

present on that platform, and if they are they might change their opinions about it at

some point. Finally the platform might disappear within a time period (Evans 2010:

107-‐11). Especially in this day and age, where things change quickly, this is important

to keep in mind. As Evans (2010) states, social media is constantly changing.

Communities and platforms appear and disappear. In such a time, it is important for

companies to stay flexible and not “put all their eggs in one basket” (Evans 2010: 2).

Facebook might be the giant of social media right now, but that can change within a

few years. For example, another social media platform MySpace skyrocketed into

fame rather quickly, and after being acquired by the company News Corp. it faced a

number of challenges, which it couldn’t live up to. MySpace still exists, but is nowhere

near its popularity now as back then17. In a Forbes article, journalist Eric Jackson

posits a number of reasons why both Google and Facebook might be gone within the

next 5-‐8 years – and “not bankrupt gone, but MySpace gone”18. This phrasing

exemplifies simply and well what happened to MySpace, and what Jackson imagines

might happen to Facebook.

15 http://www.socialsemantic.eu/downloadrapport.aspx?dokument=factbook2012 (accessed 15 July 2012) 16 Ibid. 17 http://mashable.com/2012/06/13/facebook-‐decline/ (accessed June 30 2012) 18 http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericjackson/2012/04/30/heres-‐why-‐google-‐and-‐facebook-‐might-‐completely-‐disappear-‐in-‐the-‐next-‐5-‐years/ (accessed June 30 2012)


51

3.8. Chapter sum up (C)

This chapter has covered subjects and grounds that create the foundation for the

remaining of this thesis. This chapter therefore serves as important background

knowledge, required to properly comprehend the conceptual and contextual setting

that has lead to the rise of social media, and furthermore, why the success and

possibilities of social media might be overly hyped.

The reflexive state between consumer culture and the branding

paradigm causes a parallel development within the two concepts, which leads the way

for continuous change in the market place. It can be hypothesized that the use of

social media in corporate communication is a result of this process. Social media

offers a new venue where consumers can disclose and present their individual

identities. These consumers are considered fragmented in that they seek cultural

resources to create and express multiple identities. This [post-‐] postmodern

consumer no longer finds loyalty in one specific brand or company, but instead

consumes according to the roles and lifestyles that the individual desires to express.

The introduction of the internet has propelled the development of the [post-‐]

postmodern consumer, which consequently has resulted in the growth and success of

social media. Finally, the hype cycle illustrates how new technological innovations

such as social media in a business context may be excessively overestimated.

In the next chapter, the thesis will introduce the interview guide,

which structured the five individual qualitative research interviews. This is followed

by an outline of the decisions made concerning the sampling process.


52

4. CHAPTER 4: The interview and its respondents (C) This chapter includes an introduction to the interview guide that has been employed

throughout the five individual qualitative life world interviews that constitutes the

empirical data generated for this study. We will present the considerations that went

into constructing the guide and explain its thematic structure. Furthermore, we will

outline the sampling techniques and processes prior to the actual selection and choice

of respondents. Finally, each of the respondents will be introduced by first name, age

and occupation or education.

4.1. Constructing the interview guide (L)

The interview guide is an integral aspect of conducting qualitative research.

Essentially, the researcher is considered the instrument through which the qualitative

data is generated, analyzed, and interpreted (Pyett 2003). Nonetheless, an interview

guide is a necessary tool that helps the researcher direct the conversation towards

specific issues and topics. Interview guides can vary in structure from being highly

scripted to relatively loose. Despite form or structure, an interview guide mainly helps

the researcher to know what to ask about, how to pose the question and how to pose

follow ups (Kennedy 2006 in Krauss et al 2009: 245).

It is depends on the individual study, whether the questions are

strictly predetermined or whether it is the interviewer’s judgment that determines

whether to follow the guide or formulate questions on the spot. Interview questions

can be evaluated according to both a thematic and dynamic dimension. The thematic

dimension is related to the production of knowledge. The dynamic dimension on the

other hand is connected to promoting interpersonal relationships in the interview.

The thematic nature of questions in an interview differs, based on the specific

purpose. Qualitative interviews can assess the spontaneous descriptions of the life

world of the interviewee or look for a conceptual analysis of the participants’

understanding of a topic. The dynamic dimension of an interview refers to the ‘how’ of

the interaction, where the researcher attempts to promote a positive conversation

and keep the flow going. Dynamics are created by keeping the questions short and

precise, and avoid academic and difficult language. An interview with a thematic

structure and conceptual focus is not always helpful for the dynamics of an interaction

(Kvale and Brinkmann 2009: 131). Kvale and Brinkmann (2009) state that the more

spontaneous the interview procedure is, the more likely it is to obtain unexpected and

impulsive answers. Oppositely, if the interview is structured it becomes easier to

make a conceptual analysis later on (Kvale and Brinkmann 2009: 131).


53

We found it important to have a rather structured approach to the

interview. The purpose of the five interviews was a mixture of investigating the

participants’ conceptual understanding of social media, as well as their daily use and

general attitude towards corporate Facebook sites. The interview guide is available in

appendix 1. The choice of making the interview guide fairly structured was based on

the overall research questions of this thesis. As mentioned before, the purpose of this

thesis is to investigate the three statements for corporate Facebook sites. Additionally,

we wanted to provide a developmental and future perspective of the corporate use of

Facebook. It was therefore crucial for us that all four themes were addressed during

each interview. Hence, we chose a rather scripted guide with both open and closed

questions. The guide is divided into five overall themes with four to six appertaining

questions. Questions 1 and 2 in theme 1 are examples of open questions where the

respondent is free to answer the question however she or he finds suitable. Question

3, 4 and 5 in theme 1 however are closed questions where we seek simple answers.

Throughout the guide we have added examples of follow-‐up questions necessary in

the later analysis. Question 11 in theme 2 is connected with a follow up question. In

this case, it is necessary that the respondent elaborates on why she or he chose to

block a corporate Facebook site. By adding the follow up question the interviewer is

then reminded to ask for an elaboration. Despite the questions and follow ups that

were prepared prior to the interviews, the guide is open to any spontaneous questions

or follows ups that can occur during qualitative interviews. Thematically, the

structure of the interview guide leads from generic questions regarding the

participants’ general use of Facebook and subsequently is narrowed down to a focus

on corporate sites and frictionless information sharing.

As mentioned in the previous chapter, the subject matter knowledge of

a qualitative interview is an ongoing process. Our knowledge on the issues and

research questions has continued to evolve throughout the thesis process and we

therefore chose to alter our interview guide after the first interview. After the

interview with participant number 1: Sandra, we realized that an area in our problem

statement was not sufficiently covered in the initial interview guide. Questions 20, 21

and 21a were added after a discussion and evaluation of the first interview. We

recognized that the thesis research question concerned with the opportunities of

improving word-‐of-‐mouth through social media could stand to be further explored

during the interview and hence the added questions.

There are different types of questions with different purposes in

qualitative research interviews. Kvale and Brinkmann (2009) have formulated an

overall rule that states that questions should be brief and simple (134). We will in the

following section describe the various types of questions, which are relevant for the


54

interviews conducted for this thesis. Introductory questions are usually opening

questions that may evoke spontaneous answers with rich descriptions, where the

interviewees provide their own experiences with the phenomena. Questions 1 and 2

in theme 1 inquire about the participants’ use of Facebook in their daily lives and the

main reason for having Facebook profiles. We believe these questions set the theme

for the interview and make the participants briefly reflect on their own presence on

this social media platform. Follow up questions occur when the participant’s answers

need to be extended or elaborated, based on a curiosity or critical attitude of the

interviewer. Follow up questions are added throughout the interview guide of this

research, however the actual interviews proved to generate many more follow ups

which can be viewed in the five transcripts in appendices 6-‐10. Probing questions is

another way of getting the interviewee to elaborate on a description, but without

stating what dimension should be taken into account. An example of a probing

question could be “Could you please say something more about that?” During the five

interviews, several probing questions occur. Another way to follow up on description

is by the use of specifying questions. This is when the questions are more

operationalized and investigate specific aspects of the interviewee’s experience or

attitude. Throughout the interview guide, we have added a number of follow

questions that asks the participant to elaborate on the answer of the main question.

These were aimed at either probing or specifying. However, qualitative research is

naturally difficult to script and plan ahead and each interview proved to have different

outcomes and structure. Direct questions introduce topics directly and are usually left

for the later part of an interview to leave room for as many spontaneous descriptions.

In theme 5 of the interview we pose direct questions regaring the service Spotify and

the social reader applications of Facebook. These questions are specific and direct,

and we immediately attempt to probe for their opinions on frictionless sharing on

Facebook. Interpreting questions involves rephrasing an answer of the interview to

confirm the understanding of what has been said (Kvale and Brinkmann 2009: 135-‐

136). It is not clear from the interview guide when these questions appear during each

interview, however this will be addressed during the analyses in this thesis.

Theoretically, there are other types of questions that can occur during

qualitative research interviews. These are questions that the researcher can prepare

prior to an interview and questions that can occur spontaneously. We considered the

above types of questions relevant to mention in the assessment of the interview guide

of this thesis.


55

4.2. Sampling of research respondents (O)

When conducting research, whether qualitative or quantitative the notion of sampling

is important to consider. Therefore, the following pages will introduce the concept of

sampling in relation to qualitative research, which in turn will be linked to the choices

made in this study and finally the five respondents that were chosen for this study will

be presented.

It is relevant to introduce the features of sampling in qualitative

research in opposition to the characteristics of quantitative research. In quantitative

studies, the purpose is often to objectively study a phenomenon, which can be

replicated and in turn function as a representation of the truth (Daymon and

Holloway 2004: 7). The notion of probability sampling is therefore often employed in

these studies, in order to mathematically ensure that the sample chosen for the study

is representative of a larger group of population (Senese 1997 in Berg 2004: 34). By

creating a sample based upon a representation of population, the data results can then

be generalized to the whole population (or group of population) (Marshall 1996: 522).

Furthermore, the most employed probability sample is the simple random sample,

where participants are chosen randomly based on a number of characteristics.

Therefore, principally each member of a population should have an equal and

independent chance of participating (Berg 2004: 34).

The sampling technique for qualitative research is naturally quite

different from quantitative studies, as the purposes are quite contrasting. Therefore,

the respondents are not chosen randomly or based on characteristics such as age or

sex. Instead qualitative researchers acknowledge that some people are more

appropriate to ask than others, and can offer richer insight to the investigation. As

Marshall (1996) appropriately expresses “[c]hoosing someone at random to answer a

qualitative question would be analogous to randomly asking a passer-‐by how to

repair a broken down car, rather than asking a garage mechanic -‐ the former might

have a good stab, but asking the latter is likely to be more productive.” (523). The

results from a qualitative study can therefore not be generalized for the entire

population, yet this is not an issue. Qualitative research focuses on meanings and

attitudes in relation to a historical or cultural context and does therefore not search

for or generates data that can be generalized to the entire population (Lindlof and

Taylor 2002:122). Simply, quantitative studies answer the ‘what’ questions, where

qualitative studies are more interested in the ‘why’ and ‘how’ aspects of the topic

under investigation. Thus, the methods for sampling are naturally quite contrary.


56

The following paragraphs relate sampling methods in the qualitative interview

approach, and will accordingly overlook techniques specifically related to observation

studies, focus groups and other types of qualitative research. The sampling strategies

that will be introduced are the convenience sample, judgment sample, theoretical

sample, theoretical construct sampling and maximum variation sampling.

The convenience sample is the least demanding strategy presented, in

that the researcher chooses respondents based on their easy accessibility and

availability. The study can suffer under this approach. For instance the sampled

participants are not suitable to offer information about the investigated

characteristics and processes. This often leads to a reduced data quality and

diminished credibility to the work. Therefore, the appropriateness of this method

needs to be considered in relation to the study and its goals (Marshall 1996: 523, Berg

2004: 35-‐36).

The second technique is the judgment sample (also referred to as

purposive sampling). In this case, the researcher selects the most effective sample of

participants in the aim of answering the problem statement or research questions. On

the basis of the researcher’s knowledge of the research area gathered through

practical experience and academic research, a framework of variables is constructed.

These variables concern the elements that can influence the participants’

contribution, and include more than the typical demographic characteristics such as

age, sex, and geographical location. With this approach it is possible to select a group

of respondents that consists of certain types and represent specific attributes

(Marshall 1996: 523, Berg 2004: 36). However, Berg (2004) argues that this technique

has limitations in form of for instance its lack of wide generalizability (36).

Nevertheless, as this feature is not sought after in qualitative research, we do not

consider it as such a serious limitation as Berg (2004).

Additionally, there is the theoretical sample, which thrives on the

iterative process that qualitative research occasionally offers. In this case the research

builds theories based on the emerging data (from the first sample) and afterwards the

theory is examined and elaborated on with the help of a second sample (Marshall

1996: 523)

Despite similarities in name with the above-‐mentioned technique, the

theoretical construct sampling is quite different. This method is appropriate for

studies that are driven by a theoretical interest. Participants can then be chosen

according to fulfilling a number of self-‐chosen criteria in relation to key concepts of

the theoretical interest. These criteria are based on the researcher’s own theorizing,

and are adopted on the basis of which aspects are needed in order to reach the goal of

the study (Lindlof and Taylor 2002: 126).


57

Finally, it is appropriate to mention the concept of maximum variation

sampling, which concerns the idea of finding respondents that embody a wide number

of characteristics with the purpose of forming a conceptual understanding of the

phenomenon investigated. This method is appropriate in cases where the range of

participants serves a purpose in the goal of the study, for instance investigating the

range of a communication approach or the difference in beliefs when different

participants discuss a subject (Lindlof and Taylor 2002: 123).

With the introduction of the various sampling techniques in place, it is

now appropriate to move on to explain the sampling choices made in this research. As

is often the case, a methodological choice may not fit into a box of specific

characteristics. So is the case in this thesis. The sampling method is therefore

characterized as a combination of convenience sample, judgment sample and

theoretical construct sampling. The empirical data in this thesis consists of five

interviews. These five people have been chosen according to a number of

characteristics that were found important in order to generate useful data and

thereby properly answer the problem statement and the appertaining research

questions. These have been made from a theoretical construct sampling approach. The

characteristics are:

1. Subjects need to have a Facebook profile

2. Subjects need to have liked a corporate Facebook page

3. Subjects need to be able to speak English proficiently

This means that the above characteristics were the most important

features that subjects needed to personify. Therefore, the method of theoretical

construct sampling served as a foundation for further sampling selection. Judgment

sampling was employed to consider which features where relevant when collecting

the most effective participants to interact with in the interview, in order to finally

answer the thesis’ research questions. In this case we considered which type of

respondent could offer useful data and most importantly, which type of consumer that

would be most well-‐informed, experienced and respond to corporate social media use

positively. In other words, which type of consumer, which we believe, would be most

likely to make use of, respond to and be aware of corporate Facebook sites, and be

able to communicate this efficiently. Since we assumed a more critical perspective of

social media and Facebook, it would have been easy to employ subjects that either do

not make use of or are not interested in companies’ usage of Facebook and thereby be

able to empirically discredit the corporate use of Facebook. However, this is not the

aim of the assignment. We want to provide a critical, yet varied assessment of


58

corporate social media use. Therefore, the chosen respondents are likely to have an

interest in the corporate communication possibilities of Facebook due to their

professional and academic background. Furthermore, the chosen respondents all

currently attend an education that has English as the medium of instruction. This

ensures that the subjects are used to speaking English and do not experience any

anxiety doing this.

Finally, the convenience sampling method has been applied in that the

five chosen respondents are students of the same type of education as we are. The

subjects were rather easy to find and schedule an appointment with, but more

importantly, they were able to live up to the demands put forward in the theoretical

construct technique and were able to offer useful data effectively according to the

judgment sample method.

After explaining the techniques for sampling in qualitative research in

contrast to the quantitative methods, and furthermore clarifying which of these have

been employed in this thesis, the following section will focus on the specific

respondents that participated in the research.

4.2.1. Research respondents

As we shortly introduced in the above section, five master level corporate

communication students who attend the same university as we, have been chosen for

this study. We therefore possess an understanding of how these students

communicate in English, as well as their ability to reflect and communicate on an

academic level. As explained, the English proficiency of the participants is a crucial

requirement in the participant group. In order to make a qualitative research we

found it necessary that the interviewees where able to answer as honest and effortless

as possible on questions that where not formulated in their native language, in this

case Danish. The interviews could have been carried out in Danish, however we

believe that meaning or understanding could be lost in translation.

As all five respondents share characteristics in education, age and

corporate social media knowledge a point of criticism could be the lack in diversity

among the respondents. Our sampling process did not include the technique referred

to as maximum variation sampling, which concerns the idea of finding respondents

that represent a wide number of characteristics. However, with this research we

prioritized the desire to gain a deeper understanding of the respondents’ life worlds,

and we were not concerned with gaining a wide spread of characteristics. Also, we

valued a high level in English proficiency to be necessary in order for them to provide

clear descriptions of their perceived worlds. With their educational and professional


59

background their insight into social media can pose as both an advantage and

disadvantage for this study. They have extensive knowledge on the subject, however

may be overly critical of the subject due to their perception of corporate social media

best practices.

Below, the five respondents are presented with a number of details

that we find important to introduce, in order to properly understand the reasoning for

the respondents’ answers. It is important to mention that we have used the subjects’

real first names and they are therefore not anonymous. This has been confirmed and

approved by the participants.

19

19 Table 1: List of respondents

RESPONDENT 1 Name: Sandra Age: 26 Academic background: Master in Corporate Communication Professional background: Previous communication intern in the Danish Parliament Interview: appendix 11 Transcription: appendix 6 RESPONDENT 2 Name: René Age: 26 Academic background: Master in Corporate Communication Professional background: Coordinator of the master introductions days at AU -‐ BSS Interview: appendix 12 Transcription: appendix 7 RESPONDENT 3 Name: Stine Age: 26 Academic background: Master in Corporate Communication Professional background: Social media student worker at Vero Moda Interview: appendix 13 Transcription: appendix 8

RESPONDENT 4 Name: Caroline Age: 24 Academic background: Master in Corporate Communication Professional background: Previously student worker at Vestas and fitness trainer at Fitness World. Currently working at Google Interview: appendix 14 Transcription: appendix 9 RESPONDENT 5 Name: Jacob Age: 27 Academic background: Master in Corporate Communication Professional background: Previous intern at the advertising agency Envision, and has since been employed as a student worker in the same position Interview: appendix 15 Transcription: appendix 10


60

5. CHAPTER 5: Qualitative data analysis theory (L) In qualitative research, the analytical process is considered difficult and challenging

compared to the possibilities of generalization and quantification of quantitative

studies. The key purpose of qualitative research is to gain insight and construct

explanations or theory. According to Professor of management and organizational

studies John Van Maanen (1979), qualitative methodology is an umbrella term that

covers an array of interpretative techniques, which seem to describe, decode,

translate and otherwise come to terms with the meaning of a certain phenomenon

(520).

Qualitative research studies are often overwhelmed with data due to

the length and depth of semi-‐structured interviews. The term analysis is concerned

with dividing up and breaking down the complex whole into constituent parts (Ghauri

and Grønhaug 2010: 199). Through the analytical activities the researcher dissects,

reduces, sorts and reconstitutes the data. The data is manipulated and assessed in

order to gain understanding and clarify meaning. There is no single agreed upon

approach to qualitative analysis, like there is no universal way to design and conduct

the actual interviews.

According to authors Kathleen Ammon-‐Gaberson and Maria Piantanida (1988) there

are three common pitfalls in qualitative data analysis. These are data shuffling,

premature closure and overly delayed closure (Ammon-‐Gaberson and Piantanida 1988:

704). During the act of data shuffling, procrastination often occurs. This happens

during the early phase of data analysis, where sorting and shifting through data is

necessary. However, when the shifting and sorting becomes excessive and prolonged

unnecessarily, this is considered data shuffling. Often it is a difficult task for

researchers to move on from the sorting process to the conceptualization and

interpretation of data. The second pitfall is premature closure which can occur in two

ways. Firstly, the researcher can terminate the data collection before sufficient data is

obtained. Secondly, the researcher stops the actual analysis of the data, before a solid

conceptual outcome is created. The final pitfall is the overly delayed closure, which

results from a prolonged data collection or analysis. Some researchers might become

anxious about their ability to produce quality results, which leads to a lengthy data

analysis.

We have chosen to let the time limitations of this research guide the

extent of our data collection and number of participants in the research interviews.

The restricted number of days and resources were crucial in choosing to complete five


61

qualitative interviews. Furthermore, in order to ease the thesis process, we have

chosen to complete all interviews prior to initiation of the actual analysis. Doing so

has enforced all the interviews to be completed within the first couple of months of

the five month official writing period. This decision has impeded the research at some

level, in terms of the iterative nature of qualitative research. By initiating the analysis

after all interviews have been completed, we have not opened up for the opportunity

of changing or redoing interviews, based on the analytical and interpretive outcome.

However, we have made alterations to the interview guide between the actual

interviews.

Authors Mathew B. Miles and A. Michael Huberman (1994) define

qualitative analysis as consisting of three concurrent flows of activity. These are data

reduction, data display and conclusion drawing and verification. Data reduction refers

to the process of selecting, focusing, simplifying, abstracting, and transforming the

data that appears in the transcript (Miles and Huberman 1994: 10). Data reduction

occurs continuously throughout qualitative research projects. Even prior to the actual

data collection, an anticipatory data reduction occurs when the researcher decides on

which conceptual framework, method of data collection and questions to employ. Data

reduction takes place continuously, until the final report is completed. Data reduction

is a part of the actual analysis and decisions related to which data to pull out and

which patters to summarize are all considered to be analytical choices. Data reduction

organizes the data in a way from which final conclusions can be drawn and verified.

Data reduction is not necessarily an act of quantification. Data can be reduced in a

number of ways such as selection, summaries, paraphrases, or larger patterns (Miles

and Huberman 1994: 11).

Data display is an organized and compressed collection of information

that permits the possibility of drawing conclusions and taking action. Displays assist

in gaining understanding of certain phenomena and can be represented in many ways

such as matrices, graphs, charts, and networks. Like data reduction, data display is

also considered a part of the analytical process and can therefore pose implications

for the data reduction process. If the data reduction is an ongoing process during a

qualitative data analysis, it is difficult to decide on and produce a final data display

(Miles and Huberman 1994: 11).

The third and final analytical activity is conclusion drawing and

verification. From the beginning of the data collection process, the researcher will

note patterns, regularities, explanations, propositions, and other possible conclusions.

The researcher holds these assumptions lightly and maintains an openness and

skepticism at the beginning of the process. As the analysis is completed these

conclusions become more explicit and grounded. Conclusions need to be verified,


62

which is an important aspect of the third analytical activity. Verification may be as

brief as a single idea or thought in the researcher’s mind, which requires a quick

return to the field notes. Oppositely, it could be an elaborate and lengthy

argumentation that requires inter-‐subjective consensus (Miles and Huberman 1994:

11).

Data reduction, data display and conclusion and verification are all

interconnected activities that take a parallel form and make up the general process of

qualitative analysis. The model below represents how the three analytical processes

and the actual data collection form an interactive circular process. The researcher

continuously moves back and forth between the different activities. For example when

data is reduced it creates new ideas to what goes into the data display. Entering this

data in the display requires further data reduction and when the display is complete

the conclusions are drawn.

20

This thesis includes five individual qualitative interviews and we have therefore

approached the challenges of data reduction, data display, and conclusion and

verification in a way different from studies that include a high number of respondents

and therefore a large amount of data. Naturally, we have transcribed all five

interviews which are available in appendix 6,7,8,9 and 10. Each transcription has

assisted us in immersing ourselves in all five interviews. Consequently, we have been

able to address all aspects of the interviews that we have found relevant for the

analysis. We have chosen to reduce the data by listening to each interview a second,

third or fourth time with the aim of reducing the statements of each participant into

main headlines of their opinions and views on a specific subject. All statements have

been collected in one document listing all the statements of the participants aligned

with the questions asked. Each participant has been given a color, which has assisted

us during the analysis when drawing conclusions and comparisons between the

20 Illustration 5: Components of qualitative data analysis (Miles and Huberman 1994: 12)


63

answers of each participant. We have chosen to name this document Data display of

interviews and it is attached in appendix 3.

Returning to the work of Steiner Kvale (2007) the author has proposed five main

approaches to qualitative analysis. These are meaning condensation, categorization,

narratives, meaning interpretation, and ad hoc meaning generation (191-‐192).

Meaning condensation involves making a reduction of the expressed meanings in the

interviews into shorter formulations. Long statements are compressed into briefer

statements in which the main point of the statement is rephrased in fewer words.

Meaning categorization implies that the interview is coded into categories. Long

statements are reduced to codes such as positive or negative, which indicates the

occurrence or non-‐occurrence of a phenomenon. Categorization reduces large amount

of data into a few tables and figures. Narratives in qualitative analysis entail a

temporal and social organization of a text aimed at producing meaning. Focus is on the

stories told during the interview and structures and plots are subtracted. If no stories

spontaneously occur during the interview, a narrative analysis may attempt to create

a coherent story out of the different happenings during the interview. Meaning

interpretation is when the interviewer has a perspective on what is being investigated

and interprets the interviews from this perspective. The researcher goes beyond what

is being said directly and discovers structures and relations of meanings not

immediately apparent in the text (Kvale 2007: 201). Ad hoc meaning generation is

according to Kvale (2007) one of the most frequent forms of interview analysis. This

approach entails employing different techniques for meaning generation. There is no

specific standard method for analyzing the whole of an interview. Instead there is a

free interplay of techniques during the process. This entails a need for the researcher

to read all interviews through, get an overall impression and then return to specific

passages and sections to make deeper interpretations using different techniques

(Kvale 2007: 203-‐204)

Ad hoc is the main choice of analytical framework in this research,

however it has been combined with the use of meaning condensation and meaning

interpretation. We have conducted five interviews all varying in length between 33 –

47 minutes. Each interview is transcribed in detail and found in the appendices of this

thesis. All interviews have been condensed and displayed according to their answers

and the associated interview guide. These statements have been reduced further

according to the technique of meaning condensation and applied during the analysis

and sub conclusions that have been drawn throughout the thesis. Meaning

interpretation has been employed on the basis of linking the respondents’ answers

with theoretical knowledge of social media behavior and identity construction. Based


64

on the knowledge we have gathered throughout the research process, we interpret

the statements of the respondents based on the purpose of the investigation.

The following three chapters include the three overall corporate social

media statements on which our research is based. Each chapter will include an

introduction of the authors and literature responsible for the statement, an analysis of

the generated qualitative data or theoretical contribution and a final discussion

regarding each statement.


65

6. CHAPTER 6: Statement 1 (C)

Social media allows companies to engage in dialogue with their consumers. The above-‐mentioned statement is the first of the three overall corporate social media

statements, which direct this thesis. This chapter will initially introduce the authors

and literature that argue for dialogue with consumers possible through social media.

Each piece of literature will be presented in detail as they are employed several times

throughout the following chapters. Subsequently, the data generated from the

qualitative interviews will be introduced and analyzed according to the analytical

method presented earlier. The chapter is concluded with a discussion that questions

the statement by the means of theory and empirical findings.

6.1. Origins of statement (L) The following section will revolve around a number of articles that present the

statement that social media will allow companies to engage in dialogue with their

consumers. Of course this is stated in various ways and the phrasing is not executed

similarly. However, the following articles and literature have a collective belief, which

makes it possible for us to collect them into one overall statement. This statement is

concerned with the opportunities that social media provide companies when engaging

in conversation or dialogue with their consumers. Some authors furthermore point

out that through dialogue on social media, companies have the opportunity to form a

bond and create relationships with consumers, which can possibly even lead to

consumer engagement and evangelism (Weinberg and Pehlivan 2011). These authors’

statements vary in their degree, but share the common belief of social media as a

company-‐consumer conversations or dialogue platform, which positions us to

formulate statement 1: social media allows companies to engage in dialogue with their

consumers. This statement will be challenged by the means of the empirical data

combined with the conceptual and contextual framework presented in chapter 3. In

order to properly introduce this overarching statement, we will in the following

paragraphs introduce the literature, the authors responsible for it and most

importantly their perspective on social media.

Authors Pookulungara and Koesler (2011) have investigated how culture influences

the use of social networks and how it impacts users’ online purchase intentions. Even

though the cultural aspects in the use of social media have been omitted in this thesis,

Pookulungara and Koesler (2011) express several interesting views that will be

addressed. They believe that companies can reap benefits by including online social


66

networks in their marketing and thereby enhance the overall marketing strategy

(348). They argue for the opportunities for brand-‐related messages being carried by

non-‐marketers, learning about consumer needs, and the opportunity to converse with

consumers. The latter will be the focus of this chapter.

As mentioned above, Pookulungara and Koesler (2011) reckon that

social media gives companies the possibility to engage and converse with consumers.

They state that engaging in social networks is a an attractive alternative to traditional

communication tools, in that companies can engage with consumers directly, timely,

more efficiently, and at a lower cost (351-‐52). Furthermore, they believe that by

listening to and engaging with consumers through conversation and dialogue, the

result will be a better customer service and the transformation of loyal consumers to

passionate advocates.

Pookulungara and Koesler (2011) state “[t]here is a great sense of

urgency for retailers to integrate this new emerging medium in their marketing plan

and create a social network based strategy that is true to the brand and allows the

company to control the service experience for their customers.” (349). We find the

expectation to control the service experience interesting to address. As introduced

previously, the fact that [post-‐] postmodern consumers have secured the power and

control from organizations is a large part of why companies even want to be a part of

the social media bandwagon. Author Liana Evans (2010) expresses that companies

might struggle with embracing this new medium. For instance, they no longer control

negative publicity. She believes that companies need have an awareness of the

activities online, but need to accept that they no longer have control over it (Evans

2010). Therefore, the entrance into the world of social media should not be based

upon the wish to re-‐gain the control of the consumer experience. Consequently,

Pookulungara and Koesler’s (2011) statement is in complete contradiction of what is

really possible. Nevertheless, Pookulungara and Koesler (2011) state that social

networks are not a panacea for all business-‐related problems and companies need to

investigate this with an open mind.

In the work of authors Weinberg and Pehlivan (2011), it is acknowledged that the

spending and budgeting on social media within the business world is met with a lot of

uncertainty. With their article they have explored the depths of social media in order

to present and highlight the most important distinctions between the various social

media platforms. Furthermore, they investigate social media from a strategic

perspective, and by offering the contrasts between the differing possibilities, they are

able to provide information in relation to the tactical execution of social media efforts.

Weinberg and Pehlivan (2011) offer grounds for the use of social media such as


67

tracking consumers’ beliefs, relying on social currency to carry the brand-‐related

message and finally the possibility of relationship building between organization and

consumer, which is the aspect in focus in this section.

Weinberg and Pehlivan (2011) believe that certain features of social

media create more empowered and influential consumers, enabling a relationship to

build between organization and consumer. Weinberg and Pehlivan (2011) consider

social media to be a relationship-‐oriented medium. They deem the execution and

success of it to be greatly enhanced, if it has a personal touch (276). They believe that

in order to carry out a relationship oriented social media strategy, organizations need

to have a skill set, which consist of several important qualities. These are authenticity,

reciprocity, the ability to relinquish some control, having a ‘human’ persona, being

conversational and give up the urge to constantly sell, sell, sell (Parise et al 2008 in

Weinberg and Pehlivan 2011). With this skill set in place, companies should be more

likely to succeed in their social media strategy.

The work by professor Rosemary Thackeray and authors Brad Neiger and Heidi Keller

(2012) is relevant to apply in this chapter. Even though their interest relates mostly to

how social media can be used strategically in social marketing, their article provides

some interesting points that are significant to include. They consider social media as a

real-‐time, two-‐way communication channel, which can be used to ensure that the

company gets the consumers input and opinion. Most importantly, they believe that

social media has an added value in the opportunity of creating ongoing conversations

and dialogue with the audience. Furthermore, they state that this ongoing exchange of

opinion and ideas will form a foundation for the creation of deeper and longer lasting

relationship with the audience.

Similarly to Weinberg and Pehlivan (2011), and Pookulungara and

Koesler (2011), Thackeray et al (2012) believe that with a deeper connection is the

possibility to create loyal champions that are more involved. However, content is

equally as important as the actual. If the use of social media is to be truly successful, it

is required that the content is engaging and genuinely formed as a dialogue. According

to Waters and Jamal (in Thackeray et al 2012: 168), research shows that one of the

biggest challenges for companies’ application of social media is creating this genuine

and two-‐way oriented dialogue with consumers. They believe that the integration of

social media into a social marketing process can create a powerful synergy. However,

this can only be successful if the company actually engages the consumer and has

strategically thought social media into the entire social marketing process.


68

Professor Michael J. Meredith (2012) examines and discusses the importance of the

inclusion of social media in business communication studies. Meredith shortly

presents his thoughts about the possibilities of social media from an integrated

communication approach and what aspects he will focus on during his course. In the

article, he outlines the MBA course that he is currently developing, and explains why

he believes that social media is a good channel to employ when talking with various

stakeholders. The course will include the promises, pitfalls and best practices of social

media, and he uses this in his article to exemplify the importance of this particular

course. Meredith (2012) argues that social media is a valuable tool for communicating

with stakeholders – our focus being the consumers – and in the process building and

maintaining a relationship with them. This means that according to Meredith (2012)

communication through social media functions as a relationship builder. This opinion

is what contributes to the over-‐arching statement related to creating dialogue through

corporate social media.

Author Danny Meadows-‐Klue’s (2007) research and work is on the concept of

relationship marketing in a frictionless time, which is highly influenced by the

continuous consumer development. Up until now, the relationship between

organization and consumer has been one-‐way. Now, in a radically different

environment, companies need to change their approach to relationship marketing. In

correlation with the theme of this chapter, Meadows-‐Klue (2007) argues that by

employing social media companies can create and maintain relationships with

consumers. As presented in the conceptual and contextual framework, consumers

have changed and no longer respond to marketing as they have previously.

Consumers have become marketing literate and with the rise of the internet it is

argued that consumers are also becoming literate towards digital media (Meadows-‐

Klue 2007:248). With the increasing use of the internet and social networks,

Meadows-‐Klue (2007) therefore argues that this development has great consequences

for companies and their efforts to form relationships with consumers. He believes that

this development is important for companies to understand, if they want to form

relations with their consumers.

We have connected several statements in the previous presented literature and

articles to the main statement named social media will allow companies to engage in

dialogue with their consumers. As stated in the problem statement we question this

claim by the means of an analysis of the empirical data generated in the five

qualitative research interviews. Subsequently, the over-‐arching statement, the


69

analytical results and the conceptual and contextual contribution will be reflected

upon in a final discussion.

6.2. Qualitative data analysis (L)

In the following, we have addressed the statement social media allows companies to

engage in dialogue with their consumers. This statement will be treated by the means

of the qualitative data analysis and subsequently questioned in the following

discussion. The empirical contribution to this thesis consists of five individual

qualitative research interviews, which have been processed and analyzed with the

method of ad hoc meaning generation as presented by Kvale (2007). This approach

has been combined with the use of meaning condensation where expressed meanings

are condensed into shorter formulation and meaning interpretation where decisions

and assumptions are made about the insinuated meanings and attitudes of the

participants. The analysis is divided into four sections each covering a specific

question and the appertaining follow ups and answers evident in the interviews.

Questions 13 – 16 were all formulated to investigate how the participants

communicate with companies and if and why they have engaged in dialogue with

corporate Facebook profiles.

“Which is your latest corporate like?” Initially, when attempting to assess how our respondent interact with companies by

the means of Facebook, we ask for the latest corporate Facebook site they have liked.

This information is available on their personal Facebook page and is grouped together

with all interests and likes since the profile was formed. We attempt to highlight that

we wish to avoid alternative corporate sites such as celebrities, music, television

shows, athletes and entertainment sites. We underline in the interview that focus is on

companies that produce a product or service and are considered a corporation in the

traditional sense.

Sandra discovers that her latest corporate like is the fashion brand

Vero Moda. The reason for liking this site was a competition that one of her Facebook

friends had liked and it therefore was brought to her attention. The winnings were a

clothing budget to empty a Vero Moda store (App. 6 #00:08:16-‐6#). During the

interview Sandra discovers that she has made few corporate likes during the years of

2011 and 2012 (App. 6 #00:19:49-‐6#).

The two latest corporate likes of René are design consultancy Designit

and Jyske Bank. The reason for liking Designit is based on an internship he has applied

for at the company, and he wanted to “[…] see what goes on” (App. 7 #00:07:31-‐9#).


70

His reason for liking Jyske Bank, is that he has recently transferred his account to this

bank and he believes they have an interesting approach to their Facebook group.

However, he states that he does not like a lot of corporate sites on Facebook. He is

very selective and considers his newsfeed to be overflowing with non-‐useful

information as it is (App. 7 #00:07:31-‐9#). René states that he likes pages with useful

information. He follows the page of the Aarhus University merger, in order to stay

updated on the process (App. 7 #00:08:17-‐1#). Rene has experienced that the

consequence of liking too many corporate pages on Facebook is spam overload

(#00:08:50-‐5#).

Stine reveals that her latest corporate like is Vero Moda Norway,

however this was for work purposes, so focus in this analysis will be on the most

recent corporate like fueled by private reasoning. This is an Aarhus based hair dresser

called Per and the reason for liking this site is the updates on discounts and new

products that then becomes available on her newsfeed (App. 8 #00:10:01-‐9#,

#00:10:42-‐6#).

Caroline’s latest corporate like is Nutrimino fitness nutrition. Caroline

states that she has used the product in the past and she noticed a friend shared an

update from the page. We attempt to get Caroline to elaborate on why liked the

Nutrimino facebook site, and she states that she genuinely likes the product.

Furthermore, she wants to show others that she likes the site which then links it to

her lifestyle (App. 9 #00:08:53-‐7#)

Finally, Jacob discloses that his latest corporate like is the airline

Norwegian. He follows the site because he read in a newspaper that the airline will be

expanding their routes to New York and Bangkok with low cost fares and he wishes to

keep track of this development. More specifically, Norwegian promotes a deal called

Tuesday offers where flight offers can be purchased on the specific day. Basically, he

follows the site in order to keep up with the latest offers and news of the expansion

(App. 10 #00:05:04-‐9#).

The reason as to why we inquire our respondents about their latest

corporate Facebook likes and the immediate intention with these likes, is to assess

what motivates them to join the corporate pages and what benefits they expect to

gain. The motives for the last corporate likes between the five respondents are quite

diverse in terms of motivation and expected outcome. Sandra has liked a corporate

site with the aim of entering and winning a competition. René liked the site of a

company that he was hoping to join as an intern and therefore states that he wants to

see what goes on with the company. Stine liked a local hairdresser, in order to stay

updated on discounts and the arrival of new products. Caroline has liked a product

that she consumes and wanted to portray to others that this product is linked with her


71

current lifestyle. Finally, Jacob has liked the airline Norwegian, in order to keep track

of the new routes and potential offers. This collection of answers to the above

question represents an interesting pallet of the different possibilities and needs that

Facebook can fulfill in a corporate context. Our respondents have liked corporate sites

for extrinsic benefits such as cash prizes and offers and for intrinsic benefits like self-‐

representation and the need to stay informed. We find this to be an interesting point

of departure into a deeper investigation of the attitudes and behavior our respondent

have towards corporate Facebook sites. In order to explore how the respondents

engage in dialogue with companies through Facebook, the following questions are

related to their specific communication exchanges with these companies.

“Have you ever made an official complaint by the means of Facebook?” When asking Sandra if she has ever made an official complaint to a company through

Facebook, her reply is no and she elaborates that it is probably because she has not

been bothered enough. (App. 6 #00:20:17-‐8#). When inquiring whether Sandra could

ever see herself making an official complaint by the means of Facebook, she replies

that it depends on the type of company. If it is a company that occupies a strong

presence on social media, she considers this the way to contact them. However, she

honestly believes she would complain through other means, perhaps Twitter. She

explains that she would utilize Twitter because she does not want to appear to her

friends as a “nag-‐head” (App. 6 #00:22:10-‐2#). Few friends following her on Twitter

compares to Facebook and this reassures her that mainly strangers will see her

complaint. By formulating a specifying question, we attempt to confirm whether it is

the lack of anonymity that refrains Sandra from making official complaints through

Facebook. She replies: “Yeah, I hate… I actually don't like that whenever I just like

something or […] I'm participating in this and that event, I always go to my profile and

delete it. Because I don't want people.. I mean I have maybe five hundreds friends on

facebook and I don't want […] 490 of them to know where I'm going this Thursday

(App. 6 #00:22:47-‐6#)”. Sandra mentions that she tries to keep her Facebook profile

relatively private.

René has been very close to making a complaint to his previous bank

where his experienced bad treatment and poor handling of a situation. He considered

that other customers might not have experienced a similar situation with the bank

and therefore he figured Facebook might not be the place for this kind of complaint. In

other hypothetical cases of product failure or dissatisfaction with a company, René

states that he would probably just write an email. He expresses: “Why post it to

100,000 people potentially?” (App. 7 #00:16:32-‐3#).


72

Stine states in her interview that she does not remember having ever

made an official complaint to a company via Facebook, however she recalls having

thought about it once. Eventually, she chose not to, as she feels it puts her on the spot,

as everyone can see her complaint. If she is to make a complaint, she will pick up the

phone and call the company. She does not want to display herself publicly (App. 8

#00:21:54-‐6#, #00:22:35-‐3#.) We attempt to get Stine to elaborate on the reasoning

for not using Facebook to complain to companies, by asking a probing question. Stine

highlights that she considers Facebook to be a great venue for complaints and she is

positive towards the option of writing companies private messages that are not

displayed on the public wall. However, this option appears to her as a doubled sided

sword. On the one hand the consumer can avoid being displayed in public, however

this this eliminates that everyone can openly see which complaints the company is

receiving (App. 8 #00:23:28-‐3#)

Caroline has recently made a complaint to Kraft Foods regarding their

Philadelphia light crème cheese. She often confuses the light version with the original

version and proposed that the packaging should be different. She states that she used

the corporate Facebook site, because she could not locate an official customer service

email. We ask her if this means that she would prefer to write corporate complaint via

email. She confirms this and says that email is more anonymous. She believes there is

too much of her personal information available on Facebook that she does not want to

share with others through an official customer feedback (App. 9 #00:22:45-‐

5#,#00:24:23-‐1#)

Jacob has never made a complaint to a company through Facebook and

states that he will prefer to call them (App. 10 #00:14:00-‐9#). By doing this he feels

that he receives an immediate response and he that he believes that the complaint is

more serious (App. 10 #00:14:10-‐7#). Finally, he states that he does not want the

public to see his complaint.

In conclusion, only one of the five respondents has made an official

complaint to a company through Facebook. Caroline employed the Kraft Food’s

Facebook site, in order to complain about the packaging of a crème cheese that she

regularly purchases. However, she does explain that she did so because she could not

locate an official customer service email. She would prefer to write a traditional email

as to avoid the lack anonymity that Facebook entails. The other four participants do

not recall having ever complained through Facebook and all make comments about

the lack of anonymity. Sandra would prefer using Twitter as fewer of her friends

would see her complaint. René does not see the sense in making his complaint public

to others than the company. Stine is conflicted as she sees the advantage in making the

complaint public on Facebook, however she does not want to expose herself. Jacob


73

prefers to make phone calls, because of the immediate response and he believes the

complaint to appear more serious.

“Have you ever made recommendations to a company by the means of Facebook?” Besides making complaints via Facebook, we inquire whether the participants have

ever made recommendations or suggestions to a company regarding a product or

service.

Sandra only recalls one incident, which was related to a competition

where the company encouraged the participants to share how they would wear a

certain outfit, which was the actual prize of the competition. She states that she

wanted to win the prize; otherwise she would have never made the recommendation.

She has never done so proactively (App: 6 #00:24:21-‐0#, #00:24:52-‐4#).

Rene does not remember having made recommendations or

suggestions to a company, however he states that he might have done so, but has been

unaware of it. He cannot deny that he could have made comments or posts on the wall

of his Facebook friends and this could somehow have reached a company. He says:

“Even if I had a brilliant idea, I wouldn't give it to them” (App. 7 #00:21:08-‐1#).

During the interview with Stine she immediately replies no to the same

question (App. 8 #00:26:14-‐3#).

Caroline has at this point already provided us with an example of a

complaint or suggestion for a company that was sent through Facebook. We ask her

for other examples and she does not have any. However, she does mention that when

she has purchased a product she might enter the corporate Facebook site and like it.

With this action, it appears that Caroline considers a simple corporate like as a type of

valuable recommendation to a company (App.9 #00:27:06-‐1#)

Jacob has also never made such suggestions and elaborates that he

does not believe the corporate pages are taken seriously by management. He

considers this to be true for around ninety percent of the corporate Facebook pages

(App. 10 #00:16:14-‐1# #00:16:50-‐9#)

Only one of our respondents has made a suggestion on a corporate

Facebook page, besides the complaint from Caroline, which can also be viewed as a

recommendation to a company regarding their packaging. Sandra made the

recommendation in connection with a competition where she aspired to win a prize.

Sandra utters that she would never make recommendations like this proactively. It is

interesting to see how the participants interpret the question in different ways.

Caroline considers the fact that she has liked corporate sites as a recommendation of

some sort. René refers to companies on Facebook as silent readers where his public


74

communication with friends could potentially be of interest to companies. In order for

us to investigate our respondents’ opinions on dialogue generated via Facebook with

companies, the following question attempts to assess what could motivate them to

engage.

“What motivates you to engage in dialogue with companies on Facebook?” Sandra believes if companies seem open-‐minded, open to suggestions, interactive and

not only present on Facebook because everyone else is, it could motivate her to

engage (App. 6 #00:25:21-‐4#, #00:26:10-‐3#). Sandra seems to have an idea of how

she prefers corporate Facebook sites and which characteristics that could make her

engage more with companies. However, she has never voluntarily engaged in dialogue

with companies. We attempt to get her to elaborate on this. Her response is: “I don't

know if I know what I like, but I know what I don't like, if that makes sense. I know

what I don't want them to do. But again, I think that if I don't like what they are doing I

just unfollow and just ignore them and then they don't exits” (App. 6 #00:27:04-‐0#).

René believes he will be motivated to engage with companies, if they

challenge, provoke or dare him. Furthermore, he will engage if he can win something

or stand to gain something. Finally he says: “[...] if they really pissed me off, with

something ridiculous […]” would make him engage (App. 7 #00:22:23-‐8#).

Stine’s reply to the same question is that she does not do that at all. She

does not engage with companies by for instance writing on the Facebook wall or

commenting on pictures. She elaborates that there should be something in it for her

such as a competition or a fun application (App. 8 #00:26:44-‐2#). She feels she would

be more inclined to comment or engage with a specific blog rather than Facebook, as

she considers Facebook a quick newsfeed (App. 8 #00:27:38-‐7#).

Caroline will engage if the information provided has value to her.

Furthermore, the corporate page should function like an actual person. If the content

is relatable she is more likely to be motivated to engage (App. 9 #00:28:37-‐5#,

#00:29:30-‐0#)

Jacob explains that so far he has not come across any sites that have

motivated him interact, so he cannot bring forth an answer for this question. He states

that he actually wishes that he has an answer for how to engage users on Facebook

(App. 10 #00:18:09-‐4##00:18:19-‐6#).

It appeared a difficult task for the respondents to define which

characteristics can motivate them to engage with companies through Facebook. Stine

and Jacob clearly state they do not interact with companies on Facebook. Stine is more

inclined to interact with blogs and considers Facebook only as a quick newsfeed.

Sandra and Caroline have some ideas of what could motivate them to engage.


75

Companies should appear open-‐minded, interactive and appear like an actual person.

Caroline highlights that if the content has relevance for her, she might be inclined to

engage. René seems more skeptical and will interact if companies provoke or dare

him.

In summary, the three above questions and corresponding follow ups

provide interesting insight into how the five respondents have entered in dialogue

with companies via Facebook and which characteristics that could motivate them to

engage. The aspect of dialogue is represented by two complementary questions about

corporate complaints and recommendations, which invites consumers and companies

to engage in two-‐way communication. Additionally, we investigate the reasoning

behind the participants’ latest corporate like. Motives for corporate likes proved to be

quite diverse and both intrinsic and extrinsic needs were the motivational factor. In

connection with complaining to companies through Facebook all respondents utter a

preference for employing alternative communication channels than Facebook. This is

in part due to the lack of anonymity and the appearance of complaints on Facebook

not being taken seriously. Furthermore, none of the respondents expressed a direct

interest in using Facebook as a tool for making recommendations to businesses.

Finally, by asking the participants what in fact would motivate them to engage, we

attempt to gain a richer perspective on the consumer-‐company relations possible on

Facebook. It appeared a difficult task for the respondents to answer this question and

themes such as seeming human, content being relatable, openness, and actual rewards

surfaced during the interviews.

6.3. Discussion (C) Returning to the theoretical contributions of statement 1, Pookulungara and Koesler

(2011) believe that companies can reap great benefits from including social media in

their marketing strategy. They argue that social media offers a possibility for

companies to converse with consumers. We have linked this statement to the

formulation that social media allows companies to engage in dialogue with their

consumers. We have addressed the aspect of dialogue, by asking whether the

respondents have ever officially complained or made recommendations to companies

by the means of Facebook. Only one of the five respondents has ever officially

complained to a company through Facebook. However, Caroline emphasizes that she

resorted to using Facebook, because she could not locate an official customer service

e-‐mail. Caroline and the other respondents all stress that the lack of anonymity affects

their desire to employ Facebook for official complaints. René does not deem Facebook

as the right platform for complaining to his former bank and rationalizes this by


76

saying that other consumers might not have had the same experience. Stine

acknowledges the benefits from a consumer perspective in complaining publicly on

corporate Facebook sites and praises the newest option where complaints

additionally can be made through private messages on the sites. Nonetheless, Stine

does not want to portray herself publicly on Facebook. It is interesting to consider

whether other consumers have the same approach to social media as Stine, where the

idea of the advantages of making official complaints via Facebook is acknowledged,

however they do not utilize the opportunity in practice.

With this in mind, it is interesting to return to the notion of self-‐

presentation and self-‐disclosure on social media presented in the conceptual and

contextual framework (Kaplan and Haenlein 2010). Stine can see the advantage in

revealing a bad experience to others to see and simultaneously exposing the company.

However, Stine’s need for self-‐presentation includes a wish to control the impression

that others form of her, and the action of publicly complaining does not comply with

the identity she desires to portray. Furthermore, with self-‐disclosure, Stine makes a

conscious decision to not carry out this action, in order to not unveil this information

(the complaint). This can be connected to Caroline’s belief that liking a fitness

nutrition brand connotes something about her lifestyle. With this like, she makes an

explicit decision to unveil her appreciation of the brand, which in turn correlates to

the impression she wants others to form of her. The aspects of self-‐presentation and

self-‐disclosure are interesting to apply in connection with the statement that social

media allows companies to engage in dialogue with their consumers. Both Caroline and

Stine see Facebook as a platform to present themselves, however this aspect collides

with the willingness to engage with companies on Facebook. Due to the lack of

anonymity that the respondents report, it is possible to imagine that consumers will

contemplate and evaluate the action of engaging with companies before doing it, in

order to make sure that this level of self-‐disclosure corresponds to the desired self-‐

presentation. The aspect of self-‐presentation, self-‐disclosure and identity creation

appears several times throughout the empirical data, and will be covered more

comprehensively in statement 2.

Authors Weinberg and Pehlivan (2011) consider social media a useful

relationship builder, if companies manage to express authenticity and a human

persona behind the corporate social media profiles. Sandra expresses dissatisfaction

with companies appearing to be present on Facebook simply because that is what

everybody does. She mentions that if she senses that this is the only reasoning for

Facebook presence, her motivations to engage will diminish significantly. With this

statement, it is noteworthy to return to the reflexive state that exists between the

consumer culture and branding paradigm, which was presented in the conceptual and


77

contextual framework. It appears that Sandra has become literate towards the latest

branding technique; the move into social media. This furthermore corresponds with

Evans’ (2010) perception that consumers are suspicious of the corporate use of social

media.

Likewise Caroline utters that she prefers if a corporate Facebook site

appears as an actual person. Both statements correlate with Weinberg and Pehlivan’s

(2011) proclamation of a needed human persona behind the sites.

Thackeray et al (2012), Meredith (2012) and Meadows-‐Klue (2007) all

argue that the exchange of opinions and ideas with consumers on social media form

the foundation for creating deeper and longer lasting relationships with the audience.

The only example of Sandra entering in dialogue with a company via Facebook was a

competition where she was required to make a recommendation on the wall, in order

to win an outfit. If it was not for the prize in the competition, she would have never

made the recommendation. She has never proactively entered in dialogue with

corporate sites. With these statements, it is difficult to imagine that Sandra would

engage in dialogue with corporate Facebook sites at such a level that would entail a

relationship to form. René expresses even further reluctance to engage in dialogue

with companies, when it comes to making recommendations on corporate Facebook

sites. If he were to have a brilliant idea regarding for instance a product or service, he

would not share it with that company. Ergo, if René is reluctant to even enter in

dialogue with companies, the foundation for relationship building is diminished even

further. So far relevant observations and interpretations of statements and utterances

related to statementt 1 have been analyzed and discussed. Ultimately, this and the two

following discussions will be joined and reflected upon in the final conclusion in

chapter 10.


78

7. CHAPTER 7: Statement 2 (C) Social media allows companies to learn about their consumers’ beliefs, attitudes, and

needs.

Following statement 1 related to consumer and company dialogue, we will now move

onto the next overarching statement discovered in the social media literature review.

Firstly, the origins of this statement will be introduced. This is followed by two

complementary analytical sections; one covers a theoretical assessment and the latter

includes a partial look at the empirically generated data. Finally, all parts will be

evaluated in a discussion according to the conceptual and contextual framework on

which the thesis is founded.

7.1. Origins of statement (O) Pookulangara and Koesler (2011) who was presented earlier are additionally relevant

in this statement. They believe that social media can enhance the overall marketing

strategy in many ways and the understanding of consumer needs is yet another way

that social media utilization offers benefits to a company. They believe that social

media offers companies an opportunity to learn about their consumers’ needs and

furthermore respond to these needs proactively (Pookulangara and Koesler 2011:

348). Companies can understand consumers in a deeper degree in that “Social

networks allow organizations to track customer sentiment, customer service

problems and dissatisfaction in their customers base” (Pookulangara and Koesler

2011: 348). Additionally, they argue that this type of information has due to social

media become easier to access and obtain.

Similarly to Pookulangara and Koesler (2011), Weinberg and Pehlivan

(2011) also argue for the use of social media as an opportunity to obtain information

about consumer needs. Weinberg and Pehlivan (2011) argue that social networks are

useful tools “for influencing and tracking consumers beliefs and attitudes towards a

product or brand” (280). So not only do they believe that companies can obtain

information about their consumers, but companies also have the opportunity to

influence consumers’ attitudes through social networks. In the following sections,

statement 2 will be assessed theoretically and empirically. The focal point of this

analysis is not to assess whether or not information such as the beliefs, attitudes,

interests, and needs of consumers is obtainable, but rather the usefulness of this

information.


79

7.2. Theoretical analysis (O) The following academic publications serve an interesting take on the notion of

identity and identity creation. We believe that this literature offers a broader and

interesting perspective on statement 2; the idea that social media can provide

companies with information on beliefs, need, and attitudes about their consumers. We

take departure in the notion of impression management as presented by Goffman

(1959), Schau and Gilly’s (2003) work on self-‐presentation on personal websites, Zhao

et al’s (2008) article on identity construction on Facebook and finally the work on the

act of ‘liking’ on Facebook by Mensel and Petersen (2011). Consequently, this section

will focus extensively on the academic literature on identity construction – both in

general terms and specifically in relation to Facebook – before we continue on to a

presentation of our empirical results.

When discussing the aspect of identity creation and self-‐presentation, it is applicable

to return to Kaplan and Haenlein’s (2010) model on social media presented in the

conceptual and contextual framework. This model was employed in order to show the

different dimensions of social media, and to explain the characteristics of Facebook.

To recap, their model on social media consists of two dimensions, which are media

and social. Kaplan and Haenlein (2010) believe that these two elements are key in

social media. As previously mentioned, within the social dimension they have applied

the theories of self-‐presentation (Goffman 1959) and self-‐disclosure (Schau and Gilly

2003). Self-‐presentation relates to the notion that people want to control the

impressions that others form about them. Through self-‐disclosure, people are able to

consciously and unconsciously reveal or hide information, in order to support the

image that they want to present to others. Goffman (1995) and Schau and Gilly’s

(2003) work will be employed in further detail and examined in the following

sections.

Sociologist and writer Erving Goffman (1959) introduced the notion of

impression management, which concerns the process of communicating and behaving

in relations to the desired identity or self that one wants to project to others.

Furthermore, Goffman (1959) has applied a dramaturgical approach to the notion of

impression management. He presents the idea that people put on acts in their daily

lives and as in a theatrical performance people have a front stage and back stage.

Goffman (1959) presented the idea that in social interactions people live on the front

stage, where ones’ positive attributes are highlighted and the desired image is

presented to the ‘audience’. Correspondingly, the back stage is a private place where

people shed the ‘front stage identity’ and can be their true self. With his notions on


80

impression management, Goffman (1959) introduced the idea that when people

interact in a social setting with each other, they try to control the image and

impressions of themselves formed by others. Goffman (1959) and his main ideas are

interesting to introduce in that they offer a basic, yet important knowledge of humans’

desire to control the impression that others form.

Since its publication Goffman’s (1959) work has been used and cited

extensively, and Dr. Bernie Hogan (2010) explains that the common denominator for

this work is the idea that people do employ impression management, meaning “the

selective disclosure of personal details designed to present an idealized self” (Hogan

2010: 379). In connection with this, it is applicable to introduce the idea that identity

consists of two types of values; the operating and the ideal (Wiley 1994 in Schau and

Gilly 2003). The operating values are those practiced in everyday behavior, such as

being punctual or drinking coffee, whereas the ideal values relate to the values one

aspires to, but might not be able to live up to in reality (Wiley 1994 in Schau and Gilly

2003: 387).

In the following, we will employ the work of Hope Schau and Mary

Gilly (2003) who investigate the use of personal websites as a method of self-‐

presentation. Onwards, we employ of the terms offline and online as antonyms to

refer to the identity that is presented on Facebook (online) and the identity employed

in ‘real life’ (offline). We do acknowledge that self-‐presentation is not as absolute as

the two oppositions represent, meaning that the offline and online persona can have

interdependent influence. However, as the following sections will show, we do assume

a difference in self-‐presentation between these two realms, and with the use of these

labels it is easier to explain and consequently comprehend.

Despite that Schau and Gilly’s (2003) work is from a pre-‐social media

and Facebook period, their findings offer an interesting perspective on the discussion

about self-‐presentation and identity construction in an online world. Firstly, Schau

and Gilly (2003) base their research on the theoretical affirmation and empirically

demonstrated notion that people invest meanings into things. This means that the

relationship between human and object offers a way for individuals to non-‐

linguistically communicate with other people (Schau and Gilly 2003: 388).

Furthermore, Schau and Gilly (2003) assume the idea that people use consumption as

a self-‐expressive action and that products and brands are chosen in order to express a

given identity. As they state: “[..] consumers make their identities tangible, or self-‐

present, by associating themselves with material objects and places” (Schau and Gilly

2003: 385). With the emergence computer-‐mediated environments (CMEs), they

argue that consumers can now present themselves and their desired identity using

digital references instead of physical references (Schau and Gilly 2003: 385). Schau


81

and Gilly (2003) believe that with the use of personal web pages, consumers have the

opportunity to create a digital self by collecting symbols and signs to represent and

express their self-‐concepts (386). This correlates with the [post-‐] postmodern notion,

which we presented in chapter 3. Consumers produce identities, symbols, and

messages through consumption and through these cultural resources (brands) the self

is created. Therefore, consumption is a value producing moment, where symbols and

messages are created (Firat and Venkatesh 1995, Holt 2002)

An important factor to consider in the differences between expressing

identity online vs. offline, is the fact that offline consumers can actually use the

product, as well as experience the symbolic value of it. Whereas online, the functional

value of the product is almost always absent, and the symbolic value is therefore of

main significance (Schau and Gilly 2003: 388). Therefore, the functional value of a

product is often not considered when individuals choose to associate themselves with

it online. Instead, the symbolic value is greatly considered before it is communicated

to the world (Schau and Gilly 2003: 399). Furthermore, in ‘real life’ (offline) the brand

association is limited by factors such as finance, space and proximity. However, online

consumers only suffer the limitations of one’s own imagination and computer skills.

Consequently, online consumers can associate themselves with brands and companies

that they feel express their ideal identity without ever being able to associate

themselves with the brands offline (Schau and Gilly 2003: 400). An individual may

have a Porsche as his or her dream vehicle and feel that is who he or she really is, but

may never be able to purchase it because of its financial costs. In relation to Wiley’s (in

Schau and Gilly 2003) two constructs of identity, the Porsche may be one’s ideal

identity but Suzuki is what can be afforded and is therefore the operating identity.

As the personal web space does not have the same limitations in

regards to brand associations as the constraints in real life, the personal web space

offers individuals the opportunity to portray their desired identity. With the absence

of constraints such as ownership and proximity, consumers have a greater freedom to

associate themselves with brands that correlate better with their ideal values (Schau

and Gilly 2003: 387). It is relevant to mention that since the work was published, it

has become easier than ever to create a personal space on the internet with social

media platforms such as Facebook. It does not require the same technical skill set as a

personal webpage, and it is therefore easier and more convenient that ever before for

people to create their own personal web space. In view of this, we found Schau and

Gilly’s (2003) work to be very relevant to incorporate in the theoretical challenging of

the statement presented in this sub-‐chapter.


82

With the introduction to impression management by Goffman (1959) and thereafter

Schau and Gilly’s (2003) view on the presentation of self on personal websites, it is

now relevant to employ the work of authors Shanyang Zhao, Sherri Grasmuck and

Jason Martin (2008). Their work relates specifically to identity construction on

Facebook, and the employment of their study therefore makes this section more

specific to the presentation and creation of identity on Facebook. Zhao et al (2008)

differentiate between anonymous and nonymous21 online settings, and set out to

investigate if and how identity construction on a nonymous environment like

Facebook, differs from chat rooms, role-‐playing games and other online venues, where

people are more anonymous. It is argued that in a completely anonymous online

environment people are able to reinvent themselves and explore ‘hidden selves’ by

producing new identities (Zhao et al 2008: 1818). However, with the emergence of

social networks such as Facebook, the online world is no longer completely

anonymous. The types of relationships on Facebook differ from other online or social

media venues such as communities, chat rooms etc. Zhao et al (2008) characterize it

as an anchored relationship. With this they refer to both offline acquaintances and

online acquaintances that know each other’s legal name and residential locations. This

means that many of the relationships on Facebook also exist offline. The possibility of

creating new identities and exploring hidden aspects of the self, are limited in a

nonymous setting like Facebook because the claims that can be made in relation to

identity in such a setting are constrained (Zhao et al 2008: 1818).

Zhao et al (2008) therefore state that a new nonymous online world

has emerged where peoples’ self-‐presentation strategies are different than in the

offline environment and in the anonymous online setting (1819). Zhao et al’s (2008)

findings suggest that Facebook offers a venue where users can express their hoped-‐for

possible selves, which is here defined as “socially desirable identities that an

individual would like to establish and believes that they can be established given the

right conditions” (1819). In a nonymous environment such as Facebook, it is argued

that individuals that find it difficult to take on this identity ‘in real life’, are empowered

to establish this persona online. Zhao et al’s (2008) findings showed that in a

nonymous rather than anonymous online setting, people do not take on a completely

different personas, but do try to embody the hoped-‐for possible selves. Even though

there were great variations in the extent of how this was done in their sample, all

participants tried to project a socially desirable identity, through for instance group

pictures (denoting many friends), hobbies (denoting well-‐roundedness), quotes

(denoting positive attitude about life) and similarly (Zhao et al 2008: 1826-‐1828). 21 Nonymous is in their work used as the opposite of anonymous, and refers to relationships both online and offline where there is a limit of the identities one can claim, in that factors such as age, name, sex, gender, authenticity etc. are known by the other party (Zhao et al 2008).


83

Their work argues that with the emergence of online settings such as Facebook, the

identity strategy is different to what is attempted offline and in anonymous online

venues. Consequently, in a nonymous online environment, the strategy is to portray

ones hoped-‐for possible identity that users wish for, but have not been able to

accomplish offline (Zhao et al 2008: 1828). Interestingly, the methods to claim this

hoped-‐for possible identity were often implicit rather than explicit. Users choose the

more passive function of showing the identity rather than telling (Zhao et al 2008:

1826). Zhao et al (2008) state that “[b]y selecting one’s affiliations with certain

groups, activities, or hobbies, an individual is implicitly making an identity statement

about him-‐ or herself. Those online identity production statements enable people to

stage a public display of their hoped-‐for possible selves that were unknown to others

offline” (1820). With this Zhao et al (2008) believe that Facebook offers users a new

venue for selective self-‐presentation where users are able to create implicit claims

about ones identity in the hopes of creating a desired identity in the presence of

viewers.

Finally, Zhao et al (2008) challenge the antonyms real selves vs. virtual

selves and true selves vs. false selves present in theoretical work on identity creation

in online environments. They argue that the virtual self and false self (which refers to

the online self) are just as ‘real’ as the real and true self (which refers to the offline

self). Since the person will still be held accountable for the nonymous online behavior,

it therefore has real consequences for the individual who created the online identity

(Zhao et al 2008: 1832). We concur with the perception that the online identity is just

as real as the ‘real self’, but as explained previously we still opt to using the labels

online and offline identity in our work, because there is an indication that there is a

difference between one’s online and offline identity. However, working within the

social constructionist paradigm, we do not consider one or the other more real, but do

argue that the distinction between the offline and online self is relevant to make when

social media authors argue for the opportunity to obtain information about

consumers.

Based on the theoretical literature presented in this section and the empirical data

that is presented in section 3.3, we argue that the identity companies get a glimpse of

is the online, front stage and hoped-‐for possible selves. Since it is the offline and

backstage self that carries out the purchases, we argue that companies do not get the

information that they think they get. In connection with this, the notion that identity is

socially constructed as offered by social constructionism is applicable. Depending on

the social situation (offline vs. online) people will be influenced to create different

identities. Furthermore, the notion of multiple identities as presented in this thesis in


84

chapter 3 is relevant to include. [Post-‐] postmodern consumers are fragmented and

de-‐centered beings which wear many masks and take on different roles, depending on

the motivations and purposes (Firat and Venkatesh 1995, Gergen 1995, Beck and

Beck-‐Gernsheim 2002).

We will now employ the work of Lea Mensel and Thomas Petersen (2011). Their

acknowledged and price-‐winning22 master thesis “Like Me” ”offers a comprehensive

assessment of the action of liking a page, company, group etc. on Facebook and it

offers an interesting and up-‐to-‐date perspective in relation to the process of creating

an identity on Facebook. In their thesis, Mensel and Petersen (2011) investigate why

consumers ‘like’ companies on Facebook, and their results indicate that this action is

carried out primarily with the intention of projecting a desirable image towards

others.

Mensel and Petersen (2011) suggest that consumers do make use of

impression management to guide peoples’ image perception, and they infer that

Facebook is a ‘setting’ or ‘field’ where this happens. Based on Goffman’s (1959)

dramaturgy metaphor Mensel and Petersen (2011) define Facebook the ‘front stage’,

whereas the ‘real identity’ (offline) serves as the ‘back stage’. They argue that

Facebook presents a large setting, with ’scenery’ that enables users to easily and

effortlessly build an identity by associating themselves (liking) with brands and by

applying other Facebook features (Mensel and Petersen 2011:115). Due to the large

potential for self-‐presentation and identity cultivation on Facebook, they define

Facebook as an appropriate setting for consumers to pursue this, and argue that

Facebook is indeed utilized by consumers for this purpose (Mensel and Peterson

2011: 116). Their results show that the ‘realness’ of the Facebook identity can be

debated. Nevertheless, the consumers view it mostly as a constructed reality.

However, as Mensel and Petersen (2011) state “[..] while consumers see Facebook as

constructed, the setting is, however, still seen as suitable for identity cultivation,

which, in turn, to a higher degree, becomes based on ideal identity” (119). As

consumers build a desired identity with the help of brand association and other

features on the profile, the presented identity on Facebook cannot be seen as an

extensive representation of whom consumers are. Therefore companies will be

presented with a consumer identity “which is founded as much on what is ‘extended’

and ‘ideal’, and on real consumer behavior (131).

Similarly to Schau and Gilly’s (2003) belief, Mensel and Petersen

(2011) state that people use individuals’ consumption behavior as a tool to judge their

22 The master thesis won kommunikationsforum.dk’s 2011 master thesis award: http://www.kommunikationsforum.dk/artikler/kforums-‐specialepris-‐2011-‐2 -‐ August 2 2012


85

social identity. Consequently, the process of liking brands and other cultural resources

on Facebook demands careful consideration because this will both represent who

they are, and just as much, who they are not (Mensel and Petersen 2011: 129). In

relation to this, it is relevant to include that Mensel and Petersen’s (2011) study

showed that the physical association (ownership) was not required for consumers to

build an identity online. Several of the respondents felt free to like brands they did not

possess, as they used it symbolically as cultural resources (Mensel and Petersen 2011:

128). Furthermore, Mensel and Petersen’s (2011) work suggests that contrarily to

when buying a product, consumers view the image equally as important as the quality

of the product when liking companies and brands (99). This correlates to the findings

presented by Schau and Gilly (2003)..

Finally, with all this in mind Mensel and Petersen (2011) believe that

companies should re-‐evaluate their role on Facebook and take their findings into

consideration when settling on a social media strategy. They believe that brands

should acknowledge and claim the role as a ‘prop’, ‘equipment’ or an ‘identity partner’

because “consumers indeed do use brands, on level with other cultural resources, to

cultivate identity, by making an enumerative list that they believe define them.”

(Mensel and Petersen 2011: 127). However, it is also important to consider that the

consumer identity is always in development and also always only partially formed.

Due to the different life stages consumers go through, outside influence factors

change. This has an effect on the consumer. Furthermore, the consumer is never only

a consumer. The individual is also a parent, sibling, citizen etc. Therefore, the

consumer identity does not make up the whole person (Saren 2007: 350).

Additionally, it is suggested that the consumer’s self can be compared to a bricolage in

that the consumer identity is “[..] being constructed by mixing ‘bits and pieces’ from

commodities and products available in the marketplace” (Saren 2007: 350). This

correlates to the [post-‐] postmodern notion that consumers produce identities by

consuming various products and brands due to the symbolic value they assign the

object.

Above we have introduced a broad but specific theoretical framework concerning

identity construction and self-‐presentation in various degrees. As mentioned

previously it is important to present this knowledge in the thesis and provide the

reader with an understanding of identity construction. We find it to provide a broader

perspective to the statement that social media allows companies to learn about their

consumers’ beliefs, attitudes and needs. In the following section statement 2 will

additionally be assessed by the means of the data from the five individual qualitative

research interviews.


86

7.3. Qualitative data contribution (O)

After introducing the theoretical concepts and contextual notions regarding identity,

self-‐presentation, impression management and corresponding subjects, it is now

interesting to look at some of the empirical data generated during the qualitative

research interviews. It is relevant to mention that the analysis does not contain as

much empirical data as statement 1 and 3. The initial intention with qualitative

interviews was to asses statement 1 and 3 empirically and statement 2 purely

theoretically. However, the data generated during the interviews proved to include

interesting contributions to statement 2. Thus, we decided to briefly assess the

argument empirically as this provides an additional dimension to our research.

We believe the statement that social media allows companies to learn

about their consumers’ beliefs, attitudes and needs is a comprehensive statement to

assess empirically and such a research would demand a master-‐thesis-‐sized study on

its own. Consequently, we chose not to include a theme concerning this topic in the

interview guide. Nonetheless, qualitative research is an unpredictable method, and

unexpected themes and statements might occur without specifically probing for them.

We experienced such an occurrence during our research and have chosen to employ it

in a questioning of the statement that social media allows companies to learn about

their consumers’ beliefs, attitudes and needs in the following section.

During the five interviews, several of the respondents address the

theme of identity construction either implicitly or explicitly without our

encouragement. These occurrences happen during the same questions, related to

themes such as complaints on Facebook, comments or likes corporate sites, Spotify

activities and reading articles.

When asked about the possibility to complain to a company by the means of a

corporate Facebook site, none of the participants were particularly thrilled about the

functionality. Jacob, Stine and Sandra all mention with worry that the act of

complaining makes it public to all their contacts as well as the followers of the specific

corporate site. Jacob states “ [..] I don’t want the public to see that I complain” (App.

10, #00:14:10-‐7#), and finds this as an important aspect to consider when

contemplating whether or not to complain on Facebook. Stine mentions that not only

is the company put on the spot with her complaint, but she is as well. Everyone in her

network will be able to see what state of mind she is in and the purpose of the

complaint is not to display herself, but the company. Sandra prefers using the

telephone or e-‐mail as a channel to complain, but if she were to complain through

social media, she would use another platform. She acknowledges the opportunity of


87

easily warning everyone else of the company’s doing, and that would be her purpose

with a public complaint. However, she does not want to show that a complaint

originated from her as she would not want her friends to perceive her as nag-‐head or

a complainer. She states “[..] I would do it through Twitter just to make sure that it

was only strangers who saw it, because I don't have that many of my friends on

Twitter” (App. 6 #00:22:10-‐2#).

Several of the respondents mention that their activities (liking,

commenting, reading etc.) on Facebook are viewed as a connection with who they are.

To elaborate on this, Sandra at one point explains that she is a fan of the clothing

company Abercrombie and Fitch23, even though she does not wear the clothes. She

admires the brand for its consistency and she describes herself as a distant admirer.

However, she has not liked the company on Facebook as she does not want people to

consider her as an Abercrombie and Fitch girl. To this she states “I like the brand, but I

don’t want to be compared to it” (App 6, #00:29:29-‐1#). Similarly, Sandra is a fan and

avid owner of Nike Free shoes, and states that she would like Nike Free on Facebook if

it had a page. However, she would not like Nike the company on Facebook. Sandra

expresses that “[..] because it's something that everybody wears anyway, so why, so

what would make it so special if I liked it, so I don't care” (App. 6 #00:30:48-‐6#). It

appears that despite the fact that she is a regular consumer of the Nike Free shoes,

Sandra sees no point in liking the producer of the product. Her statement about

everybody wearing Nike indicates that Sandra only likes corporate sites that make her

stand out or provide her with a unique cultural resource. Sandra connects the likes

that people have on Facebook with their personality and their persona offline.

In the same way, Stine equates certain Facebook activities with the

Facebook user’s offline persona. However, she acknowledges the opportunities that

Facebook gives users to highlight and hide certain aspects of their identity.

Specifically, in relation to the social reader apps that can be found on Facebook, she

would rather not read an article or find it somewhere else, rather than people can see

she has read some “stupid” article (App. 8 #00:42:38-‐1#). However, Stine is one of the

participants that uses Spotify and shares her Spotify activities on Facebook. She sees

the service as both a source of inspiration, but also as an easy way to express who she

is through music, without actively writing a status update. Similarly, she associate

people to the music they are listening to. In relation to the frictionless sharing on

Facebook, she states: “because some things you really don't want to share with

everyone and some things you, you kind of really do” (App 8. #00:46:46-‐8#). Stine

acknowledges the link between Facebook activities and identity creation, and

23 Abercrombie and Fitch is an American apparel and lifestyle clothing brand famous for its racy marketing and unique store concepts.


88

explicitly utilizes this platform for her own self-‐presentation.

Contrastingly, Jacob feels quite differently about sharing his music

activities on Spotify. He is like Stine a paying user of the service, but does not share his

activities on Facebook. He states “[..] I think I might listen to a lot of shitty music that I

don’t want my friends to know that I’m listening to” (App. 10 #00:27:55-‐9#). He finds

this ‘feeling’ as he describes it, as a silly one because he thinks that his music taste is

not necessarily a secret and if he were to be asked about it, he would admit it since his

friends will like him no matter what he listens to. Therefore, he is not necessarily

embarrassed about the image he sends with his music. He simply does not believe that

it concerns anyone else but himself. Generally, Jacob feels that the excessive sharing of

many activities on Facebook intervenes with his personal life, but also acknowledges

that some things about his personal activities he just does not want to share with

other people. In connection with this, Jacob mentions that he has a lot of websites that

he visits, however he has chosen not to like these on Facebook because they are not

“cool enough” (App. 10 #00:28:24-‐9#).

Conclusively, Jacob does acknowledge the image and identity role that

Facebook plays in his life, and when asked about why he has a Facebook profile he

answers: “But also to, to show people who I am in some way. The things you like and

the things you write [..] All the people you connect with, saying something about you”

(App. 10 #00:01:07-‐9#). With this in mind, he considers his actions on Facebook, and

avoids certain actions in order to not share information. He does not believe that his

actions concern others. Jacob compares the sharing of some activities on Facebook to

wearing his pajamas to work (#00:32:42-‐3#).

Like the other respondents above, Caroline (App 9 #00:09:05-‐5#) sees

a link between liking a Facebook site and self-‐presentation. When asked the reason

behind her last corporate like (Nutrimino, a fitness nutrition product) she mentions,

among other things, that she wanted to show that she likes the product and thereby

also link it to her own lifestyle. With the like of Nutrimino she was able to show a bit

about herself, her habits and how she chooses to eat. In regards to Spotify and the

social reader apps, Caroline has explicitly chosen not to make use of them, because she

feels that it suddenly becomes too personal and that people will know too much about

her. In this case, it appears that it does not concern her idea of self-‐presentation on

Facebook, but rather the fact that it crosses her personal boundaries, and that simple

private aspects of her life suddenly becomes too public.

It is also relevant to bring in René’s point of view concerning identity

and self-‐presentation on Facebook. As we have already mentioned, René appears

skeptical in his statements about Facebook interactions. He has no interest in showing

his network his likes and dislikes -‐ they already know, he argues. Furthermore, when


89

asked if he is a fan of any company, he responds that is not really a fan of or passionate

about anything. His focus is much more on the functional aspects of products and

hence does not care about the brand or the name. It is interesting to note, that despite

his generally unenthusiastic view, he recognizes for instance that re-‐posting corporate

updates reflects upon his identity, but has actively chosen to very seldom do so.

Basically, he acknowledges the self-‐presentation dimension of Facebook, but chooses

not to utilize this (App. 7 #00:27:25-‐9#).

With a review and analysis of comments and input generated during each

interview, a discussion that questions the statement that social media allows

companies to learn about their consumers’ beliefs, attitudes, and needs will be

presented in the following section. The literature, in which the statement originates,

will be challenged by the concepts found within the conceptual and contextual

framework presented in chapter 3, the theory related to identity construction and

self-‐presentation and finally the data generated in the qualitative interviews.

7.4. Discussion (C)

Sociologist Pierre Bourdieu (1984) presented in the contextual and conceptual

background of this thesis, claims that symbolic processes take place during

consumption and thus consumer taste is not determined privately but socially. The

post-‐modern consumer uses the activity of consumption as a highly symbolic act in

order to convey messages to other groups of individuals. Besides the actual

consumption, consumers additionally associate themselves with certain symbols that

they consider inherent in products and brands. New technology allows for consumers

to make these associations digitally without actually possessing the specific brand or

product (Schau and Gilly 2003). The rise of social media and specifically Facebook has

offered e new arena where consumers can digitally pursue the cultural resources that

they wish to associate with their ideal identity.

Consumers attempt to control the images and impression that others

have of them through impression management. Mensel and Petersen (2011) consider

Facebook as an addition to the front stage as presented by Goffmann (1959). This

additional front stage gives people an even greater opportunity to control all activities

that represent their identity. Therefore, it can be considered an expanded front stage.

People invest meaning into objects when they form an impression of others. This also

takes place in online world. However, people associate themselves with items related

to their ideal selves, which means that they employ cultural resources in products that

they for instance cannot afford financially. This is relevant for companies to


90

acknowledge, as Facebook users who like and associate their identity with the luxury

car Porsche might never actually be an actual customer. The Porsche owner becomes

the hoped-‐for possible self for the user.

The notion that people express multiples identities to towards others

correlates with the concept of a so-‐called fragmented and decentered consumer as

presented by Firat and Venkatesh (1995). Consumers are no longer attached to

specific brands or products and take on many roles, identities and lifestyles based on

the symbolic resources assumed. This relates to Gergen’s (1995) concept of multiple

mask. He believes that due to technological advancement individuals can no longer

maintain a strong and integrated sense of personal identity. Facebook has become an

additional space for consumers to create specific identities.

The respondents of the five qualitative interviews, which were conducted during this

thesis project, appear to have an either implicit or explicit understanding of the

identity construction that occurs on Facebook. They express reluctance towards

officially complaining through corporate site as they are put one the spot, appear to

others as a ‘nag-‐head’, and are displayed publically to their own contacts as well as the

followers of the specific corporate Facebook site. It appears that they make use of the

concept self-‐disclosure where they consciously or unconsciously hide and unveil

personal information in line with the image they would like to present (Kaplan and

Haenlein 2010). Furthermore, they express different opinions on the frictionless

sharing of activities connected with Spotify. Stine enjoys the fact that she can associate

her music with her identity on Facebook whereas Jacob refers to it as wearing his

pajamas to work.

Based on research and empirical data, we acknowledge that through

Facebook users have the opportunities to create extensions of their identity. It is

possible to act out an ideal identity on an expanded front stage. This realization is of

great importance when considering the statement that: social media allows companies

to learn about their consumers’ beliefs, attitudes, and needs. If the persona that is

revealed on Facebook is based on ‘the best of someone’, leaving out what is

considered negative characteristics, habits and interests that users wish to keep for

themselves, we question how useful this information is for companies. Do they really

learn about their consumers’ beliefs, attitudes, and needs, when the information they

receive is based on an airbrushed and ideally constructed identity? We acknowledge,

in relation to Pookulangara and Koesler’s (2011) viewpoint that through social media

companies can get much closer access to their consumer than ever before. However,

we argue the usefulness of this access when it is based upon consumers’ ideal identity

presented on a front stage. We do acknowledge that Facebook is a nonymous


91

environment, and therefore it is difficult to create identities that are completely

separate to ones (offline) identity. This is the identity that pays for and consumes

items.


92

8. CHAPTER 8: Statement 3 (C)

Social media allows companies to create and spread word-‐of-‐mouth and brand-‐related-‐

messages through non-‐marketers.

The above statement relates to opinions and statements in relation to the possibility

of word-‐of-‐mouth (WOM) and the dispatch of brand-‐related-‐messages through

consumers, which numerous authors have presented in their work on social media. As

with the previous two statements, we have decided to introduce the authors

responsible for the statement individually. This will provide a better understanding of

the overall attitude towards social media in each piece of literature. Some of the

articles or books are repeats from previous statements. In this section, we will mainly

refer to their views of this specific statement – namely their opinion on WOM and the

possibility that consumers can carry brand-‐related messages in their network.

However, before we move onto the specific opinions and attitudes presented in each

publication, we will shortly repeat and clarify the background of the development of

the internet and simultaneously shortly present the notion of word-‐of-‐mouth.

8.1. Word-‐of-‐mouth (O) As mentioned previously, with the increasing use and development of the internet, the

way of reaching and communicating with people has changed – both in relation to

personal dealings and in corporate communication. This development has further had

an impact on the concept of word-‐of-‐mouth (WOM). Author and long-‐time WOM

‘expert’ George Silverman (2011) claims that we currently find our selves in an age,

where the number of WOM channels and outlets has suddenly exploded (Silverman

2011: 10). Many authors argue that social media has become one of these possible

outlets for WOM.

In order to define WOM we will include the definition by the Word Of

Mouth Marketing Association (WOMMA). This association explains the concept as:

“the act of a consumer creating and/or distributing marketing-‐relevant information to

another consumer” (O’Leary and Sheehan 2008: 23). Authors Steve O’Leary and Kim

Sheehan add to this definition by explaining that this distribution of information

happens in an informal way and has previously only involved a verbal exchange. The

main differences in this exchange compared to other types of communication, is that

the credibility of information is often seen as very high, as the source that provides the


93

information (e.g. an acquaintance) is considered credible by the receiver (O’Leary and

Sheehan 2008: 2).

It is relevant to recognize that WOM (also referred to as advocacy) has

almost always existed (O’Leary and Sheehan 2008: 4, Pookulungara and Koesler 2011:

348). Despite this, WOM plays an important role in today’s business world. With the

rise of internet usage in everyday life the typical word-‐of-‐mouth exchange, it has

become easier for consumers to share their experiences and for others to find this

information. The internet functions as a facilitator for this information exchange

(O’Leary and Sheehan 2008: 4). Furthermore, Pookulungara and Koesler (2011) argue

that with the expansion of social networks WOM has become more critical in that the

size of the audience has increased substantially.

Furthermore, Pookulungara and Koelser (2011) apply the expression

social search in correlation with word-‐of-‐mouth. It is explained as the practice where

consumers make use of their social resources such as friends, acquaintances or

strangers to seek assistance in finding information online. Furthermore, they believe

that consumers’ use of social search will in the future increase and be facilitated by

social networking sites (Pookulungara and Koesler 2011). This opinion is based on the

fact that consumers find other people’s opinions posted online as the most trusted

form of advertising, with no relevance to if the review is posted by an acquaintance or

a stranger (Pookulungara and Koelser 2011: 350).

According to a recent American study nearly all users of online reviews

find these sufficiently reliable and 80 percent of them state that their purchasing

decision has been affected by these online reviews (Pookulungara and Koelser 2011:

349). However, numbers24 showed that more people use the online reviews, rather

than contribute 25 . Even though few contribute, those that do influence other

consumers’ purchasing decision process, because they are more trusted than the

actual companies.

As mentioned in the conceptual and contextual framework, with the

emergence of the [post-‐] postmodern consumer, consumers no longer find companies

credible and do not trust them on the same way as previously. According to a global

online survey, personal recommendations or online reviews have instead now become

the most trusted form of advertising worldwide (Pookulungara and Koesler 2011).

Consumers therefore rely much more on friends, than corporations and institutions

(Meadows-‐Klue, 2008). With the increase of available information, options of finding

this information and furthermore, the lack of trust in companies, WOM marketing has

offered itself as a possible way for companies to still influence the potential customer 24 http://www.modusassociates.com/ideas/newsletter/spring-‐2010/ 25 90 % of visitors to online social sites contribute, 9 % occasionally contribute and 1 % actively contribute according to


94

base (O’Leary and Sheehan 2008, Silverman 2011). Word-‐of-‐mouth marketing is

according to WOMMA defined as “An effort by an organization to encourage, facilitate

and amplify marketing relevant communication among consumers” (O’Leary and

Sheehan 2008: 23). This means that organizations harness the existence of WOM and

through their own efforts they can encourage consumers to spread the word.

Facebook is considered an efficient and effective platform for

facilitating and amplifying online WOM, due to its specific features and great number

of users. With a status update – either in the form of sharing a picture, text, link or

something completely else – companies show up on their ‘likers’ newsfeeds. However,

the aspect of WOM first comes into play, when these ‘likers’ choose to either like,

comment on or share the status updates. Given that nearly all activities on Facebook

are instantly shared with the entire social network, the action of liking or commenting

on a company’s status update reaches this network.

The possibilities of fast and easy access to a vast number of consumers

within and outside the immediate network, combined with the notion that consumers

no longer trust corporations, make Facebook appears as an attractive opportunity for

WOM. The following sections will introduce the authors responsible for statement 3,

as well as address the statement through an empirical analysis. Finally, the chapter

will be concluded with a discussion of the findings from the qualitative interviews and

conceptual and contextual framework.

8.2. Origins of statement (O)

Weinberg and Pehlivan (2011) offer an interesting perspective on the delivery of

brand-‐related messages through non-‐marketers. This refers to marketing-‐related

messages that are constructed by companies but then carried by other people, or

brand-‐related messages that are actually created and delivered by customers

themselves. Weinberg and Pehlivan (2011) explain that when a brand-‐related

message is delivered by a non-‐marketer source it is often not considered as deriving

from the marketer. This means that consumers will still be reached with marketing-‐

related messages, but will not see it as marketing because it comes from a source they

trust more than companies. Weinberg and Pehlivan (2011) believe the focus should be

on creating a mechanism that ensures that the brand-‐related message will be carried

and communicated by others, instead of spending money on directly reaching their

target audience (278). As the consumer voice has become more dominant in the

market place compared to the organizational communication efforts, companies now

need to rely on a mechanism that can exploit the fact that all consumers live within a

large network of people. With social media, it is much easier to spread brand-‐related


95

messages to this network (Weinberg and Pehlivan 2011). Furthermore, Weinberg and

Pehlivan (2011) argue that by investing time and resources in creating conversations

and relationships with consumers, they will carry the brand-‐related message in their

social network. Consequently, the goal of social media is WOM and the means to

achieve this is the relationships with consumers.

Authors Urška Tuskey, Urša Golob and Klement Podnar (2011) have made a study of

the aspect of consumer-‐brand identification when forming brand-‐consumer

relationships. Their work showed that the consumers’ identification with a brand

tended to greatly influence the possibility of a brand relationship. Furthermore,

consumers that identify with a brand often commit more strongly and spread positive

WOM. In relation to these findings, Tuškey, Golob and Podnar’s (2011) therefore

believe that companies should make use of social media. As interactive

communication, collaboration and information sharing characterize social media,

companies are able to use social media platforms to facilitate and stimulate WOM

among their consumers (Tuškey, Golob and Podnar’s 2011: 6).

Authors W. Glynn Mangold and David J. Faulds (2009) have studied and written an

article about social media as the new element of the promotion mix. In this work they

have a focus on how social media can add to a company’s tools and strategies for

communicating with its consumers. Mangold and Faulds’ (2009) ideas and findings

are presented with an integrated marketing communication (IMC) perspective –

meaning how a company can coordinate the various marketing, advertising and

promotional elements to create a unified message across the whole organization

(Mangold and Faulds 2009: 357).

Mangold and Faulds (2009) believe that with the emergence of social

media, the tools and strategies for carrying out a successful IMC strategy have

changed significantly. They argue that social media should be integrated in the

planning and execution of an IMC strategy, in that the communication and information

exchange has altered with the introduction of this new type of media. In the article the

authors reference the company-‐consumer and consumer-‐company information

exchange, but highlight the actual consumer-‐consumer conversation taking place on

social media. With the introduction of the internet and social media the ability for

consumers to communicate with other consumers has intensified. This is an aspect

that is of high significance. They argue that social media enables consumers to

communicate – much more than ever before, and they therefore refer to the concept

as “an extension of the traditional word-‐of-‐mouth communication” (Mangold and

Faulds 2009: 359). Companies cannot directly control the content and volume of


96

consumer-‐consumer communication. Thus, the article focuses on how companies can

harness this development by influencing the conversations. Mangold and Faulds

(2009) offer a number of methods that companies can employ to influence and shape

the consumer-‐consumer conversations taking place on social media (361-‐364).

The purpose of the previous section was to present the literature connected with the

statement social media allows companies to create and spread word-‐of-‐mouth and

brand-‐related-‐messages through non-‐marketers. The following will address this

statement by the means of an empirical data analysis and a final discussion, which

combines previous theory with the qualitative findings. This assessment will not

question the existence of word-‐of-‐mouth on social media, which presence we highly

acknowledge. However, we contest to what extent companies are able create, facilitate

and maintain word-‐of-‐mouth among their consumers on corporate social media sites.

8.3. Qualitative data analysis (O) The interview guide that has structured and steered the five qualitative interviews of

this project, has been divided into five sections each covering a specific theme.

Naturally, the results of the interviews proved to be less linear and deviate from the

original structure. However, in order to assess how and if our respondents create and

respond to corporate word of mouth, we will address the questions in theme four of

the interview guide, which all relate to the concept of WOM (see appendix 1).

“Do you consider yourself a fan of a certain company or brand – and have you liked the associated Facebook page?” Initially, we ask all participants whether they consider themselves as fans of a certain

brand or company and subsequently, if they have liked the brand or company’s

associated Facebook page.

Sandra replies to the question in a general sense and states that there

are companies that are so holistically integrated that she considers herself a distant

admirer. She sees herself as a fan of Abercrombie and Fitch (A&F) even though she

does not fit the actual clothing. She admires the brand for being consistent (App. 6

#00:29:03-‐9#, #00:28:44-‐5#). Sandra has not liked the corporate Facebook site of

Abercrombie and Fitch and states that she does not want to be compared to the brand

(App. 6 #00:29:29-‐1#). She considers herself a distant admirer and not a brand user.

Sandra additionally highlights that she is a fan of the shoe Nike Free and has not liked

the product’s Facebook site, as she is not sure if it even exists (App. 6 #00:30:41-‐4#).

She elaborates that she would not like the Facebook page of Nike in general and she


97

considers this to be rather random. Because everybody else likes Nike, to her it seems

as nothing special (App. 6 #00:30:48-‐6#)

René is not passionate about a specific brand or company because his

focus is more on the functional aspect of a product.

Stine replies to the same question by saying that she does not consider

herself as being a fan of a brand or company, but rather certain niches, such as fashion

(App. 8 #00:28:30-‐5#). When asking Stine if there is a brand or company that she

admires she mentions the clothing company Topshop. She likes the actual clothing,

their online initiatives on social media and the company’s website (App. 8 #00:29:04-‐

6#, #00:29:12-‐4#). Stine has additionally liked the Topshop Facebook page and

explains that she primarily used the official website of the company and from there

was introduced to the Facebook page (App. 8 #00:29:53-‐1#).

Caroline refers to herself as being a fan of specific products, rather

than companies and brands. Caroline immediately makes the connection to her

Facebook likes and explains that she follows different fitness centers, which are

related to work or studies (App. 9 #00:31:26-‐4#). We try to disconnect the question

from Facebook and ask her again, if she considers herself as a fan of a product or

brand. Caroline replies that she is a fan of the company Nike and notes that she has

not liked the corresponding Facebook Nike page. She does not explain specifically why

she has avoided the Nike Facebook page, however she notices that her likes on

Facebook are not very ‘serious’. Her likes are more related to entertainment and

events that she has attended (App. 9 #00:33:54-‐6#).

When Jacob is asked the same question he immediately goes to his

Facebook profile and explains that he has a lot of examples such as Nike, which

inspires him. He follows the company and its activities (App. 10 #00:18:49-‐8#). We

inquire whether it is a general move for him to go and like the Facebook pages of the

companies that he admires. He states that he does so with the brands that he really

likes, however if he is spammed or provided with irrelevant information he will

unfollow the pages (App. 10 #00:20:25-‐5#).

In the attempt to make a link between the respondent’s admiration of a

brand or company and their interaction with these on Facebook, the five participants

bring forth interesting aspects on their reasoning behind corporate likes. Sandra likes

corporate sites acknowledging that they are linked to her online persona. Despite her

admiration for A&F, she does not want to be associated with the brand online.

Additionally, she avoids the corporate Nike site despite that she owns several shoes of

the brand Nike Free. Jacob is also fan of Nike and has unlike Sandra liked the

corporate site. He has done this to stay updated with the company and their activities.

The reason for inquiring our respondent whether they are fans of certain companies


98

or brands is confirm if they have liked the associated Facebook page. Digital WOM

originates on Facebook when users choose to associate themselves with corporate

sites through the simple action of liking it. This like is an actual first step in the WOM

processes that take place on Facebook, as the ‘like’ shows the user’s positive

perception of the brand or company to the associated network.

“Have you ever shared an update or picture from a corporate Facebook site?” We have earlier explained how word-‐of-‐mouth can be created through Facebook in

different ways. During the interview, we investigate if the respondents engage in

direct WOM activities for corporate pages, by asking whether they have ever shared a

company’s status update or picture on their own wall.

Sandra has only done this for competitions and furthermore she would

consider sharing updates, if it was in her or her friends’ interests (App. 6 #00:33:10-‐

4#).

René states that he has shared articles and other fun and provoking

updates from for instance Communication Forum26. However, he states that these

updates are usually not directly connected to the company (App. 7 #00:25:59-‐3#). He

elaborates that for him it is not really relevant who has made the original post. He is

more interested in what is actually said (#00:26:28-‐9#).

Stine states that she shares a lot of updates from the entertainment

sites that she follows. Besides that she recalls having shared content from Danish

social media firms (App. 8 #00:31:29-‐3#). These updates were shared based on her

interest in social media and she utters that she has never shared updates from brands

such as the fashion pages that she follows.

Caroline has shared updates and pictures from companies and brands.

Some updates have been related to corporate Facebook pages that she manages. She

shared their shared content, in order to increase visibility. Additionally, she considers

it a fun way of showing her opinion on a subject without it being her actually stating it

(App. 9 #00:36:04-‐8#)

Jacob has never shared a company or brand’s picture or status on his

own wall, but he has posted some on his friends’ walls. He has shared updates from

the airline Norwegian on a friend’s wall, as they had plans to travel (App. 10

#00:24:53-‐9#).

The corporate content that the respondents have shared on their

Facebook walls is of differing nature and some more commercial that others. Sandra

has shared updates with the purpose of entering a competition, but does mention that

26 Communication Forum (Kommunikationsforum) is a communication industry site aimed at people with a personal or professional interest in communication. http://www.kommunikationsforum.dk/om


99

she would share corporate content, if it has interest to her Facebook friends. René

exemplifies that he has shared articles from the organization Communication Forum

and states that the origins of the post is of less importance to him than the actual

content. Stine shares content from entertainment sites and articles from social media

companies, which is in line with her interests. She would not share content from the

fashion sites that she actually follows. Caroline does share corporate updates in

general and considers it as fun way to display attitudes and opinions. Jacob has never

shared corporate content on his own wall, but has done so on the walls of his friends.

Have you noticed your friends sharing corporate updates or pictures – and has this spiked your interest for the associated company? Besides investigating whether the participants create corporate word-‐of-‐mouth via

their use of Facebook, we additionally intend to explore, if they are affected by other

Facebook users’ WOM practices. Firstly, we inquire whether they notice when their

Facebook friends share companies or brands’ status updates and pictures and

secondly if this has spiked their interest for these companies and brands. This

question was added to the interview guide after the completion of the interview with

Sandra and she is therefore not included in this section of the analysis.

René replies that he notices that friends share corporate updates and

pictures on a daily basis. He explains that these updates will spike his interest for the

company or brand if the updates provide something unusual or he is unfamiliar with

the company or brand (App. 7 #00:28:31-‐2#). Furthermore, if more people will start

to join the conversation and it then reappears on his news feed, René’s interest for the

company or brand in question will be spiked. However, he establishes that the

updates would have to be something out of the ordinary ( App. 7 #00:28:35-‐6).

Stine states that at some point she noticed that a lot of her friends

shared corporate content and she found it frustrating. It seemed to her as if all

companies posted competitions that required her Facebook friends to share content

in order to win certain prizes. She found her newsfeed to be overflown with useless

information (App. 8 #00:33:09-‐3#). She states that her interest for these companies

were not spiked, rather she was annoyed (#00:34:28-‐6#). However, she does say that

if a friend were to share a picture purely out of interest, it would spike her interest.

But when the content is arbitrary, it simple annoys her and creates no quality.

Caroline notices that her friends share corporate updates and she

returns to the example of the fitness company Nutrimino. Her like was based on a

shared update by one of her contacts which made her aware of the Facebook site

(App. 9 #00:36:45-‐7#). She confirms to us that this update spiked her interest for the

company.


100

Jacob has noticed that a few of his friends have shared corporate

updates and pictures on Facebook. We ask Jacob if these updates have ever spiked his

interest in a specific company and he replies that they possibly have had the opposite

effect on him, meaning that he has found it silly when his friends share or comment

these updates (App. 10 #00:25:56-‐8#). He does not want to spend his time doing so

(App. 10 #00:26:27-‐3#).

All participants have noticed that contacts on Facebook have shared

corporate updates and pictures. René will develop interest for a company, if the

updates are something out of the ordinary and if a number of his contacts join the

conversation. Stine has become frustrated when a high number of her contacts share

corporate content in order to enter a competition. Her interest is not evoked rather

she becomes annoyed with the company. Caroline has liked a company based on an

update shared by a Facebook friend. This event is a textbook example of word-‐of-‐

mouth effect on social media. We will address this further in the discussion. Finally,

Jacob states that he finds it silly when friends share corporate content.

Chapter 8 will now be finalized with a discussion that combines the

theoretical foundation with the empirical findings related to the statement social

media allows companies to create and spread word-‐of-‐mouth and brand-‐related-‐

messages through non-‐marketers.

8.4. Discussion (C)

Word-‐of-‐mouth has existed for centuries, but with the increase in internet usage and

emergence of social media, the traditional view on the concept has changed. The

introduction of user-‐generated-‐content has altered or at least added new dimensions

to WOM. Consumers have via the internet and social media been given access to

potentially millions of opinions and personal reviews of products and organizations.

Due to the introduction of social media, the characteristics of the

concept WOM naturally changes. We consider Facebook related WOM as different

from the traditional understanding and we distinguish between multiple levels of

digital WOM. Firstly, the simple act of liking a corporate Facebook page, update or

picture is considered a more or less unconscious WOM activity, as the user’s network

is notified of this admiration. Furthermore, making comments on corporate updates,

walls and pictures entails further commitment than the simple like, however we

additionally perceive such an action as a relatively unconscious production of WOM

and sharing of brand-‐related messages. At the conscious level, users are able to

proactively recommend and endorse brands or companies through the action of

sharing the corporate picture, statuses and Facebook updates. We consider this a


101

more conscious and proactive decision to communicate on behalf of the company and

thereby link the name to the users’ online identities.

Authors presented throughout this chapter all argue for social media

as an efficient channel for digital WOM and Facebook is an example of a platform

where this takes place. Weinberg and Pehlivan (2011) argue for the delivery of brand-‐

related messages through a non-‐marketer source. They believe that when a brand-‐

related message is spread through social media it will not be conceived as marketing,

because it comes from people that they trust. When asked about corporate content on

Facebook, Stine explains that she at one point experienced brand-‐related messages

from her social network in such a high degree, that she became frustrated with the

originating company. In this case, WOM did not only fail, but had negative

consequences. However, several of the participants state that if their Facebook friends

were to share a brand-‐related message, where it is clear that the friend has an actual

interest in the content shared their interest could potentially be spiked. Jacob also

notices that his Facebook contacts share corporate content, however similarly to

Stine, Jacob does not consider this a positive experience, but instead regards it silly.

Mangold and Faulds (2009) highlight the presence of consumer-‐

consumer conversations that take place on social media and consider this space as an

extension of traditional WOM. They acknowledge that companies cannot directly

control the content and volume of this communication, but argue that companies

should harness the WOM taking place, by influencing the conversations. Furthermore,

Tuškey, Golob and Podnar (2011) argue that with the use of social media platforms

companies are able to facilitate and stimulate WOM among their consumers. We will

in this discussion not deny that WOM and brand-‐related messages take place among

users on social media. However, our empirical data indicates that there are more

factors that come into play, when companies attempt to harness these processes.

The growth of social media has posed businesses with new challenges

when it comes to managing image, reputation and word-‐of-‐mouth. Furthermore,

because consumers are ‘always on’ the challenge becomes ongoing and companies

should constantly stay updated on the communication going on within and outside of

their control. Jacob exemplifies this by stating that whenever the corporate sites he

follows crosses his boundary of irrelevant information and spam he immediately un-‐

follows. By making one error a company can go from staying connected and having a

potential WOM source in Jacob to losing his connections altogether on Facebook.

René’s contribution is interesting to add to this. He states that for him to share

corporate content, the quality and relevance of the content is most important, and not

the company it originates from. If René is to be a source of WOM and sender of brand-‐

related messages, companies need to live up to these requirements.


102

Our empirical data shows that the notion of self-‐presentation and

identity construction influences and in some cases inhibits the willingness for

Facebook users to partake in the WOM and sending of brand-‐related messages.

Despite the fact that Sandra claims to be an admirer of A&F and Nike, she has not liked

their respective Facebook pages. She does not want to be associated with these

companies on her Facebook profile. Conclusively, even though she is a potential

source of WOM and sender of brand-‐related messages, she is not willing to claim this

role, because with this action these companies are linked to her persona. We find this

missing link between admiration for certain brands or companies and the reluctance

to associate such with ones identity among our participants significant to include in

this discussion. It appears that the need for self-‐presentation and identity

construction through personal Facebook profiles trumps the will to consciously or

unconsciously participate in corporate WOM and share brand-‐related messages.

If we return to the conclusion and discussion from statement 2, the

aspect of self-‐presentation and identity construction appears to have a significant

influence on the users’ activities on Facebook. All participants signify to be

consciously or unconsciously aware of how their activities are associated with their

personality, and this affects their behavior on Facebook. The identity construction of

the individual user is furthermore affected by a need to in some case portray an ideal

self rather than the ‘real’ self. Basically, if all activities on Facebook are governed by

the desired identity, the effect of WOM and brand-‐relates messages is naturally

affected.

Finally, in this thesis we do not deny that social media allows

companies to create and spread word-‐of-‐mouth and brand-‐related-‐messages through

non-‐marketers. However, we claim that more factors come into play than the simple

willingness to share corporate content on behalf of a specific company or brand. Users

appear to prefer the content to be of high quality and relevance, when partaking in

WOM and sharing of brand-‐related messages. Finally, the notion of identity

construction and self-‐presentation constantly affects the choice of activities that users

carry out on Facebook and the willingness to repost and share corporate content is no

exception.


103

9. CHAPTER 9: Interview with Preben Mejer (L) One of the initial steps in our thesis process was to conduct an expert interview with

futurologist and digital media expert Preben Mejer. The aim of the interview was to

discuss the current use of social media in a corporate context and hereby gain

inspiration for the impending qualitative interview investigation. The interview was

conducted in Danish and passages of it have been translated in the attached transcript

found in appendix 5. Furthermore, a summary of the entire interview have been

reduced and displayed in appendix 4, which provides an overview of the entire

conversation. We have chosen to address a number of the themes that surfaced

throughout the conversation and connect these to the theoretical foundation of social

media, as well as the empirical contribution of the five qualitative interviews. This

will be wrapped up with a final discussion.

According to Preben Mejer, the ongoing development in new communication forms is

an interesting aspect in the use of social media at a corporate and private level. SMS

and email have been two of the preferred forms of communication for the previous

digital generation. For the first time since their introduction to the digital market,

these communication forms are reducing in use and activity (App 5. #00:03:03-‐1#).

Mejer explains this development based on their static nature. Both forms are

transaction based, which means that for instance with traditional email, it is necessary

to assess every individual email in order to get an overview of a certain chain of

events during a specific time period (App. 5 #00:04:29-‐6#). He states that the way we

currently communicate digitally is changing towards being flow based27 (App. 5

#00:05:24-‐3#). Social media such as Facebook is a big contributor to this

development. Facebook has since the beginning offered users the possibility of

sending private messages to their contacts, similar to regular email. This function has

eventually been updated with the option of attaching documents and pictures, making

it close to identical with a traditional email account. Most importantly, Facebook

private messages is designed around a flow-‐based structure where all messages sent

and received from one particular contact will appear in one single ‘thread’. Similarly,

SMS services experience intense competition from offers such as Imessage28, which

additionally entails flow based communication between mobile phones, as well as

being a free service. Mejer highlights the fact that this development in

communications forms is ongoing and new generations will adopt the next successful

innovation which prescribes the way we communicate.

28 Imessage is an instant messenger service developed by Apply and used on Iphones with internet access. It function from a flow-‐based structure and makes it free for Iphone owners to chat.


104

9.1. Empirical contribution (L) We found the notion that communication forms changes along with generations

interesting to address in the qualitative interviews. Recognizing that technological

innovations such as Facebook go through a certain hype cycle, we decided to assess

this from a user-‐perspective and address whether the participants’ use of Facebook

has changed during the years.

“Has your use of Facebook changed since your initial registration?” The first part of the interview guide contains introductory questions about the

participants’ general use of Facebook and as a final question we ask if their use of

Facebook has changed since their initial registration (see appendix 1).

Sandra states that in the beginning she was very ‘hands on’ with her

use of Facebook where she would comment on and link to everything, because she

considered it fun and exciting. Now she stays in contact with the same ten or fifteen

people, which are the same friends that she communicates with in person or through

phone and email (App. 6 #00:04:12-‐5#). Additionally, Sandra utters that in the

beginning she did not understand “[…] what it could lead to” (App. 6 #00:04:12-‐5#).

We ask her to elaborate on this statement. She explains that at first she would accept

friendship requests from distant acquaintances and saw it as an opportunity to catch

up on old times. Now she would refrain from doing so, realizing that there is probably

a reason why they are not in contact (App. 6 #00:05:51-‐3#). Basically, Sandra

confirms that she has narrowed her use of Facebook down in the sense of the range of

contacts that she actually communicates with.

René reveals that his use of Facebook has changed since his initial

registration. In the beginning he posted more or less what occurred to him, whereas

now he is more selective. At first René was uncritical of his activities on Facebook and

now he only makes posts that he believes to be useful for his network. René has

become more aware of what he is involved with on Facebook, as he has noticed the

features on the site have changed and he feels that he is tricked into agreeing with

new updates that he will have to go and ‘switch off’ afterwards. Furthermore, he does

not like how the privacy features of the site keep changing. (App. 7 #00:04:46-‐3#). We

ask René, if this means that he has a Facebook account out of necessity. He confirms

this and utters that he does not like the way Mark Zuckerberg29 runs his business

(App. 7 #00:06:06-‐4#).

Stine also confirms that her use of Facebook has changed over time. At

first she was focused on her number of friends, which needed to be as high as possible

29 Mark Zuckerberg is co-‐founder, chairman and chief executive of Facebook.


105

and she was very active with pictures and updates. However, at some point she

realized the lack of ownership of her personal pictures and that her Facebook friends

were not actual friends of her in real life. She acknowledges her Facebook profile as a

private space and feels claustrophobic when realizing that all her Facebook friends

were invited into this private space. Stine has deleted and unfriended a large number

of people from her profile and it has become an exclusive space that she uses for

keeping in touch with the real life friends and as well for entertainment (App. 8

#00:04:40-‐3#).

Caroline explains that her use of Facebook has changed along with the

changes of the actual platform. When the possibility of uploading pictures along with

personal status updates arrived, Caroline would make use of this service and when

she bought a smartphone she started to make use the option of location based check-‐

ins. Furthermore, the smartphone has increased her level of activities on Facebook. It

gives her the possibility to make ‘instant updates’ combined with pictures and current

locations (App. 9 #00:04:59-‐2#).

Jacob’s use of Facebook has increased since his initial registration and

he uses it a lot more at this point in time than in the beginning. We ask Jacob whether

his level of activities on the site is currently at the highest and he denies this. Jacob

explains that when he went to school daily he would use it more than he does now. He

would chat and share content with the friends that he saw daily (App. 10 #00:04:11-‐

8#).

The five respondents all express a change in their behavior on

Facebook since their initial registration. Sandra, René and Stine all state a reduction in

Facebook use, whereas Caroline and Jacob have experienced an increase. The range of

contacts that Sandra actually communicates with via Facebook has been narrowed

down to the people that she communicates with outside of this media. This complies

with the change in Stine’s behavior, which entails the actual consequence of deleting

and removing friends from her profile. She considers her profile as a private space and

has become more aware of which people she allows into this private space. René has

likewise become more aware of his activities on Facebook. He is much more selective

and critical of what he posts. Furthermore, he expresses dissatisfaction with the

changes in the site’s privacy features and therefore made a conscious decision to

change his behavior.

“What do you think about the social video and reader applications on Facebook and how do you feel about the fact that most of you activities are shared with all your contacts?”


106

During the five individual interviews that make up the empirical basis for this

research, we have inquired all participants of their opinion on the frictionless sharing

on Facebook. These questions were inspired from the initial meeting with Preben

Mejer. He believes that Facebook is currently leaning towards a serious backlash,

meaning the business will experience a reduction in use and activity, for the first time

since founded. One of the reasons for this prediction is based on one of the latest

innovations on Facebook, which is the concept of frictionless sharing. This entails the

aspect of involuntary publication of activities. (#00:21:04-‐0#). We decided to

investigate how the five participants view this feature. In theme number five in the

interview guide, we ask our participants what they think about the social reader and

social videos applications that are circulating their newsfeeds. Furthermore, we ask

them how they feel about the fact that most of their activities on Facebook are shared

with all their contacts.

At first Sandra liked the social readers, in the sense that her friends’

activities would inspire her to read specific articles. However, when installing the

application needed in order to read the article Facebook requires access to her

information. She is not willing to do this and will rather find the content somewhere

else. Eventually she became annoyed with the application. Sandra states that she

deletes all the features where Facebook suggests frictionless sharing with her

contacts, unless it is content that she finds very interesting and content that she would

like others to see that she has read (App. 6 #00:39:05-‐5#).

René states that he tries not to make use of the social videos and social

readers, as he feels that Facebook crosses a very personal boundary by for instance

asking permission to his contact list while installing the features and applications. He

struggles with keeping track of what he accepts during these installations and he

avoids using them all together (App. 7 #00:30:48-‐5#). He does not like the fact that

most of his activities are shared on Facebook and at times he considers going through

all the different settings of his profile and shutting it down to the point where it is only

his close personal friends that can get the full picture (App. 7 #00:32:38-‐5#).

Stine has used a social reader application at one point with the aim of

reading an article. However, when the disclaimer asking for access to information

appeared she decided not to read the article. She usually moves away from

applications and features that ask her for access to her profile (App. 8 #00:41:34-‐6#).

Stine seems conflicted about her opinion on the social reader and video applications,

as she recognizes that she would not have been presented to the article, if her friend

had not shared it. However, she does not herself want to share such activities (App. 8

#00:41:34-‐6#).


107

Caroline has mixed feelings about the frictionless sharing applications.

Some of the very interesting articles she has read over time have been presented to

her through friends using the applications. Nevertheless, she has often chosen not to

install such applications and located the article via other sources (App. 9 #00:38:22-‐

6#). Caroline has become more aware of the access that others have to her

information and activities and attempts to control what she shares with her contacts.

She tries to be a silent reader on Facebook where she refrains from making updates

that are too personal such as political views and opinions (App. 9 #00:39:57-‐

4#)Caroline abstains from using the applications and the service Spotify, as she

believes it crosses a boundary into her private life. In this connection, she realizes that

it is probably silly to think that it is possible to maintain a private life on Facebook.

Nonetheless, she would like to believe that she controls her information and therefore

attempts not to share too much.

Jacob is also not excited about the frictionless sharing applications.

Once he read an article through one of these applications and days later he realized

that it had appeared on his profile. He felt that this incident intervened with his

personal life (#00:30:05-‐8#). If Jacob develops an interest in an article circulating

Facebook, he will access a different browser and make a search for the article (App. 10

#00:30:59-‐8#). We ask Jacob if his privacy is important to him on Facebook and he

confirms this. He explains that a few weeks prior the interview he contemplated

deleting his Facebook profile all together, because he found it to be “[…] too much

[…](App. 10 #00:31:36-‐4#). He decided not to do so as he would miss the

communication with friends.

In summary, Sandra, René and Jacob express general dissatisfaction

with the social applications and frictionless sharing. This is due to both the actual

publication of activities, but also the fact that the installment of these applications

entails that Facebook is given access to a lot of personal information. Stine and

Caroline utter mixed feelings about the applications, as they see the positive in being

inspired by their friends’ readings and views. However, both prefer not to publicize

more activities than necessary. Sandra, Jacob and Caroline prefer to locate content of

social applications through other sources.

9.2. Discussion (O) Preben Mejer’s prediction regarding the impending backlash of Facebook is significant

to discuss in relation to our respondents’ opinion on and experience with the newest

Facebook features. Mejer claims that this backlash is partially based on the occurrence

of frictionless sharing, which dominates the latest applications and features. This


108

opinion is recognizable in our interviews. Respondents such as René and Caroline

have become much more selective and aware of which activities they share with their

network and how much information they allow for Facebook to obtain. Furthermore,

it is interesting to notice that some of our respondents admit that when their contacts

share such activities on Facebook they are inspired to look into the content, however

Jacob, Sandra and Caroline will actually leave the site and locate the information

elsewhere.

Returning to the conceptual and contextual framework of this thesis,

SEO professional Liana Evans (2010) underlines the constant development in online

media and it is therefore important for companies not to fall in love with a specific

social media platform. Customers might not even be present on the specific platform

and its future is not guaranteed. In connection to this, we find it relevant to include the

notion of a hype cycle. New innovations which are deemed the ‘latest thing’ in

business often go through a certain hype cycle. This means that an innovation will go

through several phases and the first phase usually results in a massive following,

which eventually stagnates during next phases. This is when the initial and

unnaturally high expectations are not fulfilled. Eventually when this hype settles,

people will acknowledge the actual possibilities of the specific innovation and no

longer be blinded by the hype and high expectations (Fenn and Raskino 2008). By

assessing our qualitative data, it is clear that all participants have changed their

behavior and attitudes towards the site in different ways. Both Jacob and René

indicate that they have contemplated shutting down their profiles, but are dependent

on it in different ways. Jacob states that he would miss the communication with

friends and René feels that he requires a Facebook profile for work related purposes.

These statements are interesting in relation to Mejer’s future predictions for

Facebook. It appears that obvious dissatisfaction with the development of Facebook

has not yet resulted in Jacob or René’s departure from the site. They both still have a

certain needs that Facebook fulfills. Finally, if consumers take on changes in opinions

and attitudes towards a social media site, it is important for companies to have this in

mind when approaching the corporate use of Facebook.


109

10. CHAPTER 10: Conclusion (C)

The basic motivation on which this thesis was conducted was the intention to apply a

critical perspective on the growing use of social media in a corporate context. Social

media has become an inevitable concept when discussing corporate communication.

The social media authors and literature employed throughout this thesis argue for

businesses to incorporate this in their communication strategies. Three overall

statements regarding the possibilities of corporate social media are the result of an

initial extensive literature research on the subject. Each statement has been assessed

individually by the means of empirical and/or theoretical data.

A critical assessment of corporate social media could have been

addressed in a number of ways based on the desired perspective and outcome. We

chose to address the three statements from the consumers’ perspective. The aim was

to analyze whether the statements correspond with the attitudes and opinions of

current active users of social media. Due to its size and popularity, Facebook

represents the social media platform on which our research has been based.

The scientific aim of this thesis has been to interpret and understand

the world and experiences of the consumers. Therefore, the social constructionist

paradigm guides the way we perceive knowledge. We chose to conduct five individual

interviews in the aim of retrieving the respondents’ opinions and attitudes on specific

subjects related to the three overall statements as well as their general use of social

media.

Statement 1: Social media allows companies to engage in dialogue with their consumers

has been assessed empirically by inquiring the five respondents about their

interaction with corporations on Facebook. One respondent acknowledges the

obvious advantages in complaining via a communication channel that is visible to

other consumers, but is however not willing to be exposed. This utterance has been

linked to the notions of identity creation and self-‐presentation, which appear to be of

relevance in each assessment of the three overall statements that guide our work. All

participants stress that the lack anonymity interferes with their desire to complain

officially through Facebook. The theoretical contribution of identity construction

combined with the qualitative data from the interviews indicates that consumers will

evaluate if the act of engaging in dialogue with companies corresponds with their

desired self-‐presentation.

We inquire our respondents about what could motivate them to

engage in dialogue with corporate Facebook sites and the aspects of appearing as an

actual person and authenticity were deemed as important by two respondents. Social


110

media literature argues that the exchange of opinions and ideas with consumers on

social media form the foundation for creating deeper and longer lasting relationships

with the audience. The only example evident during the interviews where a

respondent had made an actual recommendation to a company via Facebook was in

relation to a competition. Otherwise she claims she would never do so proactively. We

question how this interaction would entail a meaningful relationship between

consumer and company to form.

Statement 2: Social media allows companies to learn about their consumers’ beliefs,

attitudes, and needs. This has been assessed primarily by the means of a theoretical

analysis. The empirically generated data from this study has contributed to this

questioning.

With the help of the conceptual and contextual framework, we

established that the contemporary consumer is a fragmented individual that

consumes on the basis of the symbolic value attached to a brand or company. Through

consumption of cultural resources, the [post-‐] postmodern consumer constructs the

self. The notion that individuals comprise of several masks and roles, and change

between these depending on the purpose, provides an added dimension to the

contemporary consumer. This perception of the existing consumer provided an

interesting point of departure to investigate statement 2.

With the introduction to concepts such as impression management and

self-‐presentation, it was illustrated that consumers behave and consume in relation to

the desired identity that they want to project to others. Thus, the [post-‐] postmodern

consumer consists of several roles and identities, and consumes various cultural

resources with the intention of creating several identities that correlate with the

image that he or she wants to project. The notion of a public ‘front’ stage in contrast

with a personal ‘back’ stage is therefore relevant. Furthermore, with the emergence of

technology, consumers can employ the online world to create a personal space and

live out the desired identity.

We have argued that Facebook functions as an extended ‘front’ stage,

where users present themselves more favorably and differently compared to their

‘offline’ persona. This corresponds to our respondents’ views on identity creation that

emerged spontaneously during the qualitative research interviews. All five

respondents have either an implicit or explicit understanding of the aspects of self-‐

presentation and identity construction on Facebook. Hence, a few of the respondents

consider their behavior on Facebook in relation to the impression that this will send

to their social network. In some cases, the behavior on Facebook was directly related

to the wish of presenting themselves more favorably. Correspondingly, other activities


111

were refrained from, in order to avoid presenting unfavorable aspects of the self.

These considerations were not in all cases conscious; thus, the identity creation on

Facebook can also be an unconscious action.

Our work adds another dimension to the statement that social media

allows companies to learn about their consumers’ beliefs, attitudes, and needs. It offers

the notion that consumers consist of several identities and furthermore that the

creation of these identities is affected by the image they want to project to others.

With this in mind, the information about consumers’ beliefs, attitudes, and needs will

be based upon a desired image presented on an extended ‘front’ stage, rather than the

‘real’ self. However, with the social constructionist standpoint, we acknowledge that

one reality is not more correct than others, and therefore one identity is not

necessarily more ‘real’ than another. Nevertheless, the information obtained by

companies will be based upon the desired identity, and not the ‘actual’ identity that is

responsible for purchasing and consuming products.

Statement 3: social media allows companies to create and spread word-‐of-‐mouth and

brand-‐related-‐messages through non-‐marketers. This statement has been investigated

empirically with questions related to the respondents’ tendency to share corporate

content on Facebook, and furthermore if they are affected by others sharing it. By

introducing the traditional concept of word-‐of-‐mouth, it was evident that the

emergence of the internet and social media has changed the characteristics of the

concept significantly. It has become easier for companies to spread their name and

company activities on social media platforms such as Facebook, in that nearly all

activities that take place are shared. This means that users’ action of liking,

commenting and sharing is visible to the entire network. With this it became apparent

that it is possible to distinguish between the conscious or unconscious action of

displaying WOM and distributing brand-‐related messages.

When considering the [post-‐] postmodern consumer, who is no longer

affected by traditional marketing techniques and trust acquaintances more than

companies, the attractiveness of WOM on social media is understandable. It makes it

possible for companies to rather quickly distribute corporate messages through non-‐

marketers.

Our research shows that there are several considerations that

influence our participants’ wish to take on this role as a WOM source. The notion of

self-‐presentation and identity creation seems to have an effect on our respondents’

willingness to create WOM and partake in the process of sending brand-‐related

messages to their social network. One of the respondents mentions the admiration of

two different brands, however states that she has no desire to publicly associate

herself to them on Facebook, and has therefore neglected to like them. This means


112

that she could be a potential source of digital WOM, but she is not willing to claim this

role, because with this action the companies are linked to her persona.

Several of our respondents could imagine their interest being spiked if

their Facebook friends were to share a brand-‐related message, however it was

required that the friend has an actual interest in the content. One of our respondents

had experienced shared corporate content in such a high degree that she became

directly irritated with the company behind it.

If the respondents were to share corporate content themselves, it was

required that the content is of high quality and relevance. However, the aspect of self-‐

presentation seems to be so influential on the respondents’ behavior on Facebook that

this is considered before participating in WOM and the distribution of brand-‐related

messages. This means that our respondents could very well be influenced by others

sharing corporate content (if it lives up to their expectations), but are however more

careful in contributing themselves. Furthermore, one of our respondents states he is

very quick to un-‐friend if the content is irrelevant, which means that it is easy to lose

him as a source WOM.

One of the initial steps in this research was the meeting and interview with

futurologist and digital media expert Preben Mejer. The data generated in the

interview proved to contribute with questions to the interview guide employed during

the five qualitative interviews. Mejer has outlined how communication forms change

over time and each generation has its preferred form. This corresponds with the

author Liana Evans’ (2010) advice for companies not to fall in love with a specific

social media platform. Mejer predicts a backlash apparent for Facebook in the near

future, which among other aspects is due to the introduction of frictionless sharing on

the site.

We have inquired the respondents about their changes in behavior on

Facebook and their attitudes towards frictionless sharing. All respondents’ behavior

on Facebook has changed since their initial registration. These changes entail either

an increase in activity because of the acquisition of smart phones or a decrease due to

the choice to narrow down the number of contacts they interact with. Mixed feelings

appeared related to the notion of frictionless sharing on Facebook. Some respondents

recognize the advantage in friends’ activities being shared, however express

dissatisfaction with the access to information Facebook requires when installing

social features and applications. Furthermore, two respondents would rather locate

content from alternative sources, in order to avoid publication of their activities. The

respondents’ general dissatisfaction towards the new features on Facebook combined

with Evans’ (2010) suggestion to not focus on one specific platform, indicates that


113

companies should not focus all their attention on a specific social media platform.

Technological development is ongoing, consumer behavior changes and expectations

for new innovations may be exceedingly overenthusiastic.

In conclusion, with this thesis we have attempted to contribute to the current social

media literature with a critical perspective of how consumers experience corporate

social media. Due to the social constructionist approach, from which we construct

knowledge it is not possible to make any generalizations of the results evident in this

thesis. However, we have attempted to present a nuanced conclusion that includes

different perspectives and experiences from five current active users of social media.

We do not deny that the three overall statements are possible on social media

platforms, however the respondents’ attitudes and opinions towards corporate

Facebook sites highlight that the alleged possibilities available for companies may not

be as simple to obtain as the literature presents it. The elements of identity creation,

self-‐presentation and the need for anonymity have an impact on the way our

respondents behave on Facebook. All elements that companies should consider in

their use of corporate social media. Furthermore, the content of communication

distributed via social media is expected by our respondents to be of relevance and if

companies do not fulfill this, our respondents are more inclined to un-‐follow the

corporate Facebook site.

Additionally, it is relevant to return to the one of the personal

motivations that prompted this research; the current belief that all corporations need

to be on social media. In the employed literature various authors argue that corporate

social media is the next thing within corporate communication, and companies need

to get on board. By referring to factors such as the development of consumer behavior,

consumers’ increasing marketing literacy, and consumers’ distrust in corporations,

social media is presented as an appropriate tool to employ in corporate

communication to overcome these. However, due to the reflexive state that exists

between the consumer culture and branding paradigm, an original and effective

branding technique can become ‘the latest thing’ and result in a bandwagon effect that

triggers everyone’s participation. With the over-‐use of certain branding techniques,

consumers are able to realize the economic motivations and insincerity of it. It is

interesting to note that one of our respondents shows signs of marketing literacy

towards the newest branding technique; the use of corporate social media. She has

grown suspicious of the corporate use of social media, and this reduces her motivation

to engage in company dialogue. With the integration of the theoretical foundation and

empirical data, it can lead to a speculation of companies’ abilities to overcome

consumers’ growing marketing literacy. Furthermore, if corporate social media is


114

deemed as ‘the latest thing’ within corporate communication, the move onto this

digital space requires companies to consider a wide number of elements before

jumping on the bandwagon.


115

11. Bibliography

11.1. Books

-‐ Beck, U. and E. Beck-‐Gernsheim (2002) Individualization. Sage Publications

-‐ Berg, B. L (2004) Qualitative research methods for the social services. Pearson

Education Inc., 5th edition

-‐ Borgmann, Albert (1992) Crossing the Postmodern Divide. Chicago; Chicago

University Press.

-‐ Bourdieu, Pierre (1984) Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of

Taste. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

-‐ Burr, V. (1995) An introduction to social constructionism. London, New York;

Routledge

-‐ Daymon, C. and I. Holloway (2002) Qualitative Research Methods in Public

Relations and Marketing Communications. London, New York; Routledge

-‐ Evans, D. and J. McKee (2010) Social media marketing: the next generation of

business engagement. Indianapolis: Wiley Publishing Inc.

-‐ Evans, L. (2010) Social media marketing: strategies for engaging in Facebook,

Twitter & other social media. Que Publishing

-‐ Fenn, J. and M. Raskino (2008) Mastering the hype cycle – how to choose the

right innovation at the right time. Harvard Business Press

-‐ Flick, U. (2009). Introduction to qualitative research. Sage

-‐ Frey, L. R., C. H. Botan, P. G. Friedman and G. Kreps (1992) Interpreting

communication research: A case study approach. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice

Hall

-‐ Ghauri, P. and K. Grønhaug (2010) Research methods in business studies. FT

Prentice hall. Fourth edition

-‐ Goffman, E. (1959) The presentation of self in everyday life. New York:

Doubleday Anchor Books.

-‐ Guba, E. C. (1990) The Paradigm Dialog. California; Sage Publications

-‐ Kvale, S. (2007) Interviews –An introduction to qualitative research

interviewing. Sage

-‐ Kvale, S. and S. Brinkmann, (2009) Interviews -‐ Learning the craft of

qualitative research interviewing. Sage

-‐ Lindlof, T. R and B. C. Taylor (2002) Qualitative communication research

methods. Sage Publications, 2nd edition


116

-‐ O'Leary, S. and K. Sheehan (2008) Building Buzz to Beat the Big Boys: Word-‐

Of-‐Mouth Marketing for Small Businesses. Praeger

-‐ Prahalad, C. K., and Ramaswamy, V. (2004) The Future of Competition: Co-‐

Creating Unique Value with Customers. Boston: Harvard Business School

Press.

-‐ Safko, L (2010) The social media bible: tactics, tools, and strategies for

business success. Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley. 2nd edition

-‐ Short, J., E. Williams, and B. Christie (1976) The social psychology of

telecommunications. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

-‐ Silverman, G. (2011) The secrets of word-‐of mouth marketing – how to

trigger exponential sales through runaway word of mouth. Second edition,

AMACOM

-‐ Vollmer, C. and G. Precourt (2008) Always On – Advertising, Marketing, and

Media in an Era of Consumer Control. McGraw Hill

-‐

11.2. Journal articles

-‐ Ammon-‐Gaberson, K.B. and Piantanida, M. (1988) Generating results from

qualitative data. Image, 20, 159-‐161.

-‐ Bradley, P. (2010) Be where the conversations are: The critical importance

of social media. Business Information Review, 27, 4, 248–252

-‐ Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986) Organizational information requirements,

media richness, and structural design. Management Science, 32, 5, 554—571.

-‐ Firat, Fuat A. and Alladi Venkatesh (1995) Liberatory Postmodernism and

the Reenchantment of Consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 22, 239-‐

267

-‐ Firestone A. Williams (1987) Meaning in Method – The Rhetoric of

Quantitative and Qualitative Research. The Educational Researcher, 16, 16

-‐ Gergen, K. J. (1985) The social constructionist movement in modern

psychology, American Psychologist, 40, 266-‐275

-‐ Gergen, K. J. (1995) Chapter 21: The healthy happy human being wears

many masks. In: Anderson, Walter Truett: The truth about the truth. de-‐

confusing and re-‐constructing the postmodern world, pp. 136-‐144.

Tarcher/Putnam.

-‐ Hanna, R., A. Rohm and V. L. Crittenden (2011) We’re all connected: The

power of the social media ecosystem. Business Horizons, 54, 3, 265-‐273


117

-‐ Hogan, B. (2010) The Presentation of Self in the Age of Social Media:

Distinguishing Performances and Exhibitions Online. Bulletin of Science,

Technology & Society, 30, 6, 377 –386

-‐ Holt, D. B. (2002) Why Do Brands Cause Trouble? A Dialectical Theory of

Consumer Culture and Branding. Journal of Consumer Research, 29, 1, 70-‐90

-‐ James W. Chesebro & Deborah J. Borisoff (2007) What Makes Qualitative

Research Qualitative? Qualitative Research reports in communication.

Routledge – Taylor & Francis Group

-‐ Kaplan, A. M. and M. Haenlein (2010) Users of the world, unite! The

challenges and opportunities of Social Media. Business Horizons, 53, 1, 59-‐68

-‐ Kietzmann, J. H., K. Hermkens, I. P. McCarthy and B. S. Silvestre (2011)

Social media? Get serious! Understanding the functional building blocks of

social media. Business Horizons. 54, 241 – 251

-‐ Krauss, S.E., A. Hamzah, Z. Omar, T. Suandi, I. A. Ismail and M. Z. Zahari

(2009) Preliminary Investigation and Interview Guide Development for

Studying how Malaysian Farmers’ Form their Mental Models of Farming, The

Qualitative Report, 14, 2, 245-‐260

-‐ Maanen, J. van (1979) Reclaiming qualitative methods for organizational

research: a preface, Administrative Science Quarterly 24, 4, 520-‐6.

-‐ Mangold, W. G. and D. J. Faulds (2009) Social media: The new hybrid

element of the promotion mix. Business Horizons, 52, 4, 357-‐365

-‐ Marshal, M. N. (1996) Sampling for qualitative research. Family Practice, 13,

6, 522-‐ 525

-‐ Meadows-‐Klue, D. (2008) Falling in love 2.0: Relationship marketing for the

Facebook generation. Journal of Direct, Data and Digital Marketing Practice, 9,

3, 245–250

-‐ Mensel, L. and T. Petersen (2011) ‘LIKE ME’ – Consumers Use Brands on

Facebook to Cultivate Identity. Master thesis, Aarhus University – Business

and Social Sciences

-‐ Meredith, M.J. (2012) Strategic Communication and Social Media: An MBA

Course From a Business Communication Perspective. Business Communication

Quarterly, 75, 1, 89 –95

-‐ Patterson, A. (2011) Social-‐networkers of the world, unite and take over: A

meta-‐introspective perspective on the Facebook brand. Journal of Business

Research, 65, 4, 527-‐534

-‐ Pookulangara, S. and K. Koesler (2011) Cultural influence on consumers’

usage of social networks and its’ impact on online purchase intentions.

Journal of Retailing and Consumer Service, 18, 348 -‐354


118

-‐ Pyett, P. M. (2003) Validation of qualitative research in the “real world.”

Qualitative Health Research, 13, 8, 1170-‐1179

-‐ Saren, M. (2007) To have is to be? A critique of self-‐creation through

consumption. The Marketing Review, 7, 4, 343-‐354

-‐ Schau, H. J., & Gilly, M. C. (2003) We are what we post? Self-‐ presentation in

personal web space. Journal of Consumer Research, 30, 3, 385—404.

-‐ Thackeray, R., B.L. Neiger and H. Keller (2012) Integrating Social Media

and Social Marketing: A Four-‐Step Process. Health Promotion Practice, 13, 2,

165-‐168

-‐ Tuškej, U., U. Golob and K. Podnar (2011) The role of consumer–brand

identification in building brand relationships. Journal of Business Research

-‐ Weinberg, B.D and E. Pehlivan (2011) Social spending: Managing the social

media mix. Business Horizons, 54, 3, 275-‐282

-‐ Zhao, S., S. Grasmuck and J. Martin (2008) Identity construction on

Facebook: Digital empowerment in anchored relationships. Computers in

Human Behavior, 24, 1816–1836


119

12. List of appendices

12. List of appendices

Appendix 1 – Interview guide

Appendix 2 – Facebook dictionary

Appendix 3 – Data display of interviews

Appendix 4 – Summary of expert interview

Appendix 5 – Translated passages from expert interview

Appendix 6 – Transcript of interview 1: Sandra

Appendix 7 – Transcript of interview 2: René

Appendix 8 – Transcript of interview 3: Stine

Appendix 9 – Transcript of interview 4: Caroline

Appendix 10 – Transcript of interview 5: Jacob

Appendix 11 – Audio file of interview 1: Sandra

Appendix 12 – Audio file of interview 2: René

Appendix 13 – Audio file of interview 3: Stine

Appendix 14 – Audio file of interview 4: Caroline

Appendix 15 – Audio file of interview 5: Jacob

Appendix 16 – Audio file of interview 6: Preben Mejer

Appendix 1 – Interview guide

Theme 1: General Facebook use

1) Can you please describe how you use Facebook in your everyday life.

2) Can you please try to explain why you have a profile on Facebook?

3) How often do you enter your Facebook profile?

a. What is the main reason that you enter Facebook profile daily?

4) Do you own a smartphone?

5) Do you check your Facebook profile via your smartphone?

6) Has your use of Facebook changed since your initial registration?

a. If yes, in what way?

Theme 2: Corporate Facebook sites?

7) Please look at you Facebook profile - What is the last corporate site you have

liked?

a. Can you recall the reason for liking the site?

8) If you look at your Facebook newsfeed for the last three days, what dominates

the picture?

9) Can you remember according to you an unsuccessful corporate Facebook

site?

10) Which parameters do you consider important when evaluating a corporate

Facebook site to successful or unsuccessful?

11) Have you ever blocked, unliked or unfriended a corporate site?

a. If yes, can you elaborate on why?

12) Do you have an opinion on companies’ frequency of Facebook update?

Theme 3: Dialogue with companies via Facebook

13) Have you ever made an official complaint to a company through Facebook?

a. If yes, why did you choose this medium?

b. If no, is there a specific reason why you have not made a complaint

through Facebook?

14) Where/ how do you normally make complaints to companies?

a. And why do you use that medium?

15) Have you ever made recommendations or suggestions to a company

regarding a product through Facebook?

a. If yes, can you please elaborate on this?

16) What could motivate you to engage(with that we mean write on their wall, on

their status update etc.) with a company or brand via Facebook?

Theme 4: Word of mouth

17) Do you consider yourself as a fan of a certain brand or company?

a. If yes, have you liked this brand’s Facebook page? – why/why not?

18) Have you ever commented on a brand or company’s Facebook status.

a. If yes, can you try to elaborate on why you did this?

b. If no, can you try to elaborate on have not done this?

19) Have you ever shared brand or company’s Facebook status or picture?

a. If yes, can you please elaborate on why?

b. If no, can you please try to explain why not?

20) Have you noticed one or more of your Facebook friends having commented

on a company’s status update?

21) Have you ever noticed one of more of your friends having shared a company’s

status update, picture or link?

a. Did these updates spike your interest for the specific company?

Theme 5: Frictionless sharing

22) Do you use the service Spotify?

a. If yes, what do you think of the service?

b. If no, why not?

23) Do you share your Spotify activities on Facebook?

a. If no, why not?

24) What do you think about the social reader and social videos apps that are

available on Facebook?

a. Do you use them?

i. If no, why not?

25) How do you feel about the fact, that most of activities on Facebook are visible

to all your contacts?

Appendix 2 – Facebook dictionary

Status updates = the option of writing and sharing current activities to everyone* in the social network.

Post = the actual action of publishing status updates or pictures.

Personal profile = each user has a personal profile, where everything about that person is collected, such as

information, pictures, likes etc. All postings and tags are accumulated here.

Wall = the wall is where people can write, send pictures, send videos etc. to each other. The wall message is

visible to everyone* in the senders and receivers network. This can be commented and liked by everyone*.

Furthermore, the wall is on the personal profile.

News feed = the main page, where the most recent or most popular status updates, pictures, check-ins,

picture tagging, details on other peoples activities etc. will show up. The news feed offers the option of

sharing, liking and commenting on the above activities.

Like = the action of positively recognizing a status update, picture, check in etc. by pressing the like button.

Furthermore, there is also the option of liking a comment on a status update, picture, check in etc.

Everyone* can view this action. Not only in the individual’s network, but also in the network of the one who

posted the picture and people in the network of someone who commented, liked or shared the picture.

Comment = the action of commenting on someone’s status update, picture, check in etc. This action is

considered as more of an effort compared to pressing the like button. However, as the like function is

considered as purely positive feedback, the commenting action can be used to share negative feedback.

Everyone* can view this action Not only in the individual’s network, but also in the network of the one who

posted the picture and people in the network of someone who commented, liked or shared the picture.

Share = the option of sharing a person’s, company’s, group’s etc. status update or picture to ones own

network or a specific person or group

Check-in = the option of sharing ones geographical location, to the network both in terms of actual

geography and venue.

Tagging = the option to link other users to ones updates, pictures or check ins, meaning that it appears on

their wall visible to their network.

* When something is visible on Facebook there are multiple levels of visibility. This means that people are

able to choose who will be able to see their activities. Therefore, activities can be visible to all people, to all

contacts in the individual’s network, specific chosen contacts or group of contacts, or a user-defined list of

friends. However, when we say everyone, we refer to all contacts in the social network, as this appears to

be the most used function.

Status updates = the option of writing and sharing current activities to everyone* in the social

network.

Post = the actual action of publishing status updates or pictures.

Personal profile = each user has a personal profile, where everything about that person is collected,

such as information, pictures, likes etc. All postings and tags are accumulated here.

Wall = the wall is where people can write, send pictures, send videos etc. to each other. The wall

message is visible to everyone* in the senders and receivers network. This can be commented and

liked by everyone*. Furthermore, the wall is on the personal profile.

News feed = the main page, where the most recent or most popular status updates, pictures, check-

ins, picture tagging, details on other peoples activities etc. will show up. The news feed offers the

option of sharing, liking and commenting on the above activities.

Like = the action of positively recognizing a status update, picture, check in etc. by pressing the like

button. Furthermore, there is also the option of liking a comment on a status update, picture, check in

etc. Everyone* can view this action. Not only in the individual’s network, but also in the network of

the one who posted the picture and people in the network of someone who commented, liked or

shared the picture.

Comment = the action of commenting on someone’s status update, picture, check in etc. This action

is considered as more of an effort compared to pressing the like button. However, as the like function

is considered as purely positive feedback, the commenting action can be used to share negative

feedback. Everyone* can view this action Not only in the individual’s network, but also in the

network of the one who posted the picture and people in the network of someone who commented,

liked or shared the picture.

Share = the option of sharing a person’s, company’s, group’s etc. status update or picture to ones

own network or a specific person or group

Appendix 3 – Data display of interviews

Sandra – Rene – Stine – Caroline - Jacob

How do you use Facebook in your everyday life and why do you have a profile?

- Keeping in touch with friends.

- Arranges meeting or social events.

- Stalking acquaintances.

- Would lose out on information.

- It is a practical thing.

- For social purposes.

- To contact friends through the chat function.

- Work related – for coordinating purposes / to communicate with people.

- Study groups and other kinds of groups organized around Facebook.

- A second inbox for friends living in other cities.

- Staying up to date with what people are doing.

- Secondary – keeping up with brands/ fashion and social media.

- Entertainment sites.

- She has a Facebook prolife for convenience.

- It is where everyone is.

- Use it to kill time.

- Following other people activities.

- She uses to keep in touch with people and display her activities.

- Use is as a communication tool – Like sms and email.

- To connect with friends.

- Share all sorts of information.

- As a communication professional he needs to have Facebook profile.

How often do you enter you profile?

- Very often

- Everyday – several times a day.

- At least ten times a day.

- Every day – morning, evening, during lectures and during work.

- Whenever his computer is on – for the chat function.

- Everyday - on average four times a day.

- Two or three times per hour.

- Everyday – several times a day.

- Since Facebook has gone mobile – He checks it once an hour.

Do you own and smartphone and check Facebook via this?

- Yes

- No

- Yes

- Yes

- Yes

Why do you enter Facebook daily?

- It’s a habbit

- Like checking email – she checks them simultaneously.

- Look for events, friends and offers.

- Not to miss out on what is going on.

- Not to miss out on events or information.

o Has learned to screen information.

- To check if others have written her – like checking email.

- To see what or people are up to.

- It is easy for her to check Facebook on her smartphone

- It is an alternative news source.

- It has become a bad habit.

- To know if anything is new.

- Check notifications and messages.

- I keep track of my good friends.

Has your use of Facebook changed since your initial registration?

- Hands on in the beginning.

- Comments and link to everything.

- She I only stays in contact with the same people she interact with during texts, email and face-to-

face.

- She has narrowed it down. – However, has not deleted friends.

- He used to make a lot of post a lot.

He used to accept tags in pictures.

- Now he is very selective.

- The privacy policy is a problem –He does not like the way the Facebook business is run.

- He cannot imagine not being a Facebook user, even though he wants to.

- In the beginning it was about getting the most friends.

- Shared a lot of picture.

- Tagged people and commented on pictures.

- Realized the ownership issues.

- Issues with potential future employers.

- Deleted friends that were only Facebook contact.

- Claustrophobic feeling.

- Now it is more exclusive.

- Her use has changes along with the changes and features of Facebook.

- Makes instant updates with her smartphone.

- Level of activity increased.

- At first it was a fun tool to connect with.

- He used it more along with the development of the site

- He used it more when he was a student.

What is the last corporate site you have liked?

- Veromoda- clothing company.

- Design it – Internship

- Jydske bank

- Veromoda –Norway – Work purposes.

- Per - Hairdresser

- Nutrimino

- Norwegian – the airline.

Why did you like the site?

- There was competition.

- She likes the company.

- He applied for an internship.

- She would get updates on discounts and new products

- She likes the products

- To display to others that she likes the products and then link it to her lifestyle.

- He would like to keep track of their new expansion.

- To keep track of their Tuesday offers and the new routes.

What dominates the picture of your Facebook news feeds for the past three days?

- Pictures with generic updates.

- Master thesis uploads and pictures.

- Political updates from friends that are politicians.

- Distortion

- Kids

- Links to music videos.

- Food – friends uploading pictures of food.

- People making aware of where they are and what they are doing.

He looks for things that can make him smile.

- Birthdays

- Seasonal: Exam periods, summer holiday etc.

- A good mixtures

- Updates from fashion brands

- Friends sharing other content

- A lot of corporate likes

- Highschool gradutes and completed exams.

- Holiday pictures.

- Holiday pictures

- Status updates about exams and holidays

- A few corporate sites with add for news and events

- Birthday greeting

Can you recall an according to you unsuccessful corporate Facebook site?

- Menucard

- The idea is good, but there activities are full of spelling mistakes.

- Danske bank – impersonal.

- Pages that had been disserted.

- Pages with only one update a month.

- Pages with spelling mistakes.

- Lack of visuals.

- Too high informality.

- No. She does not have a lot of corporate likes.

- Car companies – That tried to move from TV ads to Facebook.

- Seat – Used the small bugs in the TV ads.

- People did not want to engage.

- No likes, no fans.

Which parameters do you consider important when evaluating whether a Facebook site is successful

or not?

- No spam

o Only check Facebook for catching up with friends.

- She likes when they post pictures of latest collections.

- Discounts and special membership benefits.

- News from the company – So would not have to visit the company’s website.

- Honesty

- Presence – should be a communication tool – feedback.

- Bring something new.

- Be social.

- Too much irrelevant information

- She should get something out of it.

- Offers

- Interesting updates.

- Creativity

- She likes Ben&Jerry and the way they interact with the users.

o Natural approach to engage with followers.

o It feels like a friend and not a corporate site.

- Do not agree with the forced likes of competitions.

- Likes - People measure likes too much.

- Dialogue

- People should want to engage.

Do you have an opinion on frequency of updates?

- Not too often, not every day.

- When they have something new and interesting.

- It depends in the company – If it is something that interests or challenges him.

- The content is more important that the frequency

- The companies should update when they have something new to report

- Update when there is something interesting to say

- Facebook is not a channel for advertising

- Updates are relevant if they provide information as a service

- Depends on the company

- Must not be too much and irrelevant

Have you made an official complaint to a company through Facebook?

- No

- No

- No. But she has considered it.

-

- Yes. Kraft Foods. Asked the company to alter the packaging of a light crème cheese.

- No

Is there specific reason why not?

- She has not been bothered.

- If she does get offended she will call or write an email.

- He considered it might not be the place to do it. It might not be relevant for the others followers.

- Would use email.

- She likes the option of sending a message rather than writing on the wall.

o However, then other cannot see that complaint – two sided sword.

- It puts her on the spot.

- Would rather call – he gets an immediate response.

- Does not want others see that he complaints.

Where would you go to complaint?

- Go on the website and find email or phone number

- Phone or email.

- Depends on the situation.

- If it was serious – Email or phone.

- Facebook – more informal – works as a venting function.

- Fear that companies will consider it less serious and informal.

- Email

- Email and phone

Have you ever made recommendations or suggestions to a company regarding a product or service via

Facebook?

- Ones. But it was a competition requirement.

- Has never done it proactively.

- No.

- If he had a brilliant idea he would never share with companies.

.

- No.

- No. But she considers a like to be a suggestion.

- Not that he recalls

- He has asked questions

What could motivate you to engage with companies through Facebook?

- If they appear to be open-minded and open to suggestions.

- If it appears interactive.

- Not, if they appear to just be on Facebook purely with an agenda to increase profit.

- If they challenge, provoke me or dare him

- I don’t do that at all.

- There had to be something in it for her – like a competition or fun application.

- Would prefer to do it on a blog

-

- Relevant information with value

- If they ask for her opinion

- Actual person behind the site

- He cannot answer the question

- Has not met any sites that make him interact

Do you consider yourself as a fan of a certain brand or company?

- A&F – She is a distant admirer.

- Nike Free shoes

- No. He focuses on the functional aspect of products.

- No. She consider herself as being interested in certain nieches such as fashion.

- She admires Top-shop.

- Fan of products like film, book or music.

- Nike

- He likes Nike. They inspire him.

Have you liked the brand(s) on Facebook?

- No.

- Does not want to be associated with A&F.

- Only like things that says something about her.

- Yes.

- No

- No

Have you ever commented on a brand or company’s Facebook status?

- Only for competitions.

- No

- No

- She thinks she has.

- No – but he had liked states updates

Have you ever shared a company’s statues update or picture?

- Only for competitions.

- She share bands

- Yes. Kommunkations forum.

o But not like products – more like what they say.

o Happens very seldom.

- Yes.

- She shares a lot from the entertainments sites.

- From social media companies.

- But not the fashion brands that she follow.

- Believed Facebook is overflowing with people sharing competitions and random stuff

- Yes. It is a way of showing her opinion

- Not on his own wall, but on his friends pictures.

Do you use Spotify?

- Member, but do not use it now at the moment.

- Not yet.

- Yes. Premium.

- No. Do not want people to see her music.

- Yes. Premium

Do you share the activities?

- Yes.

- It does not bother her, it is not that personal.

- No

What do you think of the social reader and video apps on Facebook?

- Not too fond of them. It’s spam.

- She finds the articles somewhere else.

- He tries not to use them.

- Avoid apps completely.

- People post things without knowing it.

- He gets the information somewhere else.

- She have used it ones for an article.

- She did not want to share it.

- She moves away from the disclaimers of sharing

- She can find it somewhere else.

- Mixed feelings

- Have been presented to interesting articles.

- Does not want to install the apps.

- He does not like them

- Was annoyed when an article he read was published

How do feel about most of your activities on Facebook are visible?

- She deletes the activties

- Unless it is something she wants others to see

- I don’t like it at all.

- Sometimes think of going through all setting and shutting down the account to close friends.

- Google your name and you find so much. Scary.

- Linked in is the same.

- Borderline personal boundaries and legal issues.

- I barely know how it works – and I can’t explain it.

- Double-sided thing. If it is cool then I like it. If not, then no.

- The choice is mine.

-

- Has become aware of activities

- Prefers to be a silent reader

- He does not like it.

- It is too much

- Believes that there should be a public and unpublic part.

Appendix 4 – Summary of expert interview

Themes:

1) Problems with the use of social media in businesses:

- Professionals handle the communication:

o They do not have the same passion for the business as customers,

owners and other primary stakeholders.

o It becomes obvious on social media platforms that the companies do

not take the communication seriously by outsourcing this type of

communication.

o The communication does not appear honest.

- The mindset and tone of the people communicating does not always correlate

with the audience.

o The marketing professionals may not be able to communicate with

the young consumers.

- Facebook did not offer the e-commerce possibilities that were expected.

o Disappointing entry to the stock exchange.

o The ads on Facebook are unstructured and seemingly not effective.

o The value of Facebook is difficult to quantify due to the weak ads-

services and the problems with defining the value in the high

numbers as users.

2) Ways of communicating:

- SMS and e-mail activity is reducing for the first time since its launch.

o Transaction - communication

o Alternative communication forms

o Imessage - which is free

o The static nature of emails and SMS

- The flow-based communication on Facebook, Twitter and Imessage. (threads of

communication)

- Context awareness is important.

o Push the relevant information according to interests of the consumer.

3) Media

- Earned, owned and paid media

o Paid = buying access to a certain media, add or platform.

o Owned = the business owns communication

o Earned = Business earns positive communication such a good

reviews from consumers.

4) Opportunities for corporate of Facebook

- Monitor the satisfaction of the consumers

- Achieve dialogue with consumers

- Social intelligence – Analyze the information and data

- Monitor competitors

- Crisis management

- Customer support

- Market research

- Marketing measurement – the effects of a campaign

5) Social intelligence

- Is a part of the concept business intelligence

- Keep track of how consumers communicate about your company and other

competitors.

- Monitor communication and create new business ideas.

- Crisis handling / communication

6) Preferred form of communication in each generation:

- SMS

- Email

- Facebook

o Those who use Facebook now, will continue to do so (or other similar

types of social media).

o The younger generation will possibly be using the next development

within communication.

Question and answers:

1) Should all business be on Facebook?

- Not necessarily. It depends on the type of business. If your business deals with

the end-users then yes, this is where the customers are.

- B2B should not necessarily be on Facebook. He believes other more professional

Twitter/Facebook-networks for B2B organization will develop .

2) Which are the typical pitfalls when companies enter Facebook?

- Dishonest communication

- Ignoring communication and prevailing issues.

- Companies might not communicate effectively and efficiently on the site and

therefore not control the communication. Other might take charge of the

communication.

- Companies might not have resources to maintain the social media site.

3) Frictionless sharing – will it affect the users’ behavior?

- It is a problem!

He expects Facebook to experience a serious backlash. ‘

- He believes the hype-quote of Facebook will stagnate – due to frictionless

sharing and the waste of time that a lot of the Facebook activities actually are.

-

- The ownership issues with Facebook could also contribute to a backlash.

4) It is argued that it is possible to engage in dialogue with consumers – What

motivates people to engage?

- Consumers that are passionate about the products will be motivated to engage

o There is a risk of the communication becoming unilateral.

5) It is possible to get to know your consumers via social media?

- The representation of people and their likes, dislikes and interest is not

necessarily honest, the practitioner should therefore regulate for this in the

social intelligence analysis.

6) How should success of corporate Facebook site be measured?

- Traffic, response and dialogue

- Transform the communication and traffic to social intelligence

7) How do you see the future of social media / Facebook?

- It is the new way of communicating – flow based communication.

- Shift in communication paradigm – from transaction to flow based.

- Facebook is the market leader:

o More site will appear – competitors such as Google +.

o Google could crack the code for how to get people on their site and then

become a huge competitor to Facebook.

Appendix 5 – Translated passages from expert interview

Preben: #00:00:26-8# Back in the old days, it was possible to employ professional to

handle the marketing activities and companies were not in direct contact with the

consumers. In reality, it is immediately visible, if products marketing for young people

are pushed and communicated by older marketing fools, who do not speak the

language of the young people.

Preben: #00:00:55-9# Authenticity, sincerity, communicating in the same tone and

being in the same mindset as the receivers are classical mistakes.

Preben: #00:03:03-1# What is happening, is that the way we communicate has

changed. Facebook and Twitter is an essential part of this development. The two

previously preferred digital forms of communication are now on retreat. The first one

is SMS, which development for the first time has stagnated and reduced in use. For 25

years it has been growing, however for the first time in the development of SMS it is

falling, because people are discovering other ways of communicating. These are to too

some extent Twitter and Facebook. But also the new IOS5 with.... what is it called?

Line: #00:03:56-5# Imessage?

Preben: #00:03:57-3# Yes. Imessage is a problem for SMS, as it works well and is

costfree. So this means alternative communication forms. This means that Facebook

should not feel home safe, as this is another communication form on the side.

Preben: #00:04:29-6# Mail is also on retreat, because of services such as Imessage,

but also because every mail represents a specific image in time. You need to go

through five previous emails chronologically, in order to get an overview of a

situation. Whereas with flow based communication, it is possible to get an instant

overview.

Preben: #00:05:24-3# This means that the way we communicate is changing toward

being flow-based. It is possible to exit the communication and then return to the same

thread and pick up where you left off. This links to Facebook and Twitter.

Preben: #00:05:54-7# Another development that is possible on Facebook, Twitter

and other social media, is that of being context aware. If companies wish for success in

the future, they should focus on pushing the relevant information to relevant

consumer.

Preben: #00:06:39-0# Flow based communication and context awareness are

aspects that affect the traditional transaction based forms of communication.

Preben: #00:09:39-7# The next hot movement is something called Social

Intelligence. The data from social media is analyzed to obtain different kind of

information, such as monitoring competitors.

Preben: #00:11:00-5# It is about monitoring competitors and analyze the data.

Social Intelligence is a variant of Business Intelligence where companies follow what

is communicated about them and their competitors. This can generate new ideas.

Additionally, it can be used for crisis management.

Line: #00:17:50-6# Which are the common pitfalls in corporate social media use?

Preben: #00:17:57-2# Fake and mock communication. Attempts to suppress and

ignore problems. If we don't do anything, it will disappear on its own. But it will not. If

it is bad enough, it will not disappear. Back in the old days, a politician ones said that a

man’s memory is only fourteen days. This means that despite the severity of a

situation, it would blow over after fourteen days. Nowadays, it is more problematic, as

the issues will continue to live.

Preben: #00:19:10-8# Another common pitfall in corporate social media, is

forgetting to nurture and maintain the social media site. It is important to answer the

people that communicate with the company on the site. If the company ignores the

communication, then others will take control and it could go in a negative direction. It

is also a pitfall, when the site is not updated with relevant input and when problem

are not caught and dealt with in time.

Preben: #00:19:31-3# That of not allocating resources to maintain the site is another

classic pitfall.

Preben: #00:20:34-6# I believe Facebook is leaning towards a serious backlash.

Facebook has been through insane growth. We return to the notion that if you are not

on Facebook you are dead. All of a sudden, people will realize that it is not all that

great spending four hours on Facebook talking to people that they do not really care

about. It is nice to meet an old classmate, but then you spend half your time talking to

these people about useless things.

Preben: #00:21:04-0# Another aspect is that of involuntary publication. If I had a

weakness for country music and I wanted it to be a secret. Then it is annoying to find

the my playlist is published.

Preben: #00:22:24-8# All of this (frictionless sharing and geotags) are the reason

why the use Facebook will flatten and why I believe people will reevaluate their time

spent on Facebook

Line: #00:22:35-3# Do you believe the users' behavior will change?

Preben: #00:22:40-8# We always go through a certain hype quote where people

cannot take their arms down. Facebook is now sliding down the hype quote, which

unfortunately clashes with their entry on the stock exchange. This means that

Facebook will experience a backlash in use and activity. People will either leave

Facebook or use it more sensibly time wise.

Preben: #00:24:26-9# Each generation have its preferred communication forms. A

research at the Copenhagen university proved that the generation that was raised

along with the use of SMS, were more prone to use SMS than the generations before

and after. Meaning that the next generation have its preferred communication form.

Preben: #00:31:55-2# The headline is Social Intelligence, which is a part of Business

Intelligence. It is used for crisis management, customer support, market research and

marketing measurement.

Appendix 6 – Transcripts of interview 1: Sandra

1 June // 40 minutes

#00:00:00-0# Interviewer: Okay. First of all, what we are going to do is that we're gonna ask

you a bunch of questions about your use of Facebook and we will use it for our master thesis, so

this data will be transcribed and analyzed. So are you okay with this?

#00:00:20-3# Respondent: Yes.

#00:00:20-5# Interviewer: Okay.

#00:00:21-1# Respondent: I am.

#00:00:22-1# Interviewer: Then after the interview, I will explain to you our problem

statement of our master thesis and our main hypothesis, so know exactly what we will use it for,

but I will wait until after we complete the interview.

#00:00:35-4# Respondent: Okay.

#00:00:35-3# Interviewer: Okay


#00:00:36-4# Interviewer: First of all, we will like you to log on to your Facebook profile…

Okay, uhm.

#00:00:54-5# Respondent: Yes, I'm in.

#00:00:56-7# Interviewer: What, uhm. The reason why we have asked you to log on is

because we, you, we will ask you to check some information during the interview, but also the

computer is here for you to, uhm, if you need help during the interview, then you can find, you

you you can access Facebook and look for information if you need to. So it's not expected of you

to look all the time, but it's just in case there are things you not remember or you were not sure,

then you can look. So it's just here as a help.


#00:01:30-6# Interviewer: Uhm. Can you try to describe to us, how you use Facebook in your

everyday life?

#00:01:35-6# Respondent: Uhm, I use it mainly for keeping in touch with friends, especially

friends who might not be in the near area. Uhm, and then I use it for, uhm, arranging meetings

or social social events with near friends. Uhm, yeah and then maybe stalking people you don't

talk to that much as well. So mainly, i guess, yeah for social benefits.

#00:02:10-4# Interviewer: So that is why you have Facebook profile?

#00:02:10-6# Respondent: Yeah, also because if I wasn't on Facebook I would loose out on

information. So, yeah, it's also a practical thing I guess.

#00:02:19-3# Interviewer: Uhm, how often do you enter you Facebook profile?

#00:02:23-3# Respondent: Uhm, very often. Uhm, every day. A lot of times during the day as

well. Uhm, since I'm a student I sit by the computer a lot. So it's often when you need to have

mental break you go on Facebook, and I have Facebook on my phone as well. So I check it a lot if

I'm waiting for the bus or just, uhm, I'm bored I just check my phone. So approximately at least

ten times a day I think.


#00:02:54-0# Respondent: A lot.

#00:02:53-9# Interviewer: So you can confirm that you do own a smartphone and you do

enter Facebook through, vi, via this...


#00:03:02-5# Interviewer: Smartphone daily?

#00:03:03-0# Respondent Yes.

#00:03:22-6# Interviewer: Okay, so what is the main reason, if you can try to explain, what is

the main reason why you enter Facebook daily?

#00:03:12-9# Respondent Uhm. Yeah, that's difficult, but just you know, it's just it's more of a

habit I guess because whenever you check your email you check Facebook because the same

sort of information you would get uhm of events and uhm, yeah offers and friends, uhm friends

stating things and sending you things like links or something, you get that on Facebook as well.

So I wouldn't check my email without checking Facebook, because for me that's the same ...


#00:03:40-9# Respondent.. sort of access of information I guess.

#00:03:42-9# Interviewer: So it's like a second inbox for you?

#00:03:46-0# Respondent Yeah it is.

#00:03:47-5# Interviewer: Yeah, okay. Uhm.

#00:03:57-0# Interviewer: So uhm, since you you your initial registration uhm, have you

noticed that you're use and.. that you're use of Facebook has changed in the way that you use it.

#00:04:12-5# Respondent: Yes, actually. In the beginning I was very hands on with Facebook,

you know. I think you didn't exactly understand what it could lead to. So in the beginning you

know you would comment on everything and link to everything and, you know, add all kinds of

people because it was fun it was new and exciting, but now it's, I mean, I mainly stay in contact

with the same, I don't know, ten or fifteen people on Facebook. It's a small group of people and

actually mostly the people I talk to the most, you know, over texting or email or meeting in

person anyway. That's the same people I stay in contact with on Facebook.


#00:05:00-5# Respondent: So yeah, I think that...Uhm.

#00:05:02-9# Interviewer: You've narrowed it down?

#00:05:04-7# Respondent: I've narrowed it down a lot, I mean I still have, I haven't deleted

any friends. I haven't, you know, done the spring cleaning of my friends as some people do, but I

still think that I it's very limited the range of contact I use Facebook for, uhm, compared to in

the beginning where you just would contact people you haven't talk to in a while and just

because they are on Facebook, suddenly you can see okay how are you doing, I haven't spoken

to you in two years, uhm, which would be something I would never do now. Just because people

are on Facebook, doesn't mean that now we have an excuse to get in touch. So… I don't do that

anymore.


#00:05:42-8# Respondent: Yeah.

#00:05:43-2# Interviewer: You said, uhm, before because in the beginning you didn't know

what it could lead to. Could you maybe elaborate on that?

#00:05:51-3# Respondent: Yeah, I think it's the whole idea in the beginning you would see

that people, some people that you haven't spoken to in a long time, uhm, would contact you or

request you friendship, then you would say think that "oh here is an opportunity to, you know,

catch up on old times". And you would take that opportunity and and reply the message. But

now if somebody want to do that I would say, I would think "well I don't need that, because

there is a reason why we haven't spoken in two years, that's because we don't have that much

to talk about". So just because we're on Facebook doesn't mean that we have something in

common to talk about.

#00:06:30-2# Interviewer: Nej ja.

#00:06:31-0# Respondent: So yeah.

#00:06:31-6# Interviewer: Okay. Great. Okay, uhm. Now we're going to move on to corporate

Facebook sites.


#00:06:45-5# Interviewer: Uhm, so can you please look at your Facebook profile. Uhm. If

possible, can you tell us what is the last corporate site that you have uhm liked?

#00:06:55-3# Respondent: I have liked. Uhm.

#00:06:55-7# Interviewer: Just take your time.

#00:06:58-5# Second interviewer: And with corporate sites we mean, uhm,

#00:07:01-6# Respondent: Companies?

#00:07:03-1# Second interviewer: Yes. Not music artists or actors and stuff like that. Specific

companies that sell something.

#00:07:11-4# Interviewer: Business organizations.

#00:07:13-2# Respondent: I think that goes way back actually.

#00:07:26-3# Second interviewer: I think you can see under your...

#00:07:29-1# Respondent: I think this is probably. Maybe this one. Does a TV show counts?

#00:07:39-0# Interviewer: No.

#00:07:42-9# Respondent: Because I think it’s the last one. Otherwise it's Vero Moda.


#00:07:46-7# Respondent: Uhm, the clothing company. And I think that's. That was around

the time where there was a competition where you could win stuff. So I think that's at least

three or four months ago. Because I didn't win.

#00:08:00-5# Interviewer: Okay, so Vero Moda. Clothing company, uhm and, so the reason for

liking this site, what was that?

#00:08:16-6# Respondent: Uhm. Let me just think. There was a competition I think. I saw that

one of my friends liked, she is always very hands on with the all the competitions. So she liked

the site, I think, I think you could win like a big clothing budget to empty a store or something

and I thought that could be fun. Uhm, so I liked the site and participated in the in the

competition.

#00:08:51-2# Interviewer: So your friend told you about the competition and therefore you

liked the site?

#00:08:53-3# Respondent: Well, my newsfeed told me that she liked competition and I

thought "what it this" I clicked on it and I could see that you could win a lot of clothing and I

thought why not.


#00:09:03-4# Respondent: I spend a lot of money there anyway. So yeah.


#00:09:07-4# Respondent: And it was, you know, a company that I like, so I wouldn't feel bad

if people could see I liked the company. So if it is a company I didn't know of I would probably

not like it.



#00:09:18-4# Interviewer: Okay yes. Uhm, if you look at your Facebook newsfeed for the last

three days or so, can you tell us a little bit about what dominates the picture?

#00:09:31-5# Respondent: Should I look at it or?

#00:09:33-4# Interviewer: Yeah, just go through it, like three or four days back.

#00:09:38-2# Respondent: Uhm, well mostly, it's I think...

#00:09:42-3# Interviewer: You can just take your time maybe if you want to just make sure

that you have looked through everything.

#00:09:45-3# Second interviewer: Because three days is a long time.

#00:09:49-3# Respondent: Well, actually the other day I noticed that.. I was checking

Facebook on my phone and I noticed that more people are... people are getting better at

uploading photos together with their statuses. Uhm, I think the past three days people have

uploaded pictures of, uhm, master thesis. Because a lot my fellow students have handed in their

thesis. So that's been a lot. Also a lot of my former colleagues the past three days has updated a

lot in the, uhm, the final debate in the Danish parliament. So that's also taken up a lot. I'm

friends with a few politicians, so they take up a lot of room. Uhm. Otherwise, it's .. yeah.

#00:10:40-8# Interviewer: Okay. So pictures and..

#00:10:43-6# Respondent: Pictures mostly yeah.

#00:10:45-2# Interviewer: Master thesis updates and updates on a specific political subject.

Yeah, anything else?.

#00:10:54-5# Respondent: No, not that comes like uhm.. that's anything more different that

usual.

#00:11:01-1# Interviewer: Okay. Nothing pops out?

#00:11:02-9# Respondent: No because some people also update about the same thing, so you

just scroll down and I don't care.

#00:11:06-8# Interviewer: Yeah.

#00:11:08-6# Respondent: So yeah. So no, nothing new in that sort. And now, okay we're still

on day one. Maybe I should get fewer friends.

#00:11:17-2# Interviewer: Yeah, you can just have a look.

#00:11:19-5# Respondent: Yeah, but it's actually a lot about the thesis. Oh and kids, but that

hasn't been that bad.

#00:11:31-7# Interviewer: But you notice a couple of babies,?

#00:11:36-0# Respondent: A few babies yeah. Okay, still day one. Uhm. Oh and links to music

videos. There has also been quite a few the past few days I think. But yeah, it's mostly been..


#00:12:02-2# Respondent: There is this updated this cover picture. She got tagged in the

photo. So very like random stuff. Oh and more kids.

#00:12:09-3# Interviewer: I'm going to ask you to raise your voice just a little bit, just for our

speakers, but otherwise everything is perfect. Okay. Well I think that's that's okay. Uhm.

#00:12:24-2# Respondent: Oh and food

#00:12:27-7# Interviewer: Yes. food?

#00:12:28-6# Respondent: Food. People upload picture of food.

#00:12:30-4# Interviewer: Okay. Uhm. Okay. Can you remember according to your an

unsuccessful Facebook, uhm, corporate Facebook site? Just at the top of your head.

#00:12:47-8# Respondent: Well yes. I'm a member of.. I became a member of Menucard

Menukort, I guess. Which the project or the initiative was actually quite good but their status

updates or their mail posting or mails that they sent to me are full of like mistakes like spelling

mistakes, and when it comes to that I'm a very big spelling geek. It really annoys me when

people don't spell correctly.


#00:13:17-9# Respondent: So that annoyed me and I don't think I'm following them anymore

actually. Because I got annoyed.



#00:13:26-1# Interviewer: Uhm, so which parameters do you consider important when

evaluating a corporate Facebook site to be successful or unsuccessful?

#00:13:34-2# Respondent: On Facebook, the site on facebook?

#00:13:35-3# Interviewer: Yeah, sorry on Facebook.

#00:13:36-4# Respondent: Uhm. Well. That, uhm. Well first of all that they don't spam me. I

hate when they spam me. I mean, I have, I'm following the Economist the magazine on

Facebook, and they put out, it's so obvious that they're like in the states. And whenever they

wake up in the morning they put like ten articles out. So I have, every time, we're what.. six nine

hours ahead, so whenever it's like in the afternoon I get like ten articles in my newsfeed. But

because it's actually something interesting at times, I don't un-follow, but uhm, if it was a

company like a clothing company or some any other company, that couldn't, was only

advertising for products or something, I would un-follow immediately. But they actually have

some good articles, so I don't. But otherwise I really don't approve of having my whole news

feed spammed, because I only check Facebook for, you know, catching up with friends, so that's

annoying. But otherwise I like, uhm, I like it when they have, you know, like if it's a clothing

company that they put up pictures of the latest collections, so you don't have to visit their

website or if you, well, yeah if you get like say you're a Facebook member, okay so you get

maybe some good discounts the next time you visit there or something like that. So you get

some special membership benefits for just being a member. But otherwise I don't look at the

site that much, only if it pops up in my newsfeed. I don't actively go into see the companies I

like.

#00:15:16-1# Interviewer: Alright.

#00:15:17-0# Respondent: Unless they pop up. Because I forget. And something I think

Facebook does this weird thing that if you mention the company, suddenly you like it or

something. Because there is stuff in there on my profile it says I like, and never pressed on, or at

least I don't think I have. Uhm.


#00:15:36-7# Respondent: I don't know. Maybe it's me who forgot.

#00:15:36-4# Interviewer: So if I can just sum up you, uhm, you you like you like when there

are competitions and like benefits to gain. Like extrinsic benefits such as competitions and..

#00:15:55-5# Respondent: Yeah, I'm more like. I actually like the news the best. Like they say

"oh we have this in stores now"..


#00:16:02-2# Respondent: Get the latest collections or..

#00:16:04-4# Interviewer: So the news updates?

#00:16:05-9# Respondent: Yeah. Or say this Saturday we have this guy playing at our

restaurant or..

#00:16:13-2# Interviewer: Yeah

#00:16:12-8# Respondent: On Saturday you get two for one drinks or something. But not, you

know, all those press like to this competition and have a, you know, be a part of our lottery or

something. I don't like that.

#00:16:24-6# Interviewer: You don't like that. Okay.

#00:16:26-2# Respondent: Say we have thing competition. Be in or be out.

#00:16:30-9# Interviewer: Okay, so frequency should also be.. so how do you feel about

frequency of updates?

#00:16:37-5# Respondent: Well not too often.

#00:16:39-2# Interviewer: Not too often,

#00:16:40-4# Respondent: Not every day if, but just you know, once in a while, uhm, it's

because I don't like that many companies on Facebook, so mostly I'm thinking about clothing

companies, I think they are the main ones I like. Uhm, if they have like new jewelry or a new bag

or something that they say "It's almost sold out, it’s been very popular, hurry down to the store"

I would take notices of that rather then "do you want to win a new bag?" Like, yeah.

#00:17:08-9# Interviewer: So okay, yeah.

#00:17:10-9# Respondent: If that makes sense.

#00:17:12-7# Interviewer: So umh, you said that, if I'm correct you liked that you wouldn't

have to enter the company's homepage, you know website. So if the Facebook page acts like an

extension of the website. Do you feel that you don't have to go beyond to look for further

information. That would also to you..?

#00:17:34-9# Respondent: Yeah, i mean if we take the example of Vero Moda. If they posted

something on my newsfeed, like say, uh, this is the latest collection for example. That would be

something I might actively seek on their website thinking okay now it's time for new collections,

what do they have. But if they put that on my news feed I would be happy, because I would

think this is what I would search for anyway.


#00:18:02-1# Respondent: So, now I don't have to.

#00:18:03-4# Interviewer: Yeah, okay.

#00:18:03-7# Respondent: So that would make me happy. But only if it's something I would

search for myself. Because they save me some some time by posting it for it. But not if it's like,

yeah I don't know, like ten percent off. I don't know, I would actually react to that. But if it was

like the restaurant company Menucard. If they kept like posting, you know, random discounts at

restaurants I wouldn't eat at for example, or never thought about eating at, I would consider it

spam. But if it's a company like Vero Moda where I actually buy their clothes and are interested

in their new collections I would not find it..


#00:18:44-1# Respondent:.. annoying.

#00:18:45-4# Second interviewer: You said that you don't follow a lot of corporate sites.

#00:18:50-3# Respondent: Yeah, I can see that here.

#00:18:52-6# Second interviewer: Yeah. do you have any idea why you don't?

#00:18:55-3# Respondent: I think it's because I'm afraid their are going to spam me. I can

actually see that I.. 2012 I haven't liked any corporate sites. Umh..

#00:19:10-5# Interviewer: That's six months now.

#00:19:10-8# Respondent: And in 2011 I liked three four, and they are all clothing companies.

Except for one, which is some kind of drink that I've never tasted, so probably it was a

competition. But they don't spam me so I don't know if I follow them.


#00:19:32-2# Respondent: Uhm, yeah. It's mostly music. Apparently I like Starbucks. Yep,

that's it.


#00:19:49-6# Respondent: That's actually six seven or eight corporate sites. So that's not that

much. And mostly clothing companies.

#00:19:58-2# Interviewer: Okay. Uhm, have you ever made an official complaint to a company

through Facebook?

#00:20:07-1# Respondent: An official complaint through Facebook. Uhm, no no.

#00:20:11-9# Interviewer: Do you, do you if there is, is there a specific reason why not?

#00:20:17-8# Respondent: I guess I haven't been bothered enough. Uhm, I don't know, I'm

more of a, if I don't like it I won't buy your crap. So i mean, no. Not unless I felt very offended

and if I did I think I would call them or write an official email and I wouldn't do it through

Facebook.

#00:20:36-1# Interviewer: Okay. So where would you normally make a complaint to a

company then?

#00:20:40-5# Respondent: Uhm, I would go on their website, find their contact phone.

#00:20:45-7# Interviewer: So email or?

#00:20:47-0# Respondent: Email or phone.

#00:20:48-0# Interviewer: Have you ever made a complaint, an official complaint to a

company?

#00:20:51-1# Respondent: Uhm, no no. Actually, no. Not unless I had them on the phone

saying "okay why can't to give me this, this is too this is not good enough". Unless there was a

reason why I was talking to them. But otherwise no, never been so angry. But I have friends who

wrote like the Danish football association, because he didn't like the new song for the European

championship and I just laughed at him saying "you are crazy". I would never do that. Uhm so

yeah. But he did it the official way as well.

#00:21:32-8# Interviewer: Okay. So you.. could you ever see yourself making an official

complaint using Facebook and not email or telephone.

#00:21:42-8# Respondent: Uhm, I think it depends on what kind of company. I mean if I was,

if I was to complain about a company that is very present like on social media and has their

brand as being a social media wiz or something, I would consider it because that would be the

way to contact them. Uhm, but I think, to be honest, I would do it through another, I would do it

via Twitter instead.


#00:22:10-2# Respondent: Because I mean, I think it would be because if I had a complaint

and don't want to look to my friends as being oh she's a, you know, a nag-head. Uhm, so I would

do it through Twitter just to make sure that it was only strangers who saw it, because I don't

have that many of my friends on Twitter. So I would be like, everybody has to know have bad

they are, but my friends doesn't have to know that I posted this.


#00:22:31-9# Respondent: I don't know if that makes sense.

#00:22:31-9# Interviewer: It does.

#00:22:33-8# Respondent: I don't want to appear to be like you know, oh she's the bitch. She

complains about everything like, so I would complain in a different..

#00:22:42-0# Interviewer: So is it like, the lack of anonymity that you experience on Facebook

that would make you...

#00:22:47-6# Respondent: Yeah, I hate… I actually don't like that whenever I just like

something or uhm… press.. uhm I'm participating in this and that event, I always go to my

profile and delete it. Because I don't want people.. I mean I have maybe five hundreds friends on

Facebook and I don't want.. I don't know.. 490 of them to know where I'm going this Thursday. I

never post like "uuh I'm going to wherever, India on Thursday or something". I try not to do

that. Sometimes I can't help it. Because there are people on there I don't, I mean they don't care

and I don't want them to care. So, I don't want them to know.


#00:23:27-0# Respondent: So I see, I don't see Facebook as that private or I try not to keep it

too public, I see it as very private. But I don't want to erase friends, because it is still a network

opportunity so, I mean the friends who knows what I'm doing when, are the persons or the

people who are supposed to know.


#00:23:46-8# Respondent: So I don't have to blurt it out.


#00:23:49-0# Respondent: It's the same with liking like corporate. I don't like corporate sites,

uhm, because on Facebook because I know it’s going to appear and if I do it to enter a

competition just to win, I will delete it on my..

#00:24:04-9# Interviewer: You remove from your..

#00:24:06-7# Respondent: Newsfeed

#00:24:06-7# Interviewer: Timeline, yeah okay.


#00:24:08-3# Interviewer: So have you ever made recommendations or suggestions to a

company regarding a product or service through or via Facebook?

#00:24:21-0# Respondent: Uhm, once. But I think that was actually something they wanted

us.. I think it was part of the competition as well. Something like how would you wear this outfit.

And I said, i don't know, it was something about a sailor outfit. I said I would were it on a yacht,

because it was a sailor outfit. I wanted to win. But otherwise I have never done that no.

#00:24:40-5# Interviewer: Okay, so uhm. The answer is no, but. Okay, the answer is yes,

because it was a requirement for a competition and besides that you have never...

#00:24:52-4# Respondent: Yes. I have never done it, how can you say, proactively.


#00:24:58-4# Respondent: I've never done it just because I wanted to.

#00:25:05-1# Interviewer: Okay, uhm. So if you could think about what could motivate you to

engage with a company through Facebook let's say more proactively. Uhm. Do you..

#00:25:21-4# Respondent: I think, if it was a company that seems to be very open-minded

and seems to be very open to suggestions and not too.. If they appeared to only present on

Facebook because, you know, we're here because everybody else is and we have an agenda or a

motive, which involves profit, and of course every company has profit as their main motive, but

if it appears to be more interactive then I would feel more allowed to make my suggestions, if

that makes sense. Because sometimes I think I don't.. I don't contact companies because you feel

that contacting companies it's like hitting wall.


#00:26:10-3# Respondent: There is no access. And they don't, they get all these emails and

they really don't care, they just answer you in reply to be polite and not to make anybody

unsatisfied. So if the company appeared to be vey open-minded towards suggestions and be

very interactive with their consumers, then maybe I could consider it, but only if I had

something brilliant to say, not just because I thought "oh don't like your website, you should

change the font or something", then I wouldn't care.

#00:26:39-0# Interviewer: Okay. So to you a very interactive and maybe to you a successful

website or Facebook page could could motivate you more to engage. However, fact is that you

have never actually done it. So why do you think that it, that you have never actually done it,

even though you know what you do like.

#00:27:04-0# Respondent: Yeah. I know, I don't know if I know what I like but I know what I

don't like. I know what I don't want them to do. But again I think that if if I don't like what they

are doing I just unfollow and just ignore them and then they don't exist. They just go on being

something that's out there, but I don't know it. I don't know if uhm.. I don't know if it would

change much for me, if they changed it anyway.


#00:27:32-6# Respondent: I mean, because on Facebook I don't… I don't go on Facebook to

check for companies. They are just there. Just happen to be there sometimes. It's not something

I go on Facebook to search for. I only search for.. even if some of my friends invite me for events,

that has become spam suddenly, which is something.. Usually if you got an invitation on an

email or uhm in your inbox, your real inbox your postbox at home. Uhm, you would be happy

and feel like "Oh yay, I got an invitation". But now it's like people are spamming you. Or you feel

like you're getting spammed with invitations and that's just, it has become so insignificant

someway somehow. So even if your friends can spam you, I think the corporate sites are just, I

don't know, noise to a certain extent, so I wouldn't bother.

#00:28:20-9# Interviewer: You wouldn't bother. You wouldn't be bothered. That's..

#00:28:25-6# Respondent: Yeah, that's like the essence. I would be bothered to make an

effort.

#00:28:26-8# Interviewer: That sentence we can put down. You just can be bothered.

#00:28:30-4# Respondent: Yeah. That very conclusive I guess

#00:28:32-0# Interviewer: Uhm, do you consider yourself as a fan of a certain brad or

company?

#00:28:44-5# Respondent: Oh dear.. Uhm. Well yes. Yeah yeah. There are companies where I

think this is so holistically integrated that I can only.. I may not approve of the brand, I may not

fit into the brand, but I can still be like a distant admirer.


#00:29:03-9# Respondent: Like Abercrombie and Fitch. I don't fit most of their clothes

anyway, but I really, I admire the brand for being so, I don't know, consistent.


#00:29:15-0# Respondent: Uhm, yeah so.

#00:29:16-1# Interviewer: So have you liked Abercrombie and Fitch Facebook page?

#00:29:21-1# Respondent: No no, I haven't actually.

#00:29:23-4# Interviewer: Do do you have any idea why not, if you were to think about it.

#00:29:29-1# Respondent: Well, again I think I don't.. you don't want to like something and

then suddenly having forgot about it and then six months later somebody posted something like

"why do you like this?" I don't know, it's, I don't want to be.. I like the brand, but I don't want to

be compared to it.


#00:29:48-2# Respondent: Like say ”oh she's an Abercrombie and Fitch girl”.

#00:29:51-8# Interviewer: Okay, so you actually like it but you don't want publicly to be

connected with it or linked with it.

#00:29:56-8# Respondent: Yeah like a distant admirer. I think Abercrombie and Fitch might

be, yeah it might not be something that I myself.. would consider myself an Abercrombie and

Fitch brand user, but uhm, there's other brands I guess. Other brands like Nike Free for

example. I could actually like Free on Facebook.

#00:30:24-5# Interviewer: Three the phone company?

#00:30:23-7# Respondent: No sorry Nike Free the shoes.

#00:30:25-0# Interviewer: Nike Free okay.

#00:30:25-5# Respondent: But that would require me just liking Nike and I wouldn't do that.

#00:30:29-9# Interviewer: So what is Nike Free?

#00:30:30-9# Respondent: That's just a pair a specific model of shoes.

#00:30:34-3# Interviewer: Of shoes, Okay. Do you own these shoes?

#00:30:36-4# Respondent: Yeah, I have a lot of pairs actually.

#00:30:38-6# Interviewer: Okay, have you liked their Facebook site?

#00:30:41-4# Respondent: No, I don't even know if they have one.


#00:30:43-3# Respondent: And I wouldn't just like Nike the whole company.

#00:30:46-4# Interviewer: Nej, why not?

#00:30:48-6# Respondent: I don't know, it’s just so, I don't know it seems random because it's

something that everybody wears anyway, so why so what would make it so special if I liked it,

so I don't care. Just yeah.

#00:30:57-9# Interviewer: Okay. So again it's because what you like on Facebook you think is

linked with you and your personality and your persona on?

#00:31:09-2# Respondent: Yeah because, I mean, we all know people stalk people on

Facebook and if somebody wer to stalk me, somebody I don't even know that well maybe

someone I haven't even met. Uhm and they see - oh she likes Nike and Abercrombie and Fitch.

Oh she's a sports girl and then he meets me and this is what he meets. And then he would say

"yeah but she doesn't use it, it just appearances you know". So I don't know, I just, I only like

things that says something about me that I want people to associate me with.

#00:31:35-8# Interviewer: Okay. Yeah. Okay Uhm have you ever commented on a brand or

company's, uhm, Facebook status? As far as you can remember?

#00:31:49-3# Respondent: Uhm. Only if it had something to do, yeah, with a competition I

think. Otherwise I wouldn't...


#00:31:59-6# Respondent: Only if I could win something. I seem.. very materialistic.

#00:32:04-4# Interviewer: If you look aside from competitions, do you think you have ever

commented on a status update from a company?

#00:32:14-4# Respondent: I think once actually I commented on an organization called

Boernefonden, because I'm a sponsor there. And they..

#00:32:22-4# Interviewer: Boernefonden...

#00:32:23-6# Respondent: Boernefonden yeah. I commented something because they had

this crisis and I was actually doing a thesis on that crisis and they said something about Oh we

have done this and this and this and I think I commented like okay well done, finally something.

Because I had been thinking why didn't they do that.

#00:32:40-5# Interviewer: Okay. Was it a critical comment or?

#00:32:42-3# Respondent: No it was like, good job, finally you are doing something active or

something. But again I didn't comment when it was, was I unhappy with the company. So they

didn't know if i was unhappy with the company.

#00:32:52-7# Interviewer: Nej...

#00:32:53-9# Respondent: Because I didn't say anything, but when they did the thing I

wanted them to do I said "Thank god" or something like that.

#00:33:01-6# Interviewer: Okay. Uhm. Have you ever shared a brand or company's status or

maybe a picture?

#00:33:10-4# Respondent: Only for competitions. Otherwise no.

#00:33:11-2# Interviewer: Okay. Only for competitions.

#00:33:12-7# Respondent: Well I don't know brand, well music I have. Like bands and.. uhm,

if it's a band I like and they have a status update saying "thank you Aarhus you were great or we

are coming to Aarhus to play", something that concerns me or could concern somebody I know..

Umh, then yeah, I would probably share it.


#00:33:34-1# Respondent: But again, it's only if it’s it’s band I really like.. Yeah..

#00:33:39-8# Interviewer: Okay. Great, okay. Umh.. Do you you use the service Spotify?

#00:33:48-1# Respondent: Umh, I'm a member, but I don't.. I used it for a while but I had, in

the beginning, but I haven't used it for I don't know, a year, no six months - eight months maybe.

#00:33:59-9# Interviewer: Okay. Uh did you use the free service on? Or..

#00:34:02-6# Respondent: Yeah.. Free service, I didn't pay. Yeah.

#00:34:04-2# Interviewer:.. the premium. Okay. Free service. Umh, why, do you know why

you haven't used it for like.. So long?

#00:34:10-6# Respondent: Umh, well actually, I only, I only used Spotify because I was

working at an office at the time, where where umm.. I worked with a guy who had very, some

very good playlists. And he said, I said can you maybe copy your playlist to me and he said "oh it

is actually on Spotify, you can just go get it". And I went and became a member and got the

playlist, umh.. But, I don't.. I just, I just download the music, I don't really care. Uhhh..

#00:34:41-9# Interviewer: Okay..

#00:34:42-1# Respondent: I just, I mean, it's weird but I, if it's Danish artists I buy them on

iTunes, but if it's foreign artists or international artists I go on Youtube, and just get the mp3.


#00:34:56-8# Respondent: (incomprehensible) into..

#00:34:57-0# Interviewer: So do you, so, can you answer like why, why do you not use it. Why

not, is it possible for you to answer why you don't use it anymore?

#00:35:07-1# Respondent: I think it's because I Iike to have, I I I get music that I put on my

phone, and I used the free service Spotify so I don't have it on my phone..


#00:35:17-3# Respondent: … and I hate that sometimes when songs are interrupted by

commercials, uuhh, and I like to uhh.. I shift uh, skip through the numbers a lot.. So I only hear

like, one third of the song, and I am on to the next..


#00:35:35-0# Respondent:.. and every time if you do that on Spotify, you get commercials all

the time so, I wouldn't' uuhh.. It's a bit of a hassle for just getting music. And for me, music is. I

can get it for free, maybe not completely legal but, yeah. I'm a small fish in a big pond, so.. I

don't.. Yeah.

#00:35:56-1# Interviewer: Okay. Okay. Thank you. Umh, what do you think about these..?

#00:36:00-7# Respondent: Well, oh maybe I should just say one more thing. I have horrible

music taste, so I don't have anything to share with people anyway. So.. I just see whats on the..

Yeah, they wouldn't take my playlist anyway I guess. So it doesn't matter.

#00:36:16-2# Interviewer: Okay.. Umh.. So you have used Spotify in the past?


#00:36:25-9# Interviewer: Umh, how do you feel about the fact that, umh.. You know, that,

okay, no wait, I will ask you this question later.


#00:36:36-7# Interviewer: Have another question. What do you think about these umh, social

readers and social video apps that are available on Facebook?

#00:36:45-4# Respondent: Umh..

#00:36:46-1# Interviewer: Do you know what I mean?

#00:36:47-0# Respondent: Yeah, yeah.. Uh, the video. The video cam, social cam, what ever it

is called, I'm not too fond of those. I don't know, I think it's again, it's sort of spam. But the social

reader, I actually kind of liked, umh. But when you press on the link, because you see an article,

maybe this person you know has good taste, or they are interested in some thing that is similar

to my interests, I I usually click on the link. But then as soon as we get to the "I want to access

your whole information" I just get bored, and I go find the subject somewhere else. I would

rather Google it, or have an article directly, so.. In the beginning I though it was a good idea, but

again once it's been there for a while, it just doesn't matter anymore, it becomes annoying.


#00:37:38-5# Respondent: So, umm, but yeah the social reader I actually kind of liked.


#00:37:42-8# Respondent: Umh, but.. Not anymore. The the videos are weird. But also, I think

in the beginning people.. It looked like everybody saw some video of a guy getting umh, a hand

job from some girl..

#00:37:58-5# Interviewer: And inappropriate video?

#00:37:59-7# Respondent: A very inappropriate video yeah, and some of the people I could

see clicking on that link, I didn't wanna know, because I am friends with my old, my old high

school teacher, I am friends with some kids, uh, from my Taekwondo, I used to teach

Taekwondo, and.. They're suppose to.. In my head they are nine years old, but now they are 16

right, so I don't need to know that they click on these kinds of links..

#00:38:24-8# Interviewer: Nej..

#00:38:25-4# Respondent: So, so one of it becomes too private, that they are watching these

videos. Even though they are funny, and it's just a video..


#00:38:32-7# Respondent:.. you just don’t want that association with your..

#00:38:35-2# Interviewer: nej..

#00:38:35-5# Respondent:.. I don't know, with my Taekwondo coach and.. Yeah. Or the

politician I work for.


#00:38:43-3# Respondent: You don't want that, no.

#00:38:45-0# Interviewer: Great, so actually, how do you feel about that most of these

activities, you know music, and videos, and articles, that they are visible to all your contacts?

How does that make you feel?

#00:38:55-2# Respondent: Umh, I go and delete it. If I clicked on a link, and it appears in my

feed, I.. if I remember to do so, I delete them.


#00:39:05-5# Respondent: Umh, unless it's something that I really find interesting, and think

okay, it's okay that people can see I've read this, and again it's it's.. If it's an article about "this is

what EU financial agreement would do to Greece" I would leave it, but if it's a I don't know

"Peter Andre and Jordan meets up again".. I would of course delete it, but, yeah again, that's

what.. What do you want people to know about you, and how do you want them to associate

you..

#00:39:39-0# Interviewer: So for them most part you find it annoying, umh.. That everything

is shared, or do you not, is it not a problem for you, it's..

#00:39:51-7# Respondent: No I liked it better, in the beginning, where you could say "okay, if

we shared this, umh.. with you network"

#00:39:57-2# Interviewer: Okay..Okay..

#00:39:58-4# Respondent: Umh, but now they've changed it, so now you do it automatically..


#00:40:01-5# Respondent: .. you have to go delete it.


#00:40:02-6# Respondent: I think that's.. I liked the other thing better, umh.. Because.. Yeah.

And some times you just, some times I can be on a website, and be like "is this getting shared to

my Facebook", and remember, no I didn't click on it via Facebook. So you get, I get completely

confused.

#00:40:20-3# Interviewer: Okay Okay. Okay, well.. I think that's about it. We don't have

anymore questions.

Appendix 7 – Transcript of interview 2: René

6 June // 35. 55 minutes

#00:00:00-0# Interviewer: Okay, umh.. Now you have logged onto your own Facebook profile

and the reason why you have done this is because umhh.. you are allowed to use this as an aid if

you need help to answer some of the questions, then you can just look in your profile and

discover information on.. so that's why we have asked you to go on Facebook

#00:00:27-2# Interviewer: First of all, can you please describe.. try to describe to us, how use

Facebook in your everyday life

#00:00:36-9# Respondent: Yes, I use Facebook every day. Umh, it has become more of a habit

every morning, during lectures, during work, in the evening. But I use it socially, to contact

friends, primarily the chat function and also I use it at work, for coordinating purposes.

#00:00:58-4# Interviewer: Okay.. So you use it socially and professionally.. Can you say that?

#00:01:07-9# Respondent: Yeah, more or less forced to actually. The previous jobs I had used

it as a way to coordinate events and communicate with people, and it is very useful for that. And

socially it’s, again, I use the chat function quite a lot. And also we have, ummh, study groups and

different groups organized around our line of study. Which is also helpful of course.


#00:01:32-9# Respondent: So actually it is also used for educational purposes


#00:01:36-6# Respondent: At least I say that to myself

#00:01:38-9# Interviewer: Yeah, okay.. Umh, can you explain to us why do you have a

Facebook profile. I know you kind of said it, but..

#00:01:50-2# Respondent: I suppose I was lured into it, more or less, in 2008 or 9. Umh, and I

think you can't do without it. Given the way our study environment is. And given the way people

generally use social media. You cannot really avoid it if you want to be in an.. And also in

connection with my studies, it's more or less expected of me to know what goes on. And I

believe you cannot know what goes on without being an active user. So, I'm more or less forced

to it if I want to continue working with communication for instance

#00:02:27-0# Interviewer: Okay, so what do you study?

#00:02:30-1# Respondent: I study corporate communication

#00:02:31-4# Interviewer: Okay. Okay.. Umh, how often do you enter your Facebook profile?

#00:02:38-3# Respondent: Actually whenever my computer is on I usually log on to Facebook.

Again for the chat function. Instead of people having to call me or text me, they can always reach

me on Facebook. But I don't use it as such.. It's not like I spend time on a news feed, or anything.

It is only if I need to contact someone, or someone needs to contact me. But, more or less,

always online.

#00:02:59-1# Interviewer: Okay, so you're saying whenever your computer is on..

#00:03:01-6# Respondent: Yes

#00:03:02-5# Interviewer: You are on your Facebook profile

#00:03:05-3# Respondent: Yes, always

#00:03:05-3# Interviewer: Okay. What is the main reason why you enter it, enter your

Facebook profile daily?

#00:03:16-7# Respondent: Not missing out on anything. I like different pages, which feed me

with information. I don't really care that much what any individuals is doing, unless they have

something unusual. But it is not to sort of, umh see what goes on with everyone I know. It’s just

to make sure that I don't miss out on any information that I really need to know. For instance,

during the exam or in relation to my job.


#00:03:46-4# Respondent: I don't like going through the news feed on an hourly basis. It

doesn't really provide me with that much useful information but you get this ability to screen it

very fast to see what is important and what is not

#00:03:59-8# Interviewer: Okay. Great. Do you own a smart phone?


#00:04:04-5# Interviewer: Do you check your Facebok profile via your smartphone?

#00:04:09-2# Respondent: Sometimes, but it works like crap. So usually no.


#00:04:13-4# Respondent: And I don't like the way they force you to update the software. I

don't like the messenger function, which pops up every time someone pokes me or anything. So

no, I tend not to use it. Also, the screen is simply too small, doesn't work that well.

#00:04:29-5# Interviewer: Okay. Ummhh, has your use of Facebook, do you think it has

changed since your original registration? On the, on the site..

#00:04:46-3# Respondent: Yeah, I tended to post more or less whatever occurred to me to

begin with. Whereas now I am very selective in what I post. Both in terms of updates, videos,

picture, whatever. So in the beginning I was very uncritical to post whatever I found was funny,

or I just needed to get of my chest. Also, I didn't care if people tagged me in pictures, and now

I'm much more aware of what I do, because I only wanna post something that I know someone

can actually use or finds funny, or.. Not that I'm drinking coffee wherever. If I do that, it is an

open invitation to join me. There always needs to be some sort of purpose. Whereas to begin

with, you just did what everybody else did. And also, they changed some of the features which

also changed my focus a bit, because you can see that every time you update something you are

more or less suckered into it. that you just agree with it, okay.. And then you have to switch it

off, and I e like that. So I have become much more aware of what I am actually involved with.

Because they keep changing the private policy. And..


#00:05:47-0# Respondent: And the way it works.. Which I don’t like. At all.

#00:05:49-8# Interviewer: Nej, okay.. So.. You.. Could you say. Correct me if I am wrong. But

could you say, that you are a Facebook user because you have to be. But, you are actually, you

do not agree with.. a lot of..

#00:06:06-4# Respondent: Exactly..I don’t like the way mr. Zuckerberg..

#00:06:07-7# Interviewer: ..the policies of the company

#00:06:09-7# Respondent: ..runs his business. And, I can't see myself not having a Facebook

account. I actually often wonder what will happen if you shut it down, completely. I know you

can, I believe there is some software that can help you do it, which delete everything. And I've

always wanted to see what would be the social consequences for doing that.. And honestly we

don't know, or I don't know anyway.. And I also have friends that have created new profiles, to

sort of leave the old one behind, to start over.


#00:06:40-5# Respondent: But it is very difficult. It is the same thing with removing friends or

relations, just the process of it and also for instance ignoring a friend request, it is also a difficult

position. For instance, what do you do when your boss does that.. Not good..


#00:06:56-1# Respondent: And again, I tend to mix it up with work.. Not that my work is full

time anyway. And it is not something I can do without. But, I imagine if I go on a full time job, I

would imagine that there are ethical issues and also social issues involved. But I can't imagine,

not being a user. Even though I want to, very often.

#00:07:20-1# Interviewer: Okay. Okay.. Could you please look at your Facebook profile. Can

you tell us, what is the last corporate site that you have liked?

#00:07:31-9# Respondent: Corporate site.. I think it was a company called DesignIt, here in

Aarhus. I applied for an internship, and I figured, why not like it to see what goes on. And before

that it was Jyske Bank. I just switched banks, so I figured that it might be interesting. And also

they had a very interesting approach to their Facebook group or page, or whatever. But I don't

do that much in liking stuff.. again I'm very selective. Because otherwise, you will tend to like

200 different things and your newsfeed just.. It's already overflowing with unuseful

information, and you will just add to that.


#00:08:09-3# Respondent: But that was the last two..

#00:08:10-3# Interviewer: So you like corporate sites, because they provide you with some

genuine information..? and useful knowledge..

#00:08:17-1# Respondent: It’s not for me to say that I like this, and I need to show my

network that I like coca cola or Carlsberg. They know that.. It needs to be something that has a

useful meaning to me. For instance, I also liked Aarhus University's page concerning the merger

between AU and ASB. They update on the process, and I can use that. Otherwise I don't like

anything really..

#00:08:44-3# Interviewer: Okay.. Okay..

#00:08:46-2# Respondent: And again I tended to that before, but then I started to see the

consequences of doing that..

#00:08:49-7# Interviewer: Yeah..

#00:08:50-5# Respondent: And that's spam overload.

#00:08:52-6# Interviewer: Okay, so the consequence of liking too many corporate sites is

spam?

#00:08:58-4# Respondent: Yeah.. 'Cause you can get the same information yourself, if you just

google it. I believe that you can get too much information, to a point where you just get

information overload from work, friends, companies, school.. And


#00:09:13-1# Respondent: It just gets mixed up, and then I think it becomes counter-

productive

#00:09:17-2# Interviewer: Yeah.. In what way?

#00:09:19-4# Respondent: Just to how to do you know that you get the right information.

even though you have screening processes you can’t go through that amount of information,

without having consequences. Then you get.. You don't have the time to study, or you get more

and more hooked on it. And I think people need to be aware of that .

#00:09:37-5# Interviewer: Okay. Interesting.. Ummh, if you look at your Facebook newsfeed,

for the last.. Let's say 3 days. If possible. Can you tell us a little about what dominates the

picture. What do you see? So you can just take maybe one minute or two, just to look and scroll

down..

#00:10:05-8# Respondent: I think I already know..To me what dominates is.. A lot of.. People

making aware of where they are and what they are doing, though pictures and of course the

status updates.. And, nine our of ten times it doesn't really concern me. Which is why I focus on

links, I focus on videos, particularly music. It is a good way of sharing music. But all the

pictures.. I mean I wasn't there, so I don't really mind. And then there is an example of this guy,

who uploads his drawings. Now it becomes interesting, because he needs, he wants feedback of

course, and I can give him that very easily.


#00:10:46-9# Respondent: And also, I look very much for things that can make me smile or

laugh.


#00:10:52-3# Respondent: Which is not a picture of cake, but perhaps a joke or a link to some

funny video, or.. (incomprehensible) And, a lot of birthdays as well..


#00:11:04-6# Respondent: Which I hope they remove at some point.. Because every day at

least five people I know has birthdays, and they all know each other. So, that is usually what is..

And again, it depends on where you are in terms of season and studies.. If you are in an exam

period, there is nothing but people complaining about the exam. If if is in the middle of summer,

it's holiday pictures.. And it really depends on the season.

#00:11:34-8# Interviewer: Okay, okay.. Can you remember, according to you, an unsuccessful

corporate Facebook site?

#00:11:45-5# Respondent: Ummh, politicians tend to delete some of their postings. Not a

good idea. And, umh, I think Danske Bank also had some issues at some point. They do it very

differently from Jyske Bank for instance. Ummh, being very impersonal whereas Jyske Bank

really, sort of, you feel like you are sitting next to a person, even though it is a cartoon character

you are talking to.

#00:12:19-0# Interviewer: Have you seen the Danske Bank Facebook site?

#00:12:21-7# Respondent: Yeah, I wanted to..To.. Give them my opinion on why I changed

from Danske Bank to Jyske Bank, but I never got that far.


#00:12:31-0# Respondent: I don't really care.. I don't engage that much on those corporate

websites, or sorry, Facebook groups or pages, because I don't want the information to come to

me. I don't need to, so I seek it out myself.

#00:12:43-2# Interviewer: Okay, but you did see the site?

#00:12:46-2# Respondent: Yeah, I believe so.

#00:12:47-7# Interviewer: Okay. And what, what about it, is it that you consider

unsuccessful?

#00:12:54-5# Respondent: I think they are good at it, in the sense that they are on Facebook

as they are in real life. And I don’t like them in real life, so I don't like them on Facebook either.

But in that sense, they do a good job. But to me it didn’t work. But I’m not really that much into

the corporate aspect of it

#00:13:13-9# Interviewer: Nej.. Okay. So, which parameters would you consider when you

evaluate a corporate Facebook site to be either unsuccessful or successful?

#00:13:26-0# Respondent: They need to be honest. If they start censoring. even the so called

trolls that are only there to annoy them, they need to be very.. very very honest and open about

how they censor, because of course they need to if they get attacked. But definitely honest and

open. You are allowed to communicate with them. And I think, they need to be present. If you

just make a Facebook group or page, and you just write information you can find on the website,

it has no usefulness at all. It should be a communication tool, so that you feel that you are in

contact with someone or whatever, that you get some feedback. And I suppose, also bring us

something new. Something that we cannot find or know by ourselves.


#00:14:17-8# Respondent: Could be competitions. Whatever suit’s the company. Make use of

social media, know that it is just not a media. Be social.

#00:14:25-9# Interviewer: Okay. Great. Ummh, have you ever blocked, un-liked or un-

friended a corporate site?

#00:14:38-1# Respondent: yeah. If they piss me off. The moment they do that, I just remove

them.

#00:14:42-7# Interviewer: Okay, Can you elaborate on that?

#00:14:45-5# Respondent: Umh, again, if they spam too much. I don't need that. And they..

Again, it’s a delicate line. It is difficult for them to, I suppose, they need to post. Because,

otherwise again, they become inactive. But too much information, and if it become irrelevant for

me.

#00:15:05-2# Interviewer: Okay, umm. So do you have an opinion on companies' frequency of

Facebook updates?

#00:15:17-1# Respondent: Ummh, I think they face a huge challenge. Because, some might

like two updates a month, other would like every hour. How do you accommodate?

#00:15:27-0# Interviewer: And what do you personally prefer?

#00:15:29-1# Respondent: Depends on the company. Lets just say, for instance, someone

posting something about music, which is an interest of mine, it could be on a daily basis. If it is

actually news. Umh, and if they challenge me with something, something unusual. I don’t mind it

coming up all the time, because it doesn’t matter if it is my friend or a company that posted it. As

long as I get some sort of benefit from it. But if it start becoming irrelevant or they start being

less creative, I don't like it really.. Sometimes you can just remove them.. Remove them from

your news feed, and not unlike them. But then again, I don't really do that much in corporate

pages..


#00:16:12-6# Respondent: And I can imagine, if you like a 100 corporate pages, it might be a

very different scenario. You might be even more critical towards what you like and you don't.

#00:16:21-1# Interviewer: Okay.. Umh, okay. Have you ever made an official complaint to a

company through Facebook?

#00:16:31-8# Respondent: Nope.

#00:16:32-4# Interviewer: No

#00:16:32-3# Respondent: I was very close, in terms of Danske Bank. But I figured, my case

might be unique. They didn't treat me very well, and it might be my view of they handled the

situation, might not be the case for a 1000 other customers. So I figured it might not be the place

to do it. But I never really experienced any product failure, or bad behavior that would piss me

off to the point that I would actually go and vent my frustration on Facebook. Because I would

probably just use an e-mail if I had something concrete. Why post it to a 100,000 people

potentially..?


#00:17:11-8# Respondent: Again, it might not be relevant for them. I don’t want to hear about

10 single cases of people, some time you can even read from what they post that it is their own

damn fault.

#00:17:22-0# Interviewer: So it’s the exposure of..?

#00:17:24-1# Respondent: The.. I mean, if you have a complaint.. Think about where you go to

complain about it, might be an isolated incident. Why, why sort of blame the entire company's

procedure or processes, because one.. I don't know, one technical glitch or their single case

might be unusual, so. I would never do that..

#00:17:44-8# Interviewer: Okay. Umh, so where do you normally make complaints to

companies?

#00:17:54-5# Respondent: Either by phone or e-mail. Preferably, by e-mail. Because you get

to explain, and you don't have to do all the face work. They can't respond immediately..

(incomprehensible), defend strategies, or anything. So you just explain the situation via e-mail.

And I think that's usually what I do.

#00:18:11-7# Interviewer: And why do you choose that medium? E-mail.

#00:18:16-3# Respondent: You got something on record basically. And, you can also use the

chat function with customer service. I use that some times. Because you usually get a lot from

what you said. And you don't get.. Umh, they do not promise you anything, they cannot live up

to. Whereas when you are on the phone, they might forget what they promised. So it is a way of

ensuring, also, for their sake, in terms of what I ask them.. So you have something concrete. And

they can answer when they have time. If, unless, in a hurry for me, then I would probably use

the phone.


#00:18:56-5# Second interviewer: Have you.. Do you often complain, if you are unsatisfied?

#00:19:00-7# Respondent: Noo, they really need to piss me off.

#00:19:02-7# Second interviewer: Okay

#00:19:03-7# Respondent: As long as they do, whatever they do, within what the law says, I

don't really care..

#00:19:09-3# Second interviewer: Okay

#00:19:10-4# Respondent: But then again, I haven't really been in a situation where they

really pissed me off.. Yet.

#00:19:16-9# Interviewer: Have you ever made an official complaint?

#00:19:21-0# Respondent: Not that I can think of. I might have thought about doing it, but

then again. You always, I always weigh sort of cost-benefit.. Okay, what do I get out if it. Do I get

anything out of it.

#00:19:29-7# Interviewer: Okay, yeah..

#00:19:31-0# Respondent: Otherwise, again, irrelevant for them and for me. So why bother?

#00:19:36-0# Interviewer: So, if we say, you have decided, "now I will make an official

complaint", then your choice of communication channel or medium, would be e-mail?

#00:19:48-2# Respondent: Most likely

#00:19:49-1# Interviewer: Okay, okay.. Umh, have you ever made recommendations or

suggestions to a company regarding a product or service, through Facebook?

#00:20:06-1# Respondent: Yeah often


#00:20:08-2# Respondent: Umh, not traditional products. Usually related to concerts and

music, and events. Perhaps even services. Not, I don't recommend a phone or a TV. Unless

someone asked for it. Umh, but but, almost on a daily basis I will recommend music to friends.

#00:20:31-8# Interviewer: Okay, umm, I think, I.. I didn't quite mean the question like that. I

mean, umm, to the company. You know, so if you have an opinion or an idea, about how they

can change a product. Have you ever, through Facebook, made suggestions, for the company?

#00:20:49-8# Respondent: No. I just went to I think it was Northside's Facebook page.

Somehow I got into that.. I don't plan to go, but I saw they posted the beer prices, and there was

a huge debate. Where I.. I was considering writing something. But then again, I figured why? I'm

not even going.


#00:21:08-1# Respondent: So, I, I dint even understand the whole debate. But it is very

seldom that I do that. I even if I had a brilliant idea, I wouldn't give it to them.

#00:21:17-5# Interviewer: Have you ever, okay, okay.. Do you remember having ever done it?

#00:21:21-7# Respondent: No..

#00:21:23-1# Interviewer: No.. Okay

#00:21:26-8# Respondent: I might have been, sort of, unaware of it. Posting something on a

friend’s comment or something like that that, that might indirectly have reached the company.

But never ever written "dear company X you should do this"

#00:21:39-5# Interviewer: Nej, okay..

#00:21:40-4# Respondent: Never

#00:21:41-4# Interviewer: Ummh.. What could motivate you to engage, ummh.. with the

company on Facebook? And by this we mean, you know, write on their wall or comment on

their status updates and etc.

#00:22:02-5# Respondent: If they challenge me. Either through recommending a page, or

competitions, or provoke me.


#00:22:11-5# Respondent: It might a scenario. Dare me to do something, or, you can win

something. Or where you as a user stand to gain something from engaging.

#00:22:21-6# Interviewer: Okay, so.. Okay.

#00:22:23-8# Respondent: Or if yeah, if they really pissed me off, with something ridiculous, I

might.. Or if someone else commenting on something, pissed me off.. I might also engage. Umh,

but again, it's just what do I get out of it. It’s a lot time you usually invest in it, and if you engage

in it one time, you usually get a response. So you have to go back.


#00:22:45-1# Respondent: I like to avoid that as much as possible, because then again, it is

just time consuming.

#00:22:51-7# Interviewer: Okay, so if you feel provoked or challenged, or if there is an actual

gain from it..

#00:23:00-6# Respondent: Yeah..

#00:23:00-8# Interviewer: Like an, en extrinsic reward?

#00:23:03-8# Respondent: Yeah

#00:23:04-3# Interviewer: Could you say that?

#00:23:04-8# Respondent: Yeah, I suppose you could argue that if you are really engaged, it

might open some doors somewhere. But you don't know that. So I really need to know, that I.. I

don't know, if the first 1000 people liking something or commenting on something, they get a

chance to win whatever. That would probably.. Because it doesn't require that much time from

my perspective. And I stand to win something or have a chance.. Unless it is completely

unrealistic. If it's a 100,000 I would never do that.


#00:23:34-5# Respondent: Because.. Because it usually involves you posting something, on

your wall. Or provoking your friends to like it, or something. If there is a 100,000 people I do not

stand a chance anyway

#00:23:46-4# Interviewer: Okay. Alright.. This is maybe a tricky question. But maybe you can

answer it. Do you consider yourself as a fan of a certain brand or company? You can take a

minute to think about it..

#00:24:07-8# Respondent: Some brand or company.. Klubben.

#00:24:11-2# Interviewer: Yes..

#00:24:14-5# Respondent: Brand.. huh, I don't think I'm.. I'm not passionate about it..

anything. I would like to not be. I don't like to de dictated or.. Umh, for instance the whole Apple

scenario. I can never imagine being passionate about Apple. I don't care what.. It's just HTC, I

don't care. Could have said anything else. I'm much more.. You know..My focus on the functional

aspect. I don't care what name it is.


#00:24:41-4# Respondent: So I'm not that huge brand fan, as such..

#00:24:46-0# Interviewer: Okay, umh.. Okay, uhh. Have you ever commented on a brand or

company's Facebook status?

#00:24:59-8# Respondent: Not that I can think of. Might have liked something. But.. No. I tend

to get the feeling that you just drown in those 200 comments that are already there. So why

bother?

#00:25:18-1# Interviewer: Okay, why bother?

#00:25:20-6# Respondent: Unless it’s it’s, very small company perhaps, and you can see there

are only 10 people discussing everything or.. Where you actually feel that someone might read

this. And it’s not just buried in 200 comments.

#00:25:36-9# Interviewer: Yeah.. But you don't remember having..


#00:25:41-3# Interviewer: ..actually done it. Okay, it’s okay. Umh, have you ever shared a

company's status update or a picture or similar activities? Have you ever shared a company's

activity on your wall?

#00:25:59-3# Respondent: Uhuum, if you consider, I don't know, if you consider a company or

an organization, but Communication forum usually post interesting stuff from my point of view,

I like to share that sometimes. But usually, it's not, it's not product oriented or a new service

they provide. It's usually something not directly connected to the company, something funny or

interesting or thought provoking. That I like to share. That I don't really care who posted it..


#00:26:25-4# Respondent: Could be a friend, could be anyone. Could be something I found

(incomprehensible)


#00:26:28-9# Respondent: So it's not really the company as such I relate it to, it's more what

they say. Umh..


#00:26:34-4# Respondent: It's not like, I don't know, some clothing company having, I don't

know.. Buy five, pay for three. Something like that I would never, really, post..

#00:26:44-5# Interviewer: Nej, okay..

#00:26:45-0# Respondent: Might send it to someone specifically, if I knew someone had to

find an apartment or a given product at a cheap price, or something. If I could remember

something like that I might send it directly, but I don't post stuff, as such.

#00:26:58-9# Interviewer: Nej, okay.. Well we actually, like.. I think I will just elaborate. I

mean, if you are on a corporate Facebook site, and they have a status update, or a picture. You

know, have you ever re-posted?

#00:27:14-6# Respondent: Very seldom that I do.


#00:27:17-0# Respondent: I can't really see why I would do.. I think.. Again, what do I get out

of it?


#00:27:25-9# Respondent: You might say it says something about me, but but.. Very seldom

that I do.

#00:27:30-6# Interviewer: Okay. Uuummh, have ever noticed one or more of your Facebook

friends having commented on a company's status update?

#00:27:47-6# Respondent: Yeah, on a daily basis

#00:27:48-9# Interviewer: On a daily basis?

#00:27:50-0# Respondent: Again, it changes from when I originally joined Facebook. Because

they now have this.. I don't know what they call it.. Friends feed, in in in the top right corner,

where you can see what other people do


#00:28:02-3# Respondent: And and, if I can see if they like something I can see what, or

comment on something, I can see that even though I have nothing to do with it, or don't know

what goes on..

#00:28:09-5# Interviewer: Okay, so you have also noticed them sharing status updates and

pictures, and links..


#00:28:16-9# Interviewer: Okay, so having noticed this. Did these updates, have they ever

spiked your interest for a specific company?

#00:28:31-2# Respondent: Only if they provide something unusual, or I don't know the

company


#00:28:35-6# Respondent: And I can see there is a lot of activity. If more people start to join

the conversation. And it reappears on my news feed. But.. Again, it really has be something out

of the ordinary.

#00:28:47-2# Interviewer: Out of the ordinary, okay. But if it was like, a lot of traffic, and it

reappeared.. Then..

#00:28:53-5# Respondent: Yeah, if you can see there is a lot of hype or fuss about it, you tend

to see what goes on

#00:28:58-1# Interviewer: Okay, great. Umh, do you use the service Spotify?

#00:29:04-1# Respondent: Not yet


#00:29:06-4# Respondent: Umh, I mainly use different radio stations and Youtube actually,

for music purposes.

#00:29:15-4# Interviewer: Okay. Umh, is there a reason why you do not use Spotify?

#00:29:20-7# Respondent: To be honest, I don't know much about it. As far as I understand,

it's some sort of music service, where you get free access, or you can buy premium access or

something like that. Usually, I don't have that great experience with these services. They contain

a lot of music, just not a lot of music I like. Soo, for me it's never really caught my attention.


#00:29:43-6# Respondent: But I won't rule it out.. Again, I haven't really tried it, so I can't

really say that it's not something for me.

#00:29:49-4# Interviewer: Okay, so you..

#00:29:50-0# Respondent: But, to me it's a matter of not involving myself in a new medium,

that I have to remember.. Username, password, and something else to, to.. To take up time. But I

can see a lot of activity on Facebook from Spotify, when people post whatever they are listening

to.


#00:30:10-9# Respondent: I like the idea.. I just haven't really..

#00:30:13-7# Interviewer: Gotten to it yet.


#00:30:15-0# Interviewer: Okay. Umh.. what do you think about these.. Umh.. Social reader

apps, and social video apps, that that are on Facebook now.. Umh, do you know what I mean?

#00:30:29-4# Respondent: Uhmm..

#00:30:30-6# Interviewer: If you, for instance, Washington Post's, umm, people can read

articles..

#00:30:35-4# Respondent: Yeah, yeah..

#00:30:36-2# Interviewer: On Facebook, from different social reader feeds, and..


#00:30:42-0# Interviewer: Umh.. Video apps. Umh, do you use them?

#00:30:46-3# Respondent: Try not to

#00:30:47-7# Interviewer: You try not to?

#00:30:48-5# Respondent: Yeah. I don't like.. Usually you when you use these.. I tend to avoid

apps completely. Because they, to me, cross some very.. Some private boundaries. I mean, if you

join any given app, it would ask for permission to look into your contact list. Why? I just need to

watch a video, why do you need all my friends? And I don't like that. And sometimes I can't

figure out what I am saying.. What I am accepting, when I use an app. So I try to avoid it. I I can

see it specifically with people watching very weird sounding videos.. Some girl, can't believe a

girl jumped off a cliff, or something like that.. And you can see a lot of people liking it. And then,

if you contact them saying, why did you post this, they say I didn't post it.


#00:31:37-5# Respondent: So, it actually posts something and removes it from your own..

what's it called.. Timeline. So you don't even know you are posting it.. And that..


#00:31:47-8# Respondent: ..scares me at bit, because what else do you then agree to, when

you just like these apps. So I tend to avoid it.


#00:31:53-2# Respondent: The same thing on my smartphone. It has the same idea that it,

that it wants to know where you are in the world.. Why? It's a calculator.


#00:32:00-9# Respondent: But it actually sends information to God knows who, where I am..


#00:32:04-7# Respondent: Facebook does the same thing. As soon as you open the Facebook

app, it.. umh.. starts the GPS signal. Which is nice, I mean it can show, I can, I can, what's it

called.. check in somewhere. Which my friends then can see, that's a good idea. But it's also a

scary thought.


#00:32:20-7# Respondent: And I don't like that at all. If I can avoid it, I can get the same

information just by going to New York Times.com


#00:32:26-8# Respondent: So I try to avoid it..

#00:32:27-8# Interviewer: So, how does it make you feel, the fact that.. umh.. most of your

activities on Facebook are actually visible to all of your contacts?

#00:32:38-5# Respondent: Don't like it at all..I reconsider.. Sometimes I think of going

through all the different settings, and.. and sort of shutting down my account.. To the point

where it's only the closest friends that actually get the full picture..


#00:32:52-9# Respondent: Because if you don't do that.. If you just Google your own name,

you can see how much you can see. Umh, and that's a scary thought.


#00:33:00-7# Respondent: Umh, same thing with other social media. Like LinkedIn.. Exactly

the same thing.


#00:33:06-9# Respondent: And I think it borderlines, sort of your own, sort of own personal

boundaries.. But also, in terms of legally, what you are saying yes to..


#00:33:17-1# Respondent: And I don't think people generally know what they do.. I mean you

can even look up old pictures that you deleted. They're still there somewhere. And you can go

back and see your very first comment on Facebook.. Still there..

#00:33:30-6# Interviewer: yeah..

#00:33:31-9# Respondent: And that, that I think.. You end up in a situation where it comes

back and haunts you, or you don’t even know, how many people know that much about you..


#00:33:39-9# Respondent: I don't like that thought..

#00:33:41-3# Interviewer: Could you say that, you inhibit your activities on Facebook

because of the exposure..


#00:33:49-3# Interviewer: That, yeah..

#00:33:50-0# Respondent: Because what do I stand to gain? Not that much.. But.. Whereas if..

The way it works right now, and the way I use Facebook right now, I'm fully satisfied with it.. I

don’t need more. So, I don’t see why I should.. Be more open or think less of it.. And just do what

everybody else does.


#00:34:11-3# Respondent: So as long as I don't get anything out of it, or it doesn't need for me

to go further, I just keep it as it is.


#00:34:17-6# Respondent: But next time, they update Facebook I might be suckered into it

anyway.. Umh.. You never know what they come up with.


#00:34:26-1# Respondent: And you can't choose to use the older version. And I don't like that

either..


#00:34:31-3# Respondent: I.. It's one thing that they change the design, I don't care if they flip

it over I don’t mind at all. It’s when they start changing privacy settings.. Just letting me know

that now we have changed the privacy settings, and it is up to you to read them, and then you go

see a 100 page document. And you have no idea what you just said yes to..


#00:34:48-7# Respondent: And even if you shut it down.. Your account is still somewhere. All

the information..


#00:34:54-8# Respondent: And that's scary.. Especially if you see, if you start, if you create a

new account, or you create sort of… an alter ego, an second account, you can see how quickly it

learns. It will recommend friends, where you're like.. How do you know that? You've got my e-

mail and my fake name, and you can see ten of my closest friends, and you recommend them..

How does it know that?


#00:35:18-9# Respondent: Now that's a scary thought.. And I know that, 'cause my parents

they experienced that, umm, were quite scared of it. And I couldn't even explain to them how it

worked.


#00:35:27-9# Respondent: And I'm supposed to know something about it.

#00:35:29-8# Interviewer: Yeah.. Okay

#00:35:31-8# Respondent: That makes you think about it, a lot.

#00:35:34-5# Interviewer: (incomprehensible)

#00:35:34-5# Respondent: Then again, there is nothing you can do about it as such, if you

can't disconnect from it, without having.. Presumably, social consequences. Then you're stuck in

between.. Yeah.. Worse or bad.

#00:35:49-8# Interviewer: Okay.. Well, great, thank you.

Appendix 8 – Transcript of interview 3: Stine

13 June // 47.15 minutes

#00:00:00-0# Interviewer: First of all we would like to ask to log into your Facebook profile..


#00:00:12-0# Interviewer: Umh, we've asked you to do this because during the interview we

will.. uh.. ask you to find some information.. umh.. on the site, but it it also there as a help if your

need to check anything, if you're not sure how to answer. So it's here, just as a help.


#00:00:30-3# Interviewer: Umh, okay. Could you please describe how you use Facebook in

your everyday life?

#00:00:37-5# Respondent: Umh, I use it.. I I think.. The main thing I use it for, is as.. sort of a

second and more informal inbox. Umh, I use it a lot for, I have friends that live in different cities.

Umh, and I use it a lot for keeping up with them, umm, through the the inbox and mail function.

Uh, so I use that a lot. And then, of course, I use it for just, like, staying up to date with what are

people doing today. And also, but I guess that that's more secondary, I also use it for keeping up

with some brands, mainly fashion and social media, because that's what I am interested in. And

then I use it a lot for, umm.. entertainment sites. There is a lot of sites in there that create

memes and do fun pictures. And I use it a lot for that. Umh, and I share a lot of those status

updates because I think that's that's funny, so. A lot of entertainment and a lot of staying in

contact with friends.

#00:01:47-6# Interviewer: Okay. Umh, can you.. I know it's kind of the same question, but can

you explain why do you have a profile?.. Umh..

#00:01:58-8# Respondent: Oh..

#00:01:59-3# Interviewer:..on facebook..

#00:02:00-7# Respondent: I guess when.. To start with, I got a profile because I started on our

education, and I hadn't heard about Facebook. Umh, and then everyone kept asking "why are

you not on Facebook?" And I didn't know what Facebook was. So, it was like, okay, I have to

create a profile, because apparently, everything was going on on Facebook. And all events were

created on Facebook, and we started on this education and they made a group in there, so if

your wanted to know something about, okay where are we going tonight, you had to go onto

Facebook. So that was why I started. But.. Why I still kept it. I think is.. is mainly because that's

where everyone is. That is where.. I mean I use it for staying in touch with friends, I use it for

creating events, and I know that other people use it for that as well. So if you are not there, it

will be a hassle for everyone else to invite you to something, and it will be a hassle for me to

invite people to events. So it is mainly convinience now. Because everyone is there, and it's easy,

and you are used to using it. And it still has those functions.. umm. The event function and the,

the chat function, which is so convenient and so easy to use. Umh, and all your friends are there..

So, I guess that's that's mainly why.

#00:03:27-6# Interviewer: Okay. How, umm, often do you enter your profile?

#00:03:33-6# Respondent: Everyday. Umh, and several times a day. I guess.. Oh, it all depends,

but average I would say four times a day.. three times a day.

#00:03:48-7# Interviewer: Four times..


#00:03:49-6# Interviewer: Okay.. And what is the main reason why you enter it daily?

#00:03:54-8# Respondent: Umh, the main reason is to see if anyone has written me. If I have

gotten.. It's like checking my e-mail. Umh, and then of course, secondarily, it's to check what are

all the other people doing and are there any fun status updates, or anything.


#00:04:12-7# Respondent: That's about.. That's the main reasons.

#00:04:15-5# Interviewer: Umh, do you own a smartphone?

#00:04:18-6# Respondent: Yes, I do

#00:04:19-7# Interviewer: Yes, do you check Facebook through or via your..


#00:04:24-4# Interviewer:..phone..? Yes.

#00:04:25-7# Respondent: I do

#00:04:27-5# Interviewer: Okay, umh.. Can you tell us if your use of Facebook has changed

since your initial registration? And.. yeah.

#00:04:40-3# Respondent: Yeah it has.. Umh.. When I started using it.. First of all I.. You start..

Getting a lot of friends. And I remember when I started using it, umh.. it was all bout getting

friends. And getting a lot of friends. And whoever had the most friends was like.. I remember

you went onto a friends profile and you were like "oh my god he has 500 friends.." You were

like.. ahh.. I gotta have 500 friends as well.And you shared a lot of pictures, and you were

tagging people in pictures. And everyone time you went to a party there were pictures taken

and they were put onto Facebook and you were tagging each other. And, and.. that that was

basically the use of it then. And commenting on pictures and making fun, and.. it was.. I guess

back then, to be honest, it was a lot of "look at where I went, and look at what I was doing and

look at how much fun we had". Umh, but then.. You sort of started to realize that okay, all these

pictures are actually not owned by me, the second I put them onto Facebook. And, there was a

lot of focus on, umm, what if your future employeer goes onto your Facebook profile and sees all

these pictures. So I started, umh.. Taking a lot of the pictures down, untagging myself in a lot of

pictures and the second thing I did.. Umh, was..I kinda realized that a lot of the friends I had on

Facebook, if I went down the street and met some of them, I wouldn't even say hi. And so I

thought.. Well, if I'm not gonna say hi to them on the street, if I would never talk to them in

person, why am I friends with them on Facebook. So I started deleting a lot of my friends, as

well as.. or unfriending them.. umm,.. Because.. I guess it's it's the sort of feeling that develops

that you you, you start out by.. When you don't have Facebook you have your own private space,

and you have certain invited people who knows about the private space and knows about what

are you doing in that private space. And you don't really think about, when you go onto

Facebook and you develop this this whole environment of so many people that you don't even

see on a daily, or even a monthly or yearly basis. That all of these people.. All of a sudden, you

have invited into this private space. Umh, which you would never have done in your offline life.

Umh, so I got this feeling that that.. Sort of.. We talked about it before. Sort of a claustrofhopic

feeling, umm, of everyone from my past and everyone that I have ever known or said hi to,

suddenly knew what I was doing and and had an insight into my life. And and I thought that

that was, that was not the purpose for me at least, to be on Facebook. Umh, So it started out very

broad and and ended up being actually, more exclusive and more okay.. it's the people that I..

umh.. That I have contact with on daily, monthly, yearly basis. Umh, and it's it's the people that I

am friends with in real life that I am also friends with on Facebook. And now I, as I said before, I

use it more for keeping in touch with those people, and for.. a lot.. for entertainment. And.. I

actually, I don't.. I can't even remember when was the last time that I uploaded a picture to

Facebook. I don't do that at all..


#00:08:23-5# Respondent: ..anymore.. Cause I've I've gotten so aware of the fact that when

you put it out there, it's out there. And there is also this function where you can go in and if if

someone tags you in a photo then you have to, uhh, accept that tag before it goes onto your

profile. Umh, and I never accept these tags, I just.. Again, pictures are.. A lot of pictures at least,

are private things, and I don't want to share them with with the rest of the world. So I don't do

that anymore, umh..


#00:08:58-4# Respondent: The of course I make updates like everyone else, but that's like..

Once every every fortnight I guess. And it's almost always something about complaining about

the lady who lives upstairs or the guy who's over there across the street, umm, playing piano

really loud. And that's it. Yeah..

#00:09:20-0# Interviewer: Yeah, okay.. Umh, if you could please look at your Facebook

profile, can you tell us what is the last corporate site that you have liked and by corporate site..

umh.. we mean a company that sort of sells a product or a service, so not.. umh.. we're moving

away from for instance musicians and..


#00:09:47-6# Second interviewer: Television shows..

#00:09:48-4# Interviewer: Televisions shows, and so on..So, more.. traditional idea of a

company.

#00:10:01-9# Respondent: Likes.. Ohh yeah, oh no, no that's not it..Umh.. Well.. I liked a blog,

but I guess that doesn't count. Umh, the last page I liked was Vero Moda Norway. And that was

for work purposes. But other than that, umm.. The last one I liked was… Umh, Per. Which is a

hairdresser here in Aarhus. Umh..

#00:10:30-3# Interviewer: Yes.

#00:10:31-2# Respondent: The hairdresser that I usually use..

#00:10:34-1# Interviewer: Go to.. Yeah. Okay. Umh. Can you recall the reason for liking this

specific site?

#00:10:42-6# Respondent: Yeah, I remember they wrote something about, what was that..

Was I down there or.. I don't remember where I found out, but I found out somehow that by

liking their Facebook page, you would get, umm, information about when they got new products

or discounts on products. Umh, stuff like that.. So I thought, hey.. that was a good thing to do. So

basically, it was because I I I usually, course I like things just out of interest, but if I like a page

like that, it's usually because, okay I get something out of it. I get 10 % discount or something

like that.


#00:11:20-4# Respondent: I remember it was something about you can get discounts on some

products and news about when new products arrive and..


#00:11:27-2# Respondent: So, yeah..

#00:11:29-3# Interviewer: Okay, umh.. If you look at your Facebook newsfeed for.. umh.. for

like lets say the last two or three days. If you just take a couple of minutes to scroll down. Can

you tell us a little bit about what you think dominates the picture? But yeah, uh, you can just

take your time.

#00:12:25-9# Respondent: Umh, it's it's sort of a good mixture, umh.. But mostly it's updates

from, I'm following a couple of fashion brands. Umh, mostly updates from them mixed with..

There are actually not that many.. like.. updates from friends. Uhhhm.. When there are updates

it's mostly friends sharing some other content. Umh. Sharing another page or a picture or an

article. Or something like that.

#00:13:05-3# Interviewer: Okay. Umh. And why do you think that is? Is it because you have

few friends and a lot of likes.. Corporate likes.. Or..

#00:13:14-8# Respondent: Umm, of course it's because I have a lot of corporate likes.. Umh..

And also I don't remember even how friends I have at this point, I think I have about a 100. Uhh,

I'll just check. 106. Umh, and yeah, I do, and of course the corporate likes they they update

pretty regularly, umh. Like once a day, once every second day. So of course they will be

dominating. Umh, and also I think that… Uhm.. There is a slight tendency that a lot of, at least a

lot of my Facebook friends, use Facebook more than they did before at least, more for sharing

other content than for just writing "here I am with my cup of coffee" or whatever, than for just

writing updates. Umh, so yeah.

#00:14:14-3# Interviewer: Okay.. Umh, can you remember an, according to you, an

unsuccessful Facebook site, corporate Facebook site?

#00:14:26-1# Respondent: Oh.. Can I remember. Puhh, well.. For work umm, I used to work

for Vero Moda.. Umh, I did some research on.. We were trying to sort of develop a new strategy

where we wanted to.. Umh, make the same strategy and tactics for all of the Facebook pages for

the different countries and the different stores in the different countries. So for that I was

researching a lot.. Umh, and there was a lot of stores who had, umh..Just opened Facebook

pages. And so I was researching into those and trying to figure out how they were doing and

what they were doing. And there I saw a lot of of bad examples from my point of view anyways..

Umh, of first of all pages that were just.. had been opened and then there were two updates and

then they were just left completely.


#00:15:36-8# Respondent: Umh.. And also pages where their updates were either misspelled

or there was only like one update a month. Umh.. And also pages where they, that's that's the

thing that I think that's important at least when you use Facebook for branding purposes that,

especially with a fashion brand, that if you make an update you follow it up by a picture or a

video or something visual to look at...


#00:16:09-7# Respondent: Cause otherwise it will just be forgotten in the newsfeed

completely, it will drown and a lot of those page didn't use any visual material at all. So it wasn't

very inspiring..


#00:16:20-4# Respondent: Umh.. And then there was also a lot of, uuuhh, very informal.. I

mean I think it is important as a brand to be more informal on Facebook than you are on on

platforms and other media. But there is a limit to how informal you should be.. There was, I

remember one store made an update and then put like 7 smileys afterwards, which I though

was very inappropriate.


#00:16:52-8# Respondent: Umh.. So yeah that was some of the example of what I would say

was was bad page managing.

#00:17:00-1# Interviewer: Okay. So umm, which parameter do you consider important when

evaluating a corporate Facebook site? And here umm, if you could try to tihnk of you as being

the user and maybe not like..

#00:17:15-5# Respondent: Yeah.. Not..

#00:17:16-5# Interviewer: Not.. And objective.. Uh

#00:17:17-3# Respondent: Yeah.. Umh.. Well first of all I think it is important, as I told you

about the Per, the hairdresser one, that I get something out of liking the Facebook page, other

than just "hey, stay updated la la la…" because that's what everyone does. And that will drown

out, I guess.. Umh, so I think it is important that there is something in it for me. It it can just be,

like, posting okay for the next week we've got an offer on shampoo or whatever, that's enough.

But but just some sort of offer..


#00:17:53-5# Respondent: Umh, I remember one page, umm, offered 10 % discount for all

people who had liked their Facebook page. On their products. So that was a good thing.. Umh..

What else, what else, what else… I I actually like a lot, I think when I look on my newsfeed what

what drowns out is.. It's actually the pages that sort of repeat the same updates day to day.


#00:18:32-3# Respondent: When.. for example here I've got Mango, which is a fashion brand,

and and they do a lot of those sorts of updates where they've just got look of the day, and of

course it will..it's.. that will come every day. And then they have a picture of a look and here it

says where you can buy it. But at some point you get used to looking at that, so you will sort of

like.. What do you call that, man sorterer det væk, altså.. You you sort that out..


#00:19:02-1# Respondent: Umh.. So you don't even look at it anymore. And you don't even

look at it anymore. It’s the same thing for this Vero Moda page, you don't look at it anymore

because I'm so used to looking at it.


#00:19:10-9# Respondent: So I guess actually, that I like more the pages that maybe don't

update that regularly, they don't have to do it every day. But you know that when they do, it's

something interesting. For example I'm following Nodes, which is a social media company, and

they don't update that regularly, but when they do it's something interesting and that makes

you go and look.

#00:19:33-6# Interviewer: Okay. So do you also look for like a creative angle when they..

#00:19:38-1# Respondent: Yeah I do, and sort of uhh.. I always look for like something

something interesting, something I wouldn't get anywhere else, uhh.. Sometimes I liked that as

well, sometimes Top Shop uh link to their blog if they've made a new blog post about something

interesting and I usually go from Facebook to their blog. Umh, so I like that. a lot. I guess that's

it.

#00:20:08-0# Interviewer: Okay. Umh, so.. You said something about frequency of..


#00:20:13-7# Interviewer: ..status updates.. Do you have an opinion of that in corporate sites?

Umh..

#00:20:19-6# Respondent: Well, I actually used to think that when I was like, on the other

side, that you has to like update every day, but now that I'm looking at it from this side.. I think

the focus should be more on.. There's a tendency to focus a lot on uhh.. The same as when we

got on Facebook the first time, there's a tendency to focus a lot on how many friends do I have,

how many likes do I have, how many comments do I have. I think it's important for brands to

focus on the content instead. It doesn't matter how many times you update, as long as the

content is interesting and it stands out. Umh… I think you should report when there is

something new to report.


#00:21:04-0# Respondent: And something interesting to report.. umh.. And maybe well.. I I

can see now, now that I see from this side I can see that it's it's.. Umh

#00:21:14-4# Interviewer: From this side, you mean you as the user..

#00:21:15-9# Respondent: The user side, yeah.. That that.. Maybe it's not that that clever to

like focus on one update each day that focuses on like a new product or or whatever.. Because

that will drown out. So. I think frequency depends on, do you have interesting content.

#00:21:38-2# Interviewer: Okay. Alright, great.. Umh, have you ever made an official

complaint to a company through Facebook, using Facebook?

#00:21:54-6# Respondent: Oh God. I can't remember.. I don't think I have.. I remember

thinking about it. Wha-what what which company was that? I remember thinking about it, and I

wanted to do it. Hvad fanden var det for et firma? Aahhh..I don't remember. I remember

thinking about it. I don't think I've ever done it. I remember thinking about it with, uuhh, some

company. I don't remember what it was. But then I thought.. I don't wanna go in there, because..

When I make a complaint to a company on their Facebook page, it puts me on the spot just as

much as it puts the company on the spot..


#00:22:35-3# Respondent: ..because everyone can go in a see okay, this crazy bitch is like so

out of her mind.. Umh.. So I think that that's why I didn't do it, and I thought, okay if I wanna

make a serious complaint I will pick up the phone and call them instead. Because I don't want to

display myself, I wanted to display them.


#00:22:52-6# Respondent: Umh, so that was why I didn't do it.


#00:22:55-4# Respondent: (incomprehensible)

#00:22:58-6# Interviewer: So is that the specific reason why you haven't used Facebook for

complaints, because of the exposure..


#00:23:06-1# Interviewer: ..that you get get online..


#00:23:08-0# Interviewer: yeah..

#00:23:08-8# Respondent: I think so..


#00:23:10-1# Respondent: Because otherwise I think it’s it's a great venue.. The thing that

they've done is that, now you can go into the umm.. the brand page and just give them a

message in-instead of writing on the wall, which I think is a great idea, because that eliminates

umm.. the whole thing of displaying yourself.


#00:23:28-3# Respondent: But.. At the same time, that also eliminate that everyone else can

see that "okay this company has gotten this complaint"


#00:23:37-8# Respondent: Umm, so.. That's sort of a two-sided sword, umh. But I think it is a

good idea, that they have done that so that you can go in, because it's a lot easier to go in there

and just give them a message..


#00:23:48-6# Respondent: ..than finding their e-mail and what specific e-mail to write to, and

then it usually takes like, forever for them to write back and.. So I think that's a good idea. So I

would I would probably like if I had a complaint to a company, I would probably go in and use

the message function umh.. on Facebook.

#00:24:06-5# Interviewer: On facebook...

#00:24:07-2# Respondent: ..page. If I was to do anything.

#00:24:09-8# Interviewer: Okay. So that would be my next question. Where would you

normally make a complaint to a company?

#00:24:17-1# Respondent: It of course depends umh.. If if I just went to a store, and I'd gotten

rotten service, it was, if it was that sort of thing. I would probably go onto their Facebook page a

give them a message about that, and the specific store and what was going on. Umh, if it if it was

something more serious, than that sort of thing, I would contact them by e-mail or or telephone


#00:24:44-8# Respondent: I guess that that has to do to with the fact that Facebook is more

informal, and Facebook is more venting..


#00:24:51-6# Respondent: ...than.. Whereas email or or contact by phone is is more serious

and yeah..

#00:24:59-4# Interviewer: So you could say that you consider the e-mail or the phone like

more official..?

#00:25:03-9# Respondent: Yeah I do, still


#00:25:06-5# Respondent: Even though it's, I mean they take it just a seriously if it comes on

Facebook as they do if it comes by e-mail or phone but.. Yeah, I I think if if it was really like a

serious complaint, like I've bought this product and it doesn't work and I cannot get the money

back and there is no garuentee, that sort of a thing.. Then I would probably write them a serious

letter.. Umh.. On e-mail instead of just going on to Facebook. And I guess that's because I… Uhhh,

I have a fear or an expectance that the company will see the complaints on Facebook as more

informal..


#00:25:44-7# Respondent: ..and less serious..


#00:25:46-4# Respondent: ..than if they come by e-mail or by phone..


#00:25:50-1# Respondent: I guess that's why..


#00:25:51-6# Respondent: Umh.. yeah.

#00:25:53-6# Interviewer: Okay. Umhhh.. Oh sorry.. Have you ever made, like,

recommendations or suggestions to a company through Facebook? Like for instance to improve

a product or umh..

#00:26:12-1# Respondent: Can I just look down on..

#00:26:13-5# Interviewer: Of course..

#00:26:14-3# Respondent: ..these things to just try to remember. I don't think I have, but..

yeah.. No.. Nope I haven't.


#00:26:25-2# Respondent: No.

#00:26:26-2# Interviewer: Umh.. What could motivate you.. to engage.. umh.. with the

company? And by this we mean write on their wall or.. umh.. on their status update or comment

on a picture, so..



#00:26:44-2# Respondent: I don't do that at all.. But… I honestly have to say that if if I was to

do that, I would.. There would have to be something in it for me. There would have to be a..a

competition or… or a fun app.. or or something like that. But, I guess something where there

was s-something in it for me, because.. I think it is another thing if you into a blog and you.. you

write something there because it's not, it's not, on a blog it's not like an overflow of of updates,

but here it's like, I use Facebook more for just scrolling down and see okay, she says that, and

here is some pictures from this party and here is some pictures from that brand. So you are not

as focused on the individual update as you would be on a blog for example.


#00:27:38-7# Respondent: And, so I would be more inclined to commenting on a blog than I

would on Facebook, because Facebook is more for okay, they wrote that, oh that was great. Sort

of, I don’t know, a quick newsfeed.


#00:27:51-0# Respondent: As it is.. So yeah, for me to go on and comment, or write on their

wall there would have to be something in it for me.

#00:27:59-6# Interviewer: Okay. Like an extrinsic reward..


#00:28:03-9# Interviewer: ..could you say that..?


#00:28:05-0# Interviewer: ..or benefit..

#00:28:05-4# Respondent: Yeah.. It wouldn't just be for the benefit of of showing myself..

#00:28:10-5# Interviewer: ..for the fun of it..

#00:28:11-0# Respondent: ..as as something.. umh.. it would have to be a prize or a discount

or..


#00:28:18-4# Respondent: Something like that.

#00:28:18-9# Interviewer: Yeah. Okay. Umh.. do you consider yourself as a fan of a certain

brand or company?

#00:28:30-5# Respondent: Umh, no. I don't don't consider myself as a fan of a brand or

company. I consider myself as.. Interested in certain niches..


#00:28:42-4# Respondent: Umh. If if you can say it like that.

#00:28:44-5# Interviewer: Yeah yeah..

#00:28:44-8# Respondent: I'm very interested in in.. Umh, fashion for example. Umh.. But I

don't have like one brand that I'm I'm absolutely committed to.



#00:28:57-1# Interviewer: Is there any company or brand that you admire, like.. A lot..Umh.

#00:29:04-6# Respondent: I admire Top Shop a lot.. That's both from just my my aesthetics

and because I like their clothes.


#00:29:12-4# Respondent: Umh.. but also because I'm really impressed with what they are

doing online. What they are doing on social media, what they are doing.. umh.. On their website.

Uh, I think they are doing a lot of great things, and I just think that.. That's again aesthetics, I like

their website, I like all their graphics, and.. Yeah.. So I'm very, I think they're great.


#00:29:35-3# Respondent: What they, what they're doing, it' sort of a universe that they've

created around their brand, is is.. um, very appealing, and yeah..

#00:29:43-2# Interviewer: Okay. So you, have you liked this brand's..

#00:29:47-7# Respondent: Yeah I have..

#00:29:48-4# Interviewer: ..Facebook page..

#00:29:48-9# Respondent: ..liked it..

#00:29:48-8# Interviewer: Yes, you have.. And why would you do that?

#00:29:53-1# Respondent: Umh.. I actually.. No I did it before uh.. 'Cause the thing was, that I

started out with a lot of the fashion brands that I liked on Facebook, I started out liking them

because of my job at Vero Moda, so to sort of see what other brands were doing. But Top Shop I

actually liked before I liked all the other brands.. Umhh.. I think, mm.. Why did I like them.. I

guess I just I I went on to their.. I was doing a lot of like shopping online, and I went onto their

website, and I just.. It's it's again, if you go onto their website it's it engages you, and the

graphics are just inviting, and it's a whole sort of universe that you wan't to get into. Umh, and I

think I went on from there and then liked their Facebook page.


#00:30:46-5# Respondent: Yeah. I think that's why.

#00:30:49-3# Interviewer: Have you ever, can you remember having even commented on a

brand's or a company's Facebook status?

#00:30:59-2# Respondent: Nope. Never.

#00:31:01-3# Interviewer: Have you ever shared a brand's status or picture?

#00:31:07-0# Respondent: Uuh, yeah.. I have… But not not, very many times, I think I've

maybe done it once.

#00:31:15-7# Interviewer: Okay. Can.. Do you remember the situation? Can you elaborate on

why you did it? If you remember, otherwise..

#00:31:23-5# Respondent: I mean I share a lot of.. but that's not brands, I share a lot from

from some of the the entertainment sites.


#00:31:29-3# Respondent: Umh.. If I've shared.. Pictures or content from other brands, it has

been from either Nodes or Comfort, which are both umh.. social media firms here in Denmark.

Umh.. I remember I shared something, some news about Facebook and the changes in Facebook

and uhhh.. That sort of thing. I remember sharing that, and I, that was simply again, that was

because I'm I'm very interested social media and I was interested in those changes. And there is

a lot of talking about people needing to be aware of the changes that were being made. And. And

that was why I shared it. But otherwise I've never shared like for example the fashion brands

that I follow, I I've never shared their pictures. Uhm, I don't really see why I would wanna do

that because when I go on and look at their pictures, it's to get inspiration..


#00:32:31-2# Respondent: ..for my own wardrobe, for my own style and just because it's

pleasing to look at.. Umh.. yeah

#00:32:39-6# Interviewer: Yeah.. okay. Umh, do you ever notice your Facebook friends

commenting on uuhh, status updates, on companies' status updates?

#00:32:55-0# Respondent: Mmmm..

#00:32:57-4# Interviewer: And as well, have you ever noticed on or more of your friends

sharing companies' status updates or pictures or links?

#00:33:09-3# Respondent: I actually I I notice that they did a lot of, at some point, when

they've done it's because. And it was so frustrating, because there was a lot of sharing going on

at a moment, where it was like, all companies found out that okay, if we make a competition

where you have to share this picture with all of your friends and then you can win something,

then we get like a lot of content out there and everyone gets to know about us. And it was so

frustrating because all of a sudden your newsfeed was like overflown with crap..


#00:33:43-5# Respondent: With like random products and someone who liked a baby chair to

win it and and, what the fuck am I going to do with that baby chair. There was a lot of that going

on. Umh, and that frustrated me. Umh, so the the, I guess the only time that I've really, umh..

Where it's been brands and not other sorts of pages, have been in those situations, where there

was something in it for them, where they.. I found out that okay she shared this picture because

she was in a competition..


#00:34:12-4# Respondent: ..and now I get it.. Because you look at those things that.. and you

think why are you sharing a picture of a sweater and then you realize, oh okay, you can win the

sweater, okay cool.


#00:34:22-3# Respondent: So.. yeah..

#00:34:24-1# Interviewer: So did these updates, did they spike your interest for these

companies?

#00:34:28-6# Respondent: No, they made med annoyed as hell.


#00:34:30-7# Respondent: Umh.. Yeah, but I guess I mean if if someone, one of my friends

were to or was to share a picture just out of their own interest for that company and for that

picture.. Umh.. That would definitely spike my interest. But when it is random like that, it

doesn't and it annoys me. 'Cause it’s like, what am I going to do with that...


#00:34:55-5# Respondent: It creates no quality for me, what so ever.. But when one of my

friends has sort of uh, an an article or blog post or something else on Facebook I get interested,

because I think. Because then I connect the blog post for example to that friend. And if I think

that friend "oh my God, she makes such great cookies" and then the blog post is about cakes, the

I'll think okay that's really something to read if I wanna make a great cake or you know. So you

sort of make that connection between the content that they post and their personality, and and..

What their aesthetics are and what their interests are. So if they did it out of their own interest,

then that would definitely spike my own interest as well. But I haven't seen a lot of people doing

that, not with with brands or products.

#00:35:41-6# Interviewer: Nej.

#00:35:42-1# Respondent: Umh, that’s more like funny content and blog posts and.. stuff that

they read.

#00:35:47-7# Interviewer: Okay.. Okay.. Umh.. Lets move on then. Do you, do you use the

service Spotify?


#00:35:57-8# Interviewer: Yep.. uh, what do you think of.. What is your opinion on Spotify?

#00:36:03-3# Respondent: I like Spotify. I think it is great, because there is, umh.. Before

Spotify I was really annoyed that.. That I didn't, if if you wanted to, get music. Then you had to

like buy a whole CD or.. And the you had to sort of commit to it, you know, when when you

bought a CD it’s like I've paid this much money for it and I have to listen to it. I'm a great fan of

Spotify, I think it's it’s it's a great service and I think it is a good idea that you just pay something

monthly or you can use it for free and the get the ads. You can pay something monthly and then

you get access to all the music you'd like to hear. Because sometime I'll listen to a band for a

month at a time, and then that's it, I don't listen to them ever again. So it's a lot easier to do it

this way, than going out and buying a CD and then be like a monthly (incomprehensible). Not

gonna listen to it anymore.. Chug it out.

#00:37:02-6# Interviewer: Do you use the free service, or the premium?

#00:37:05-4# Respondent: Uhh, I use the premium. But that was mainly..The ads didn't

bother me so much, but it was mainly to get it on my phone as well. Because I think it is great

that I can use it on my phone.

#00:37:15-9# Interviewer: Yeah. Okay. Umh.. So do you share your Spotify.. Sorry.. Spotify

activities on Facebook?

#00:37:26-5# Respondent: I guess I do, don't I. I think I do. Yeah, I haven't turned that off.

#00:37:33-0# Interviewer: Okay. Umh..

#00:37:35-6# Respondent: Yeah I do.

#00:37:38-9# Interviewer: Is there a reason why you do that and maybe why you have not

switched it off?

#00:37:46-3# Respondent: There is actually. Because I I.. get, great inspiration from

sometimes when I'm I'm.. I'm not very like hip when it comes to music. Very non-hip and very

I'm listening to the stuff that I've been listening to for the past ten years. So for me it’s great

inspiration to go into Facebook and see "Oh okay she listened to this" and it’s again it’s it’s the

link that you make between the person a who is listening to it and the music.. So if you, for

example if I see you "oh you are listening to that, that must be sort of hip" and then I go in and I

listen to it and it's great. So that was actually why I.. I kept the service going.. Umh, because I

think it is great inspiration and also to be honest. Because it is a way to express yourself on

Facebook without having to go in and write a status update.


#00:38:41-4# Respondent: So completely honest it it is also a way of expressing who I am.


#00:38:49-7# Respondent: In in an easy way, through music.

#00:38:52-5# Interviewer: So how do you do you, how do you feel about the fact that you

share your Spotify activities on Facebook?

#00:38:59-0# Respondent: My Spotify activities, that doesn't bother me that much, because is

it not that personal. Umh of course music is a personal thing, but music is again something that

is accessible to everyone. A (incomprehensible). Think for instance umm Mumford and Sons,

they are accessible to everyone. It’s not a band that I have here at home in my apartment that no

one else

#00:39:22-5# Interviewer: Like a guilty pleasure or..?

#00:39:24-1# Respondent: Yeah.. Exactly. Umh, so it is something that is public anyway, the

only thing I do by by having Spotify put it on my Facebook profile is to show that hey I also

listen to them.


#00:39:39-3# Respondent: So.. Yeah. I mean there are some fun situations some times. I had

my my niece was visiting me and she was staying the night and before she goes to sleep she like

to listen to some music. And the last time she was here my boyfriend found a Hello Kitty album

on Spotify for her to listen to. And of course it was on my Spotify account. So she was listening

to that on the Spotify account and then it went onto my Facebook profile. I though that was kind

of cute. But it was like "Stine listened to Hello Kitty".

#00:40:16-4# Interviewer: Okay.. So that didn't bother you? Actually..

#00:40:18-5# Respondent: No no it didn't..

#00:40:19-9# Interviewer: Kind of..

#00:40:20-2# Respondent: Yeah.. I though that it.. Because then people ask and the it was like

oh well it was because my niece was staying over and we had fun.

#00:40:27-1# Interviewer: Yeah.. It was a funny story?

#00:40:29-1# Respondent: Yeah exactly.


#00:40:30-9# Respondent: It probably would have bothered me more before when I was

younger.. If if that went onto my profile. I would probably have went in and deleted it so that

people wouldn't.. get the wrong impression or whatever.


#00:40:44-3# Respondent: Today it doesn't bother me, but it probably would have before.

#00:40:47-1# Interviewer: Okay.. So, umh.. What do you think about these social reader and

social video apps that are the newest thing...


#00:40:58-8# Interviewer: ..one of the newest things on Facebook? Umh, do you use them?

#00:41:03-6# Respondent: I think I've used one, to read one article.. But the thing that

bothered me there, was that.. It's it's a funny thing, because I went onto it because a friend read

an article and then of course it shares the article. And then I wanted to go in and read the article

and then there came this like this disclaimer that said "do you want to allow access" bla bla bla..

I was like no, I don't.


#00:41:34-6# Respondent: Uh, because I don't wanna share with everyone else what I read..

But then again, if my friend hadn't shared it with everyone else, I wouldn't have gotten

knowledge about this article. So.. Personally I I, whenever I click onto those and there is this

disclaimer I move away from it again.


#00:41:55-4# Respondent: Umh.. Because I feel like.. News is not, that specific news is not that

exclusive, I can find it somewhere else where I don't have to share it on Facebook..


#00:42:05-9# Respondent: ..and then I'll just do that if it is that important to me.


#00:42:10-8# Respondent: Yeah. So I guess that's how I feel about that. I don't want to share

every article I read, umm, on Facebook. Uh I just want to be able to, if I want to get news that I

have easy and convenient access to news and if I don't have easy and convent access, I'm not

going to go and read it.


#00:42:31-3# Respondent: I don't know why I don't want to share it on Facebook. I guess it’s

it’s just, I mean..

#00:42:36-4# Interviewer: You just don't..

#00:42:38-1# Respondent: It sort of.. I mean if I go onto Ekstra Bladet for example and read

some like stupid article, umm.. I don't even have to give you an example because every article in

Ekstra Bladet is stupid, so. You don't wanna have that shared on Facebook because I mean that

doesn't really. It's it's again about, I mean, even though you don't think about creating an

identity on Facebook you do it anyways, because that that is what goes through my mind when I

think "no I don't want to share it with other people" is that I don't want them to see that I've

read this article. umm..



#00:43:18-6# Second Interviewer: Do you feel that way about everything else. Also brands

and.. If you like a corporate page, do you feel, even though you personally like it, would you then

not like it because everyone can see that you liked it, and maybe it's a guilty pleasure, I don't

know..

#00:43:43-6# Respondent: Yeah.. I mean I guess I would, if if there was a company where I felt

that way, then then I probably would.. umm.. And I would probably.. I I maybe wouldn't like

them on Facebook. Uh.. I can't really think of a company, because that would be like some, I

don't know, vibrator producer. Umh.. But yeah I think that would be the same thing, because it..

That was the exact thing that went through my mind when I went onto this article and I wanted

to read it. It was something really stupid, I can't remember what it was but it was something

like.. Really.. Stupid. And that was why I didn't want to share it with everyone on Facebook. Also

because everyone else on Facebook is all like "Ooooh my God I got this great job, ohh I just went

running, and oh my life is so perfect" and then what I share is like "oh I went onto Esktra Bladet

to read about some woman who died after eating.. Umhh.." I don't know.. It's.. yeah.. I I guess I

do think about it and I do think about it with the music as well.



#00:44:54-5# Interviewer: So, umm.. Last question, umh.. So in general how like, overall, how

do you feel about that a lot of the activities that you do on Facebook are visible to all your

contacts.

#00:45:11-2# Respondent: Umh.. If you think about like.. Reading articles and..

#00:45:18-9# Interviewer: Yeah.. Reading articles, watching these social videos and.. Also,

yeah also, Spotify..

#00:45:26-7# Respondent: The music..


#00:45:27-7# Second Interviewer: When you comment on a post that everyone can see

it..Everything that..

#00:45:33-3# Respondent: That's.. It sort of.. Again.. It’s a double sworded, umh.. or double

sided thing.. Umh.. Because.. And you're not suppose to admit this of course, but if it is

something cool.. If it something like "oh my God this band is so hip" and I'm listening to it

(incomprehensible) I'm so cool.. Then you love it. The it's great and you want to share it. But if

it’s some like sad comment or again with the article, if it's some like really uncool thing that you

shouldn't be reading about, because you know better than that, and you are very intellectual,

umh.. And shouldn't get you news from Ekstra Bladet for example, umh..When you don't want it

shared. So it’s a good and a bad thing, umh..


#00:46:22-8# Respondent: The good thing is that, I guess, you can to a great extent chose how

much you want shared on Facebook and I can always chose not to go an read the article, I can

always chose on Spotify not to share the music that I'm listening to. And I think that is one of the

great features that they have added, that I have a greater extent of choice.


#00:46:46-8# Respondent: ..of what I want to share, and what I don't want to share.. But it's a

two sided thing, because some things you really don't want to share with everyone and some

things you you kind of really do, on some days when you are feeling low and you wan't to show

to the world "hey, look how cool I am". Umh.. So.

#00:47:07-7# Interviewer: Yeah.. Okay, great. Perfect.

Appendix 9 – Transcript of interview 4: Caroline

27 June 2011 // 41.37 minutes

Interviewer: #00:00:00-9# Okay. Uhm, first of all we would like to ask you to please log on to

your Facebook profile.

Respondent #00:00:10-0# Okay. Done.

Interviewer: #00:00:13-9# Okay. Uhm. The reason why we have asked you to do this is

because it's, uhm, it's here as a help to you, if you need to check information that we're gonna

ask you. And also we're gonna ask you to look at some information during the interview. But,

yeah, it's just here as a, as a help.

Interviewer: #00:00:31-6# Could you please, uhm, describe to us how you use Facebook in

your everyday life.

Respondent: #00:00:40-5# Uhm, yeah. Uhm, I use it quite frequently. I think I, it's one of the

first thing that I need to check in the morning along with my email and news of the day. And

then during the day I check it if I don't have anything to do. Like if I'm waiting for the bus or if

I'm waiting in the supermarket in line to pay or something. Just to kill time. And then, I don't

know, it's quite frequent I log on to check if something exciting is happened with my friends.

Trying to follow, uhm, different kind of activities on Facebook and so on, so that would be my

daily use of it. And once in a while I, uhm, I check in and I try to look at the competitions and so

on. But yeah. But mostly it's just for looking at other peoples activities .

Interviewer: #00:01:42-7# Okay. Uhm. So why, what is the main reason that you have a

Facebook profile?

Respondent: #00:01:52-2# Uhm. Probably to keep in touch with people that I would'nt keep in

touch with. Or no nnot people I wouldn't keep in touch with, but people I don't see that often.

That, and then to display my own activities to my friends.

Interviewer: #00:02:17-0# Okay. Uhm, how often do you enter your Facebook profile?

Respondent: #00:02:29-4# Two to three times an hour, probably.

Interviewer: #00:02:33-0# Okay. hehe. Uhm, so what is the main reason why you do that,

enter it daily and so many times during the day?

Respondent: #00:02:46-3# Because it's very easy. I have the Facebook app on my phone and I

always bring my phone with me. So it's sort of become a bad habit just to click on the app,

update it and find out what is happening in the newsfeed. What are people doing. So it's a

different kind of news source. So instead of reading news about what is happening in the real

world, it's a way of killing time and trying to, uhm, be a part of other peoples lives.

Interviewer: #00:03:24-7# Yeah. Why do you refer to it as a bad habit?

Respondent: #00:03:28-8# Because, I know it's.. It dosen't.. It's just a little useless. I could

spend my time a lot more

Interviewer: #00:03:47-0# Constructively?

Respondent: #00:03:46-9# Yeah. I could be a lot more effective. Instead of reading news about

other people, I could read actual news on my phone or just leave it. So I know that it's a bad

habit and sometimes even if I have just checked it I'm curios about what else happened on

Facebook while since the last minute. So I know it's a bad habbit, but it's become very natural

behavior for me to click on my phone and open the app. As well as on my computer. So i'm sure

that if I didn't have Facebook, I would use my time, uhm, more reasonable and spending it on

doing other things.

Interviewer: #00:04:37-2# Okay.

Respondent: #00:04:38-2# And checking it.

Interviewer: #00:04:38-8# Yeah. So you can confirm to us that you do own and smartphone

and you check Facebook...

Respondent: #00:04:45-8# Through my smart phone. yeah.

Interviewer: #00:04:47-5# Okay. great. Uhm, can you tell us something about if your use of

Facebook has changed since your initial registration?

Respondent:#00:04:59-2# Uhm. It has changed along with the change of Facebook. In the

beginning I just uploaded uhm photos, uhm, albums from vacation and so on. And then it was

possible to update your status with photos, so I started using that. And when I got my smart

phone I used checkins as well. That's only two, one and half years ago. So i thonk the most

dramatic change has been with the ability to check in different places. And then afterwards you

could combine it with both location and adding a picture with that location. So that's that's how

I feel that I've changed my use of Facebook. Initally it was from my digita camera I would take

pictures and then spend and hour or something sorting the pictures and then uploading them to

Facebook. And since I got my smartphone it's more an instant update. So I take the picture and I

update it instantly. Along with sometimes tagging people and something checking in at some

place.

Interviewer: #00:06:16-7# Okay. What about the level of activity? Is that different know from,

what did you say, two and a half years ago?

Respondent:#00:06:27-8# I would say it's, uhm, yeah. The level has definitely become higher

since I got my smartphone, because previously I could only sign on with my company. So I

could, you know, survive without having to check my newsfeed every five minutes, ten minutes.

But now that I have the easy access to checking my Facebook, I would say that the activity level

has risen a lot.


Respondent:#00:06:59-1# I should get rid of my smartphone.

Interviewer: #00:07:00-8# Hehe. Maybe. Uhm, if you please look at your Facebook

profile,uhm, can you tell us what is the last corporate site you have liked?

Respondent:#00:07:14-6# The last one. How do I do that?

Interviewer: #00:07:17-2# Yiu can see it, uhm you, go this way. Trykker den der. Likes.

Respondent: #00:07:32-8# Likes.

Interviewer: #00:07:34-5# And then by corporate site we don't mean like,uhm, music and

actors and so. Yeah, we do mean like general companies, organizations that sort provide a

service or product and.. more in the traditional sense, if you can.

Respondent:#00:07:53-7# Yeah. So uhm, that would be.., so not just a website or program for

instance, but and actual product or service.

Interviewer: #00:08:05-1# Yeah, yeah uhm.

Respondent:#00:08:06-7# That would be Nutrimino fitness nutrition.

Interviewer: #00:08:12-9# Okay. Uhm. Can you recall the reason for liking this specific site?

Respondent:#00:08:22-1# Uhm, a friend of mine shared an update from the site and I have

used some products from them. So I just went in and had a look and I just pressed the like

button.

Interviewer: #00:08:44-0# Because, do you?

Respondent:#00:08:47-1# Well, I think it's because I think I like the product they provide.

Interviewer: #00:08:51-4# Yeah.

Respondent: #00:08:53-7# And I also wanted to display that I like this product and link it to

my lifestyle.


Respondent: #00:09:05-5# So showing that I like this kind of fitness nutrition, hopefully says

something about me, my habits and how I eat. Hehe.

Interviewer: #00:09:21-6# Yeah yeah. So it was an actual like?

Respondent:#00:09:24-7# Yeah

Interviewer: #00:09:25-9# Yeah Yeah. Okay. Uhm, If you please look at your Facebook

newsfeed. If you just take a couple minutes. Uhm and then can you maybe try and look for what

dominates the picture for the last two or three days. So if you just take and couple of minutes

and scroll down and afterwards tell us about what you think dominates the picture of your

newsfeed.

Respondent: #00:09:49-5# Okay.

Respondent: #00:10:32-3# Okay. So I looked at the newsfeed from this morning. Uhm, is that

enough?

Interviewer: #00:10:41-0# No actually. I know it's a long... But we need like at least..

Respondent:#00:10:45-4# How many days?

Interviewer: #00:10:48-2# Two uhm.

Respondent:#00:10:53-3# Okay.

Respondent:#00:12:24-0# Okay

Interviewer: #00:12:23-9# Okay. So what dominates the pictures?

Respondent: #00:12:28-5# Uhm. Highschool students. Highschool graduates.


Respondent: #00:12:33-4# Uhm. And other people finishing their exams. Holiday pictures,

holiday updates and generally about school ending. Or whatever education it may be.

Interviewer: #00:12:49-6# Okay. Uhm. Okay great. Uhm.Can you remember an according to

you an unsuccessful Facebook site? Corporate Facebook site?

Respondent: #00:13:15-2# No not really. I don't think I've... I don't think I've liked that many

corporate sites. Mainly because... I don't know why... It's not always a good thing to like the the

the different corporate websites. Especially, if they don't have any purpose with their website.

So the few that I like I'm really happy with.


Respondent: #00:13:47-4# And should I be unsatisfied with their news update I usually unlike

them.

Interviewer: #00:13:52-7# Okay. So what do you consider important when evaluating a site, a

Facebook site, to be either successful or unsuccessful, you know, in your in your eyes?

Respondent: #00:14:06-9# Uhm. I think my best example is Ben&Jerry's. I really their way of

engaging with their users. They have normal updates asking about how people like the weather

or the ice-cream that they're eating and they have just sufficiently with information about the

product without it becoming to advertisement , uhm, dominated.

Interviewer: #00:14:39-4# Yeah. Is this like a national site or a global?

Respondent: #00:14:43-0# It's uhm Ben&Jerrys Danish Danish site.

Interviewer: #00:14:48-9# Okay. So the interaction with the users you...

Respondent: #00:14:55-2# Yeah I think that it's important that you ask for something or do

something that will engage your users in some way. So it could be. I know sometimes they are

asking what kind of icecream do you eat today. Or what's your favourite recipe using this and

this and that. So it becomes more than just tell people how you like our product, share this

product or share our site and so on. It's more, we know you like our product and we share that

engagement with or we share the love of that product with you.

Interviewer: #00:15:29-9# Okay

Caroline #00:15:30-8# And you should be able to express it freely in your way without having

to gather more likes to our site. So I think they have natural way of engaging with their likers.


Respondent: #00:15:49-2# Just as a friend would ask you and not.. You don't have a feeling

that it's a corporate site and they want you to be a part of a competition and help them getting

more likes. It's more we like this ice-cream, we know you like the ice-cream, so why don't you

show us a picture of you eating your favorite ice-cream outside. So that't what I like about it.


Respondent: #00:16:11-3# And what I referred to earlier with annoying corporate sites. That's

exactly when they are asking you to find to ask your friends to like this site, so you can become

part of a compettion and so on. That's what I dislike about the corporate sites.

Interviewer: #00:16:28-7# Okay. So you want like a more genuine dialouge or engagement?

Respondent: #00:16:36-2# Yeah I don't like the feeling of being pushed to like anything or

having to spam my friends in order to participate in a competition.

Interviewer: #00:16:46-5# Okay. yeah.

Respondent: #00:16:48-4# So I definitely think it's that this.. You are in the Facebook universe

as a company, so therefore you should speak with the same language and use the same features

as normal users would do. And as a normal user you wouldn't spam your friends to like your

new friend.

Interviewer: #00:17:03-9# Nej.

Respondent: #00:17:04-5# So I think it's a very unnatural way of getting new likes, because

you don't get a genuine like, you just spread on the word because some feeling, some others are

feeling that well they want to win this special prize and so on and that's why they are liking. So

that's what I mean, I mean that's the difference between a good corporate site and one that just

aims for 500.000 likes.

Interviewer: #00:17:31-8# Yeah. Okay. So have you ever blocked or unlikes or unfriended

unbefriended a corporate site? That you have previously obviously liked.

Respondent: #00:17:45-4# I don't recall it here and now, but I think I definitely have.


Respondent: #00:17:52-6# Either that, or I have actually ignored the newsfeed from some of

my friends, because it became too noisy with all the like this picture and like this picture and so

it became a little too much and I don't want my newsfeed to be another, uhm, source of

advertisement.

Interviewer: #00:18:11-9# Nej. So when you say ignore your friends newsfeed, you have like

actively...

Respondent: #00:18:17-3# I have actively

Interviewer: #00:18:18-2# Removed their updates.

Respondent: #00:18:19-7# Removed their updates.

Interviewer: #00:18:21-5# Because they were too spammed with corporate sites? or.

Respondent: #00:18:25-2# Because they tend to share sites with, uhm, like this picture so I can

win this competition and so on. Or it's obvious that they shared the picture because they

wanted to enter a competition. And that's what I mean with then it just becomes too annoying.


Respondent:#00:18:45-8# And that's why I chose to ignore it.


Respondent:#00:18:50-2# Or yeah.

Interviewer: #00:18:51-2# So finally, do you have an opinion on companies' frequency of

Facebook, uhm sorry Facebook updates?

Respondent: #00:19:06-9# Yeah. I I think that, uhm ,again the same goes for normal people

using Facebook, that if you have something interesting to tell, then you should update. And uhm,

it's very subjective when it's relevant or not.


Respondent: #00:19:25-0# But I would say that if if you just want to make advertising for your

product, then that is not, then Facebook shouldn't be the channel for doing that. Cause you have

other sources for advertisement.

Interviewer: #00:19:40-4# Yeah

Respondent: #00:19:40-8# So if your update is advertising for your product then I thinks it's,

personally I think it's the wrong use of Facebook when you have the opportunity to engage with

all of your consumers then instead you should ask for some kind, or you should initiate some

kind of dialog instead of pushing a sales message about "hey this is our new dress, and you

should like this picture, so you can share it with your friends and get the chance to win the dress

and so on..." Then I think it becomes irrelevant, but if you have links about your product or a

video or some kind of article or blog, other people saying something about your product that

you would like to share with an update then I think it becomes a more honest way of updating

your corporate status. Uhm... Yeah. I think there are different ways to do this. For instance I also

liked a page, a corporate page selling women's wear and every time they update it is because

they have new dresses or t-shirts in the shop and I think that is a great way of updating saying

"We got this new dress in stores so come down and have a look".

Interviewer: #00:21:16-5# Yeah.. but.. Yeah ok. So it has to be relevant, because you don't

consider that as like spam advertisement and so some of the other ones that you mentioned.

Respondent:: #00:21:29-3# Yeah now that I think of it I can see why like I am maybe

contradicting myself but I don't find that annoying the same way as I would find an invitation to

like something, thats what I mean thats when it becomes some kind of marketing

advertisement. When I get an update about new dresses coming in to the store and so on I think

its more a service than it is advertisement. I would say if their update was: Share this picture to

your friends and you will enter the competition to do so and so. I would consider that

spamming because it forces me to do something whereas if I to see an update that they've got

new dresses and pictures coming with that I would see that as a service because if I look at the

pictures and find something that I think is pretty I would go down in the to store and try to find

it.

Interviewer: #00:22:39-1# Yeah ok. Have you ever made an official complain to a company

through facebook.

Respondent:: #00:22:50-0# Mmm.

Interviewer: #00:22:41-3# Yes?

Respondent:: #00:22:45-5# I just recently did yeah. But I wouldn't say that it was a complain. I

found Kraft Foods on facebook because I tried to enter their corporate website like through the

browser and so on but I couldn't find a customer service e-mail address so I figured out that

they would have some kind of facebook profile or page that I could write to. So I found the

official corporate site and I sent a message where I wrote that this was a customer feedback and

I used facebook because I couldn't find an email address that write to. And I didn't complain but

interviewer: suggested that their Philadelphia Light product should have a more distinctive

color so that you don't buy it like I do(laughing).

Interviewer: #00:23:43-5# (lauhing) ok.

Respondent: #00:23:45-8# Yeah so I just wrote that I suggested that they should make.. There

should be a greater difference between the normal edition and the light edition and they wrote

back thanks for feedback and so on and they would forward the complain or the feedback to

their customers service department in Denmark.

Interviewer: #00:24:10-2# Okay. So the reason why you chose facebook as a medium is that

because you lacked an actual email or was that like a specific choice that you know you used

facebook to contact

Respondent: #00:24:23-1# Thats because I couldn't find an official... It was the only alternative

I could find. I couldn't a website or I tried to access the website but couldn't find an official

customers service email to write to.

Interviewer: #00:24:43-7# So would you normally prefer to make a complaint or suggestion or

whatever another way?

Respondent:: #00:24:53-5# Yeah I would prefer to do it through my email.

Interviewer: #00:24:56-2# And why is that?

Respondent:: #00:25:00-4# I feel that if I send it through my personal email it would be more

anonymous. I wouldn't have a picture and an entire profile that they could click on to see what

country Im from, how old I am, what I am studying, my cover photo and how many friends I

have and so on. There is just too much information on facebook that I don't want to share with

others through an official customer feedback.

Interviewer: #00:25:32-7# Yeah ok. So(telephone ringing). Ja det er okay, tag den.

Respondent:: #00:25:53-8#: Det er Caroline

Interviewer: #00:25:53-4# Where would you normally make a complaint to a company?

Respondent:: #00:25:55-6# I would do that either through the corporate website, sometimes

they have you know a feedback button you can press on and then it automatically sends to the

company or I would find an email address and then I could send it you know like a letter from

my email account in stead of using facebook.

Interviewer: #00:26:17-2# okay. If we now maybe look aside from the Kraft Foods example.

Have you ever made other recommendations or suggestions to a company regarding a product

through facebook?

Respondent: #00:26:37-1# Can you clarify suggestion?

Interviewer: #00:26:43-8# Actually similar to that story where you would you know suggest

something that could improve their product service or yeah. Just like some valuable knowledge

for them.

Respondent: #00:27:06-1# Ok. I don't think so. No not with direct contact the way that I did

with Kraft Foods. I may have commented on something or liked a picture of a product and so on

but I dont know if that counts as a suggestion, well to some extent it does because when I like a

product my friends can see that I liked it so in that way it would function as a suggestion.

Interviewer: #00:27:49-0# Yeah ok. We mean like directly to the company.

Respondent:: #00:27:51-3# To the company? No not really.

Interviewer: #00:27:53-6# Obviously besides the example you just told us.

Respondent:: #00:28:05-1# But I've sometimes bought something and then liked the

companies page afterwards but not directly writing and saying i think this was good and this

was bad.

Interviewer: #00:28:15-9# Nej ok. If you consider a company making facebook updates or

sharing pictures or so on what could motivate you to engage with these activities? I know it is a

difficult question it just...

Respondent: #00:28:37-5# It depends on what kind of activity it is. If it is engaging as in

commenting on a status update or liking the picture and so on to me that is entering a dialogue

with the company..

Interviewer: #00:28:59-8# Yeah but that is what we mean by engage in any way in some sort

active...

Respondent: #00:29:03-0# I think it would be if the information provided would be relevant to

me. if I thought that whatever they are saying has some kind of value to me.


Respondent: #00:29:30-0# If they actively asked for my opinion I think I would answer by

commenting on the status. I see that sometimes companies are updating and asking or just

that... no let me rephrase that.. I thin it is important to me that the corporate page function as a

normal person on facebook so if they have normal updates or in some way interesting that you

can relate to I would find that motivation enough to commenting or like and so on. For instance

the corporate page I, the most reason one I liked with Nutramino Fitness Nutrition they have

uploaded pictures with athletes using their products who are on vacation and holding some

kind of product and they have typed that even though... The update was: "Even when you're on

vacation you can still bring your Fitness Nutrition with you and ensure you get proper vitamins

and proteins for your body and so on.." I think that is a good way of updating. It is not about

them and their product it is about people using their product and that is something that I have

liked because I think that is a great way of showing your... Well showing the people using your

product but still as a friend also would do perhaps.

Interviewer: #00:31:18-4# Yeah ok. Do you consider yourself as a fan of a specific brand or

company?

Respondent: #00:31:26-4# Not of companies not a fan companies but perhaps more a fan of

products. As far as I remember the pages that I have liked are usually films or books or music

or sometimes different kinds of people but usually not companies as such. I have a few likes of

companies different fitness centers but that is because interviewer: have a specific relation to

these different sites which well or companies but corporate companies as such I have only like

because I have had some relation to it either work or studies or some kind of in real life activity

but usually not. It is more products that I like.

Interviewer: #00:32:33-8# Yeah. Ok we could extent it maybe here to products or... But maybe

you really should try and see this not connected with facebook but more like you as a person.

Are you like a general fan of something and I know it is difficult to say but...

Respondent: #00:33:03-2# Oh yeah yeah I think of myself as a great Nike fan.

Interviewer: #00:33:09-5# have you like the Nike facebook page.

Respondent: #00:33:14-2# I don't remember can I check it?

Interviewer: #00:33:19-0# Yeah of course please do.

Respondent: #00:33:38-8# No I havent

Interviewer: #00:33:53-0# You haven't. Do you have any idea why not?

Respondent: #00:33:54-6# No. Now that I look through the things I have like it is not very

serious things. Its either some kind of entertainment like radio programs different websties or

different events that ive attended and in connection with those events I have like the ones

arranging it or somehow related to that event.

Interviewer: #00:34:35-7# Ok great. So I think you have mentioned it before but have you ever

commented on a company s facebook update or a picture or a status?

Respondent: #00:34:45-3# Yeah im sure I have but I dont recall which one.

Interviewer: #00:34:55-5# Do you recall the reason for doing so?

Respondent: #00:35:00-4# Well I...

Interviewer: #00:35:06-4# If you just maybe choose one example and then elaborate on why

you engaged in that way.

Respondent: #00:35:13-6# I can think of FitnessWorld the corporate updates whenever theyre

doing some kind of update about memberships or useful information about the services they

provide I am sure ive liked it and probably also commented on it.

Interviewer: #00:35:42-8# Okay but you are an employee in FitnessWorld right?

Respondent: #00:35:45-6# Yeah.

Interviewer: #00:35:48-1# Yeah okay. Have you ever shared a brand, a company or brands

status update or picture?

Respondent: #00:35:56-6# Yeah

Interviewer: #00:35:49-4# Yeah, and why? Again of you choose on example what was the...

Respondent: #00:36:04-8# Sometimes its because I think its a funny way of sharing some...

showing my opinion without it happening to be me saying it and other ties its been... I also

manage a company website so sometimes I've shared it because I wanted to increase the

visibility of the update.

Interviewer: #00:36:33-5# Do you ever notice one or more of your facebook friends that they

have commented on corporate status updates or pictures or so on?

Respondent: #00:36:45-7# Yeah but again I would have to use the Fitness Nutrition Company

as an example because I stumbled on it because one of my friends shared an update about it.

Interviewer: #00:36:55-1# Okay so this update that actually spiked your interests for the

company...

Respondent: #00:37:11-2# I was already using the products that they provide but I saw my

friends update or he shared an update that they had made and thats why I found it very easy to

click on the corporate site and press like.

Interviewer: #00:37:27-2# Okay. Do you use the services Spotify?

Respondent: #00:37:35-7# No

Interviewer: #00:37:33-6# Is there a reason why not?

Respondent: #00:37:38-5# I don't want people seeing what I am listening to and I think it is

enough that people can see where I am, what I'm doing and who I'm with. To have facebook also

telling other people what kind of music I'm listening to I think that is a little to much so I

actively chose not to use Spotify when I found out it would show on facebook what kind of

music I am listening to.

Interviewer: #00:38:07-8# What do you think about these social reader and video apps that

are on facebook do you know what I mean?

Respondent: #00:38:22-6# Yeah. I have a little mixed feelings about it. A lot of the very

interesting articles that I've read have been because some of my friends facebook read it, and it

said on facebook your friend XX just read this article on Washington Post, Social reader or

Huffington Post-something. But when I have to read or when I want to read it and it says you

´have to install this social reader app I often end up saying no thanks and I can live without

reading this article. I think I only have one social reader app installed and that was the first time

I saw it. I think I just chose to install it because I wanted to read that article but since then every

time I see these social reader apps I just choose to find another source of seeing or reading

these articles instead of having facebook leading me to that article.

Interviewer: #00:39:21-6# Okay. So you would actually find a way around it and still read it

because you consider it interesting or...

Respondent: #00:39:28-9# Yeah then I would just Google it in stead.

Interviewer: #00:39:41-0# Okay. So my last question. How do you feel about the fact that you

know most of these activities that you do facebook that they are visible to all of you contacts....

And you should include you know Spotify and the social reader but also your general you know

choice of updates and photo uploads.

Respondent: #00:39:57-4# I think I have become very aware of peoples access to my

information. I don't update as frequently as I didi, especially after all of this with the social

readers and the different apps and so on. I would like to feel that I still have control of whatever

I share with people on facebook so I try to control it as much as possible not showing too much

activity so in that way I would be you know a silent reader just looking at what other people are

dong and I would only update if I think its somewhat innocent if you know what. I mean I don't

want to put anything up that’s too personal. It’s always mostly bout food or funny things that

have seen but never personal opinions or political views or so on so I am very aware on

whatever I share on facebook and I chose not to... Well I've chosen not to use the social reader

and Spotify because it goes beyond boundaries about having a private life on facebook even

though its a little stupid to think you can have a private life on facebook but I would like to think

that I have control with my information on facebook so I try not to share too much.

Interviewer: #00:41:31-3# Okay. Great thank you.

Appendix 10 – Transcripts of interview 5: Jacob

19 July // 33.21 minutes

#00:00:00-0# Interviewer: Okay. umh.. Could you please enter your Facebook profile?


#00:00:07-3# Interviewer: Thank you. Umh.. We ask you to do this because we need you to

look at it during the interview and access some information regarding your Facebook use. So..

It's here as a help to you, if you need it when you answer some of the questions.

#00:00:28-8# Respondent: That's fine.

#00:00:30-2# Interviewer: Okay. First of all can you please describe to us how you use

Facebook in your everyday life?

#00:00:36-7# Respondent: Umh.. I use it as a communication tool. Umh.. On the same level as

e-mail, text messages and everything else. Umh, to connect with my friends and to share

important and fun and.. All sorts of information.

#00:01:00-4# Interviewer: Okay. Umh. So why do you have a Facebook profile?

#00:01:07-9# Respondent: Umh.. Well actually I asked myself that just recently. First of all

umm, to connect with friends and interact with them, just on an everyday basis. But also to, to

show people who I am in some way. The things you like and the things you write and.. All the

people you connect with, saying something about you. And if you are a communication

professional you, you ought have a Facebook profile.

#00:01:43-2# Interviewer: Okay. Umh.. How often do you enter your Facebook profile?

#00:01:50-0# Respondent: Umh.. Every day, uh several times a day. It depends on what I am

doing, but since Facebook has gone mobile, uhh.. Once an hour maybe.


#00:02:05-5# Respondent: If I get a message or it could be a whole day, where I don't use it.

But since they started to use push messages for the phone, it is very easy to access all the time.

#00:02:18-7# Interviewer: So I assume that you have a smartphone..

#00:02:20-0# Respondent: Uhum..

#00:02:20-5# Interviewer: .. and you enter Facebook..


#00:02:22-8# Interviewer: … through that? Okay.. And what is the main reason why you check

it daily and several times a day?

#00:02:29-7# Respondent: Umh.. Just to know if anything's new actually. Most of the time I

just go in and check if I have any messages or any notifications. I do't go through the whole list

what my friends have done that day. Actually I blocked a lot of my friends, uh, because I don't

want to look at their more or less important information and status updates. But I would like to

keep track of my good friends and what they are doing in their lives and stuff. Uh.. So when I go

and to check Facebook I don't go through it all, I just check if I've got any news for myself.

#00:03:09-6# Interviewer: Okay. So do you differentiate between close friends and other..

#00:03:15-8# Respondent: Definitely..

#00:03:16-2# Interviewer: .. types of friends..

#00:03:16-5# Respondent: Yes..

#00:03:16-8# Interviewer: ..on Facebook. Yeah okay… Umh.. Has your use of Facebook

changed since your initial registration?

#00:03:29-1# Respondent: Uuuhh. Yes. It has changed since since.. All of my friends started

accessing Facebook. In the beginning it was just a fun tool to connect with and.. Facebook have

developed an (incomprehensible).. more stuff has gotten into it. I use it a lot more.

#00:03:53-4# Interviewer: Okay. You use it a lot more than first?

#00:03:57-3# Respondent: Sorry

#00:03:58-3# Interviewer: Yeah you use it a lot more than first?

#00:04:01-2# Respondent: Yes, definitely.

#00:04:02-4# Interviewer: Umh.. Is it at the highest now?


#00:04:07-3# Interviewer: The amount of activity or has it..

#00:04:10-0# Respondent: No

#00:04:10-3# Interviewer: ..stagnated in a ways..

#00:04:11-8# Respondent: It’s.. uhh.. a few years a go when I went to school a lot more than I

do now, I used it much more, during classes and chatting and umh… Sharing things with your

friends that you see everyday. Now, then it’s just uh, just a comment and a photo and a small

video. And it’s not nearly every day that I post something.

#00:04:42-6# Interviewer: Okay. Umh, if you can please look at your Facebook profile. Can

you tell what is the last corporate site that you have liked?

#00:04:55-9# Respondent: That is Norwegian, uh the flight company.

#00:05:00-1# Interviewer: Yeah. And can you recall the reason why you liked this?

#00:05:04-9# Respondent: Yes, yes I can. Uh, I read an article in a Danish newspaper about

Norwegian starting to uhh..They've bought a lot of new airplanes and they're going to New York

and Bangkok for very cheap prices. And since I'm moving to Copenhagen next month I would

like to keep track of that, and new offers and.. yeah..


#00:05:31-8# Respondent: So, that's the reason

#00:05:32-5# Interviewer: Yeah. Umh.. So Norwegian, how did they use umh..

#00:05:39-9# Respondent: Well they got this thing called Tuesday offers, where they they

every Tuesday they post a lot of very nice offers that you can only buy on that Tuesday. So that

was actually the main reason. Umh, besides that I don't know what else they do.

#00:06:00-9# Interviewer: Ej okay.. So for the offers..


#00:06:03-6# Interviewer: ..and the cheap prices..

#00:06:04-6# Respondent: Yeah.. And the news, when are they opening new routes and.. Yeah

#00:06:09-8# Interviewer: Yeah.. okay. Umh, if you look at your newsfeed..

#00:06:17-6# Respondent: Uhum

#00:06:18-3# Interviewer: .. can, just for the last couple of days, if you just take a couple of

minutes and scroll down, maybe you can tell us a little bit about what dominates the picture? So

just uh..

#00:06:28-6# Respondent: In my own profile..?

#00:06:29-6# Interviewer: Uh yeah yeah in your own newsfeed..

#00:06:31-6# Respondent: Yeah.. Well.. That's friends posting videos..

#00:06:40-8# Interviewer: Altså, I mean.. Home, not not your own profile.. But the.. what's it

called..

#00:06:48-4# Respondent: Second Interviewer: Newsfeed

#00:06:49-0# Interviewer: Newsfeed, yeah.

#00:06:50-3# Respondent: Okay, so this one?

#00:06:51-1# Interviewer: Yeah. If you just.. And I know that three days is a lot, but just,

maybe the past couple of days. If you just scroll down.. You can just take your time, and.. Make

notes of what you think dominates the picture.

#00:07:24-1# Respondent: Well most of all it's people sharing, umm, photos from their

holidays, status updates about.. how busy people are with exams and holidays and stuff. Also,

umm.. A few corporate sites with ads for their newest events.


#00:08:10-0# Respondent: Birthday greetings, yeah

#00:08:11-5# Interviewer: Yeah.. So, birthday greetings, holiday updates and pictures, and

some corporate sites…


#00:08:20-5# Interviewer: .. is what dominates..


#00:08:22-1# Interviewer: ..your newsfeed.. Okay. Umh.. Yeah, so, let's move on then. Can you

remember an, according to you, unsuccessful corporate Facebook site?

#00:08:42-5# Respondent: Umh.. Yes I can. Umh, at my job, I work at an advertising agency,

we looked into different car companies using Facebook as a communication tool. And, some of

them really tried to, to move their TV universe to to Facebook and to engage with users, but no

success at all.. Umh, like 100-200 likes.. Uh on a Facebook page.


#00:09:30-9# Respondent: Uhh, that was suppose to have several thousands


#00:09:36-4# Respondent: Uhm, one of them was SEAT. That used those small bugs in their

TV ads, uh, the Spanish one and the German one and.. They try to convert their Facebook , uh

sorry, their TV advertisement to Facebook and that didn't work at all.


#00:09:59-1# Respondent: People didn't want to engage with them.

#00:10:01-4# Interviewer: So no engagement.

#00:10:03-9# Respondent: No.. No no likes and no fans.. No nothing.

#00:10:06-8# Interviewer: Few likes..


#00:10:08-3# Interviewer: Okay.. Umh, so.. This is related to this. Which parameters do you

consider important when evaluating a Facebook site, a corporate site, to be either successful or

unsuccessful.. You said likes and (incomprehensible)..

#00:10:23-4# Respondent: Well likes and.. uh dialog. If people want to engage with it. Umh..

Yeah, I think people measure likes too much


#00:10:38-8# Respondent: Several people buy likes, but uh, to some sites of course that is

important because if they post something as a corporate site you get it in your newsfeed and

you maybe go on and buy stuff or whatever. For a site like Norwegian, that I like, that may be

important because they get their offers out and I click on everything they post if it is a good

offer. But for some sites, uh, it doesn't really matter how many likes if they don't have any

engagement with their fans.

#00:11:14-3# Interviewer: Okay. You said they buy likes, umh..

#00:11:18-9# Respondent: Umh, yeah well, just yesterday actually I saw a site that.. Well it's..

right here actually, uhm, the Danish Cancer Association, umh, they made a.. They made a

partnership with several sites, where the sites have agreed to pay one Danish krone pr. like they

get. So if they get 10,000 likes they will pay 10,000 for cancer research.


#00:11:55-3# Respondent: So they buy likes in that way.


#00:11:58-0# Respondent: Umh, and.. Of course they want likes on their site and the Cancer

Association want money, so it’s a good deal..


#00:12:06-5# Respondent: ..But, if I was having a corporate site I didn't wanna have 10,000

people liking my site that didn't have any interest besides supporting the Cancer Association.


#00:12:19-0# Respondent: So, umh.. I think people measure likes too much.

#00:12:24-4# Interviewer: Okay. Umh, perfect. Have you ever blocked, or un-liked or un-

friended, un-befriended a corporate site?

#00:12:36-5# Respondent: Umh.. Yes, several times.

#00:12:39-0# Interviewer: Yeah, and what what were some of the reasons for doing this?

#00:12:42-7# Respondent: Umh, well.. Some sites just spam too much. They they post too

many things that doesn't interest me. And.. I've blocked some sites in the first day, where I

thought in the beginning of the day, well this could be fun to follow them. And then after three

updates in two hours, I was like wow, I'm already tired of this. So I unfriended or un-liked them

again.


#00:13:16-4# Respondent: And sometimes it’s, uh.. It can be for other reasons as well, but

that’s the main one I think.

#00:13:23-9# Interviewer: Yeah, so frequency of updates..


#00:13:27-0# Interviewer: .. is something that you have a strong opinion on..

#00:13:30-7# Respondent: Yeah, but but..

#00:13:31-3# Interviewer: .. corpororate sites..

#00:13:31-8# Respondent: .. sometimes it could be, it could be fun, but if it’s too much or too

irrele, irrelevant for me, yeah.

#00:13:41-2# Interviewer: Okay. Umh, yeah. So have you ever made an official complaint to a

company through Facebook?




#00:13:56-0# Interviewer: Umh.. Is there a specific reason why not?

#00:14:00-9# Respondent: Umh.. I'd rather call them actually.


#00:14:07-0# Respondent: I feel that I get immediate response that way.


#00:14:10-7# Respondent: And, it’s more serious. Umh, if I post something a complaint or

something on Facebook it would be on a page wall, and I don't want the public to see that I

complain.


#00:14:24-7# Respondent: That's also a part of the reason.


#00:14:27-0# Respondent: Uh, but I do go in and ask questions sometimes


#00:14:30-2# Respondent: Umh, that could be okay. But I'm I'm thinking about, if I'm posting

to a corporate site then all of my friends and all the people in my network can see that I'm

posting to it. Uh so that’s that's a part of my.. uhh.. yeah that's why I am thinking about this.


#00:14:53-7# Respondent: If you could do, that you could just write them a personal message

it would be just like an e-mail. I might do that more.

#00:15:01-6# Interviewer: So anonymity.. uh..

#00:15:05-2# Respondent: Uh, well I don't mind that they know me. But I don't want the

world to know.

#00:15:10-5# Interviewer: Yeah, yeah, okay, yeah. That's what I meant.


#00:15:14-8# Interviewer: Umh.. So so, where would you normally make complaints?

Through e-mail and..

#00:15:21-2# Respondent: E-mail and phone.

#00:15:22-2# Interviewer: Telephone..


#00:15:23-4# Interviewer: Great.. Umh. Have you ever made a recommendation or suggestion

to a company through their Facebook site?

#00:15:35-1# Respondent: Umh, a suggestion for the company?

#00:15:38-2# Interviewer: Yeah, yeah a suggestion for the company, or product or.. Umh..

#00:15:42-9# Respondent: Umh.. Not that I can recall.

#00:15:50-0# Interviewer: No. Umh, but you did, you have asked questions?

#00:15:57-9# Respondent: Umh, yeah, that's just something.. mostly work related actually.

Umh.. Yeah.


#00:16:14-1# Respondent: I think the the reason why I don't make suggestions or something

is that, I don't think that the people that are updating a Facebook profile for a corporate page

will take it seriously. Uhh, I don't know why, I just don't think that the company management

will go in and have a look at their Facebook, which I think is very wrong..


#00:16:41-7# Respondent: ..but I don't think it has reached that level, yet.

#00:16:45-6# Interviewer: So you think that's a general tendency for a..

#00:16:49-2# Respondent: Well..

#00:16:49-5# Interviewer: ..corporate use of Facebook.

#00:16:50-9# Respondent: Well, yes, for 90 %. Of course 10 % use it as it should be if you

could talk about that. Uh, some people take it very seriously, and take all complaints seriously.

And I really like that, when when they answer people personally and well "call me and I'll help

you", and all of that stuff. But a lot of sites just refer to their rules and regulations and you can

find more information and, on our website, and that doesn't really help people, they could do

that in the beginning. But the people or the corporate sites that take it very seriously, I like that.

#00:17:33-8# Interviewer: Okay. Great. Umh, so what could motivate you uhm.. To engage

uhh more with a company or a brand through Facebook. And by engage I mean write or their

wall, make suggestions, or comment on status updates. These kinds of activities.

#00:18:09-4# Respondent: That's a really good question. I I haven't met any sites really that,

that make me interact with them.

#00:18:18-7# Interviewer: Nej

#00:18:19-6# Respondent: So, umm, I would like to come up with the answer, how to do it,

but I don't know.

#00:18:27-5# Interviewer: Okay. Umh, great. Do you umh.. I know this is a tricky question, but

do you consider yourself a fan of a certain brand or company?

#00:18:45-5# Respondent: Yes, yes definitely.

#00:18:47-3# Interviewer: Yeah, what what, do you have an example?

#00:18:49-8# Respondent: Well I have a lot of examples on my, on my page. I can just scroll

down here. I like Nike, I follow them and the stuff that they do. Uh, I get inspired by it, that's the

main reason. Uh.. For one. Umh.. And then personal brands as well, uh I have Lance Armstrong

and Arnold Schwarzenegger and those athletes that I really like, I'm a fan of those as well and

their Facebook pages and enjoy going and watch pictures and stories and stuff.


#00:19:34-9# Respondent: But, uhm, a lot of brands as well.

#00:19:38-6# Interviewer: Yeah okay, umh.. Yeah, we.. By companies or brands we have

actually limited this to organizations that provide some sort of service or product. So we have..

#00:19:54-4# Respondent: That's fine

#00:19:54-6# Interviewer: .. tried to ignore the celebrities and (incomprehensible)

#00:19:58-1# Respondent: Okay, fine fine.

#00:20:00-1# Interviewer: But I'm sorry we did not make that clear. Okay so you.. My next

question was if you have liked these brands or companies Facebook pages and, for instance

Nike, you say that you are a fan and you also, you also like this site. Is that like a general thing

that you do, if you.. uhm..

#00:20:25-5# Respondent: Umh.. Yes for some it is. Umh.. The brands that I like the most, I

would like to get updated on what they do. But the same rules apply that for every pages, that if

they spam me or if it’s too irrelevant information, that I delete them again.


#00:20:46-1# Respondent: Or unlike them. It doesn't mean that I don't like the brand, it just

mean that I don't want to follow them on Facebook. But with Nike, even though they have a lot

of updates, it’s quite inspiring and.. Yeah.

#00:21:00-5# Interviewer: So you think that NIke is.. A successful, that they manage a

successful Facebook profile?

#00:21:07-3# Respondent: Yeah I think so.


#00:21:08-8# Respondent: And also because that they don't, they don't want me to to interact

with them all the time.


#00:21:14-6# Respondent: They kind of understood that that I don't want to.. I don't want to

write everything. I'm a fan of Ben and Jerry's as well..


#00:21:23-0# Respondent: ..and I'm actually getting a little sick of them. Because every time

they post something, it’s like "what kind of flavor do you like the most" or "who would you

rather share your ice with". It’s all, all the time it's questions and they want me to interact with

them. And when you go in and have a look, people are interacting, or at least some are. And I'm

like, I've got better things to do with my time.


#00:21:48-6# Respondent: Uh, but with Nike it's different, because they don't want me to

interact, they just post inspiring stuff and sometimes I go in and have a look at ten very cool

pictures and shots and new technologies and new products. Not a lot of products, but some,

umh.. And that’s it, then I leave it for a week or two weeks and then maybe they post something

again and I can go and have a look. So, it’s it’s kind of a cultural thing for me, that I can go in and

have look what they did and get inspired to buy and to, yeah exercise.

#00:22:27-6# Interviewer: Okay, so actually, despite that the frequency of updates is high,

which you in some cases would consider spam and despite the fact that they do not encourage

engagement, this site really works for you, because it is relevant and inspiring…

#00:22:48-9# Respondent: Yeah yeah

#00:22:49-6# Interviewer: .. or is that the..

#00:22:50-3# Respondent: Well I wouldn't say that despite that they don't want to interact

with me, because that, I think that is the reason why I like them.


#00:22:57-8# Respondent: Umh, because.. Yeah. Just tell me what you want and that's it. Don't

wan.. Yeah don't want me to interact with you.


#00:23:11-4# Respondent: That's the main rule, if you could say so.

#00:23:15-8# Interviewer: Umh. Have you ever commented on a brand or company's

Facebook status?

#00:23:22-2# Respondent: Hmmm, no, but I think I liked it, some times. Just a few times.

#00:23:29-2# Interviewer: Okay. And why did you like..

#00:23:32-6# Respondent: Umh.. Well I think for Nike it was.. I don't know if I can remember

it. When Rafael Nadal won a tennis tournament just recently, they posted something that he was

the greatest or Federer or whoever, umh.. The greatest tennis player ever. And I liked that,

because he inspires me and they inspire me. Umh.. And that's it. I don't want to, they didn't post

a question or anything. People posted "well congrats" and "well done", but he's never going to

see this. And I just liked it, because that's.. yeah, that's sort of a medium thing to do. You don't go

all the way and comment, but you like it, it's just a simple click.


#00:24:26-1# Respondent: And that's..

#00:24:26-6# Interviewer: And that was because you actually liked..


#00:24:28-6# Interviewer: .. the fact that that he had won the championship?

#00:24:30-5# Respondent: Exactly.

#00:24:30-8# Interviewer: Yeah, okay. Umh, have you ever shared a companies' Facebook

status or picture?

#00:24:42-2# Respondent: I didn't share it publicly, but I shared it with friends.


#00:24:46-9# Respondent: For instance the Norwegian one we talked about before, I shared

that one with a friend..


#00:24:53-9# Respondent: ..uhh, because we talked about going, going somewhere together,

and that was like, well keep an eye on this, that might be something for us.

#00:25:02-9# Interviewer: Okay, so the reason was because it was relevant for you to.

#00:25:07-7# Respondent: Yeah yeah..

#00:25:08-3# Interviewer: (incomprehensible) Yeah, okay. Umh, do you ever notice that your

friends comment on corporate updates or pictures? Umh..

#00:25:23-5# Respondent: Mhhm, yes.

#00:25:24-8# Interviewer: Yeah..Umh, so.. Yeah., sorry. Have you ever.. And also, have you

noticed that your friends they share other companies' or share companies' pictures or..

#00:25:44-0# Respondent: Well sometimes. Not that often.


#00:25:47-0# Respondent: But a few times, yes.

#00:25:48-4# Interviewer: Did these updates, did they spike your interest for these

companies?


#00:25:55-5# Interviewer: I know it is difficult to answer.

#00:25:56-8# Respondent: No, umm, well.. Sometimes I think it is the other way around, that,

that might be the reason why I don't comment on Facebook, on brands. Because I think it's a bit

silly when my friends do.


#00:26:13-9# Respondent: Uuh, go in an comment on a company update or company photo or

something, then I'm like well. Well I don't know, there is nothing wrong with it..

#00:26:26-8# Interviewer: Nej

#00:26:27-3# Respondent: But I just don't want to spend my time with it.

#00:26:30-6# Interviewer: So you consider it silly when others do so?


#00:26:34-2# Interviewer: Why do you think that is?

#00:26:35-7# Respondent: Umh.. I don't know.


#00:26:43-6# Respondent: Umh, and that that, I think that's a part of the reason that I don't

do it, because I'm like, well uhh.. Get over it, in some way.


#00:26:54-5# Respondent: I don't know.


#00:26:56-0# Respondent: I I I can't explain why, but I think it's.. Well it's not all of course,

but some of the example I have seen, it’s like.. Yeah..

#00:27:07-5# Interviewer: Okay. Yeah. Umh, so, this is the final part of the interview. Do you

use the service Spotify?


#00:27:20-5# Interviewer: Umh.. What do you think of this service?

#00:27:26-7# Respondent: I like it.

#00:27:27-6# Interviewer: You like it?

#00:27:28-2# Respondent: I like it a lot.

#00:27:28-9# Interviewer: Yeah, why?

#00:27:31-0# Respondent: Because it's.. It's the music you want, wherever you want it, on

your computer, on your mobile devices, you can find everything instantly.

#00:27:43-3# Interviewer: Do you have the premium version?


#00:27:45-4# Interviewer: Yeah okay. Umh, do you share your Spotify activities on Facebook?


#00:27:52-7# Interviewer: No. And why not?

#00:27:55-9# Respondent: Well, umh.. I don't know, I think, well there might be two reasons.

For the first one, it's like it doesn't concern my friends what I am listening to, and also I think

that I might listen to a lot of shitty music that I don't want my friends to know that I'm listening

to.


#00:28:20-8# Respondent: To be honest with you.

#00:28:21-6# Interviewer: Yeah, yeah. Umh..

#00:28:24-9# Respondent: Well it's not that if they if they asked me and I was like, well of

course I would admit it. But it's the same with Facebook, uh I visit a lot of websites that I don't

fan on Facebook, uh, because it's not cool enough.



#00:28:48-1# Interviewer: So, if people were to see that you were listening to, what you think

might be embarrassing, you think that that would give them like a an image that you wouldn't

like them to have of you?

#00:29:02-4# Respondent: No actually not. I I, actually, I think it’s a bit silly myself, because

uhh.. I think my friends would like me for for the person I am, no matter what I am listening to.

And it’s not that I'm listening to Spice Girls and Backstreet Boys all the time, that I don't want

my people, my friends to see. But still it's like.. Well.. I don't know. It’s just a feeling.

#00:29:33-8# Interviewer: Yeah, okay. Umh, what do you think about the social reader and

social video apps that that are available on Facebook now?


#00:29:47-8# Interviewer: Do you know what I mean..

#00:29:49-0# Respondent: Nope.

#00:29:49-0# Interviewer: ..when I say..

#00:29:50-1# Respondent: Not quite.

#00:29:50-7# Interviewer: No, umh.. You know like the Washington Post.

#00:29:54-6# Second Interviewer: Yeah, who.. Articles that you can see others have read and

then you can read them.


#00:30:03-4# Interviewer: So they appear on your newsfeed..


#00:30:05-5# Interviewer: ..because yeah..

#00:30:05-8# Respondent: Yeah. I think that's a.. I don't like that as well. I think that's about

the same as Spotify. And actually, I was I was kind of annoyed one day, when I read an article

and I saw it a few days later appearing on my profile, that Jacob read this article. And not that it

was anything embarrassing or anything that people couldn't see. It was just something that

intervened with my personal life.


#00:30:40-9# Respondent: Umh, that I was like, well you shouldn't just post this, and I didn't

think I have given access for them to post it somewhere. I might have, but, still it was it was too

much, and I deleted it.

#00:30:55-8# Interviewer: So do you avoid using them?



#00:30:59-8# Respondent: I'd rather, if I see an article, I'd rather go into a different browser

and search for the article and read it. I might want to read the article, but I don't want to post

that I read something. And it's not that it's an embarrassing thing, it’s just that, well it's my.. I

don't know how to explain it, it's just that it intervenes with my personal life too much.

#00:31:23-4# Interviewer: Okay. So your privacy..


#00:31:26-6# Interviewer: .. is actually important to you on Facebook?

#00:31:28-8# Respondent: It is.


#00:31:29-8# Respondent: And I thought about it few weeks ago, that well, I wanted to delete

my my Facebook profile..

#00:31:35-8# Interviewer: Nå..

#00:31:36-4# Respondent: .. because I think it's getting too much. Uh, but then again, uh, I

wouldn't miss the communication with my friends and all of the stuff.. But uh, when I look at my

own updates, I don't update that frequent anymore. But sometimes it's very fun to share a photo

or share a status, or share a video, so of course I use it as well, but.. Not as often as before.

#00:32:06-5# Interviewer: Okay. So umm, my last question is actually it's related to what you

just said, but how do you feel about the fact that most activities on Facebook are visible to all of

your contacts?

#00:32:19-2# Respondent: Umh, well I don't like that.

#00:32:22-2# Interviewer: Hmm.

#00:32:22-7# Respondent: In in, some of them are okay, if you decided that you want to post

something, it's your own choice and of course that should be visible. But, umh, I think it's it's too

much, there should be a public and a non-public part if you could say so.


#00:32:42-3# Respondent: Umh, some people might say that it's a bit dishonest about who

you are, but but still I walk in different clothes at home uh, than I do when I go to work. And I

think you can compare that, that I don't wanna wear my my, umm, pajamas or sweatpants to

work. I wanna kind of look good..


#00:33:07-1# Respondent: .. and be presentable. And I think Facebook could do something

like that as well.

#00:33:14-3# Interviewer: Okay. Perfect.


social media hype? - kommunikationsforum

Documents