<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
xmlns:rawvoice="http://www.rawvoice.com/rawvoiceRssModule/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Apps and widgets- Cool toys or neat tools for social media engagement?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://chasingthestorm.com/social-media-marketing-theories/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://chasingthestorm.com/social-media-marketing-theories/</link>
	<description>Original content, Real opinions.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 May 2012 07:44:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: shalabh</title>
		<link>http://chasingthestorm.com/social-media-marketing-theories/comment-page-1/#comment-76</link>
		<dc:creator>shalabh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 01:08:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://shalabh.wordpress.com/?p=130#comment-76</guid>
		<description>Hey Unny,
Then again, in your support, just came across this article- 
http://adage.com/digital/article?article_id=132606

While I again agree that unruly, unorganized and unplanned-for marketing is annoying and plain simple noise/interference, I also feel that if done right, this could go a long way in creating an outlet for customer loyalty (ahem!) and achieving other marketing/business objectives .

Unfortunately,  in this industry, people are too eager to trash stuff that was in a few months ago and over anxious to start off or champion something new.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Unny,<br />
Then again, in your support, just came across this article-<br />
<a href="http://adage.com/digital/article?article_id=132606" rel="nofollow">http://adage.com/digital/article?article_id=132606</a></p>
<p>While I again agree that unruly, unorganized and unplanned-for marketing is annoying and plain simple noise/interference, I also feel that if done right, this could go a long way in creating an outlet for customer loyalty (ahem!) and achieving other marketing/business objectives .</p>
<p>Unfortunately,  in this industry, people are too eager to trash stuff that was in a few months ago and over anxious to start off or champion something new.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shalabh</title>
		<link>http://chasingthestorm.com/social-media-marketing-theories/comment-page-1/#comment-32</link>
		<dc:creator>Shalabh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2008 08:03:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://shalabh.wordpress.com/?p=130#comment-32</guid>
		<description>Hi Unny
Thanks for raising a debate here! Whew- at least someone read the post (just joking- this incidentally turned out to be the post with quite a lot of reads).

As you rightly identified- the theory (as is usually the case) postulates and tries to understand human behavior and why do they behave in the way they do. In this case, apart from a personal joy in using the tool (and in some cases finding utility) there is an inherent influence exercised by a person&#039;s immediate and extended environment that makes them endorse a product or behave in a particular manner. Hence the reference to the theory. If looked at carefully, it might help marketers carefully posture and claim a part of conversation that is the new marketing.

The theory was not developed in the internet era as I mentioned, but it could be adapted to understand the somewhat archaic phenomenon that internet behavior has become.

I also agree that everything that assumes scale or is perceived &#039;cool&#039; is hogged by ever anxious marketers.

However, everything that assumes scale and is worthy of getting a message across- becomes a media- from messages on elephant backs to cool widgety things- and does merit some marketing attention.

Also, from another angle, most legally valid developments- either online or offline have an aim to monetize- either directly or indirectly- and thus can be a part of a marketing story.

If development or innovation were sex, money is the aphrodisiac- gets you in the mood!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Unny<br />
Thanks for raising a debate here! Whew- at least someone read the post (just joking- this incidentally turned out to be the post with quite a lot of reads).</p>
<p>As you rightly identified- the theory (as is usually the case) postulates and tries to understand human behavior and why do they behave in the way they do. In this case, apart from a personal joy in using the tool (and in some cases finding utility) there is an inherent influence exercised by a person&#8217;s immediate and extended environment that makes them endorse a product or behave in a particular manner. Hence the reference to the theory. If looked at carefully, it might help marketers carefully posture and claim a part of conversation that is the new marketing.</p>
<p>The theory was not developed in the internet era as I mentioned, but it could be adapted to understand the somewhat archaic phenomenon that internet behavior has become.</p>
<p>I also agree that everything that assumes scale or is perceived &#8216;cool&#8217; is hogged by ever anxious marketers.</p>
<p>However, everything that assumes scale and is worthy of getting a message across- becomes a media- from messages on elephant backs to cool widgety things- and does merit some marketing attention.</p>
<p>Also, from another angle, most legally valid developments- either online or offline have an aim to monetize- either directly or indirectly- and thus can be a part of a marketing story.</p>
<p>If development or innovation were sex, money is the aphrodisiac- gets you in the mood!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Unny</title>
		<link>http://chasingthestorm.com/social-media-marketing-theories/comment-page-1/#comment-33</link>
		<dc:creator>Unny</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Oct 2008 15:19:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://shalabh.wordpress.com/?p=130#comment-33</guid>
		<description>hi shalabh,
not sure how social cognitive theory is getting connected here. unless we are saying that social cognitive theory explains why we tend to use these tools. then it is true of many cool tools.

i also wonder why all of us see any thing that new happens on net with the &#039;marketing man&#039;s angle&#039;. most of what is written and talked about internet and associated developments are in the context of marketing. it is as though users are on internet exist only to be a part of a marketing story. or as if any thing developed on net is for marketing.

am i making sense? perhaps debatable!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>hi shalabh,<br />
not sure how social cognitive theory is getting connected here. unless we are saying that social cognitive theory explains why we tend to use these tools. then it is true of many cool tools.</p>
<p>i also wonder why all of us see any thing that new happens on net with the &#8216;marketing man&#8217;s angle&#8217;. most of what is written and talked about internet and associated developments are in the context of marketing. it is as though users are on internet exist only to be a part of a marketing story. or as if any thing developed on net is for marketing.</p>
<p>am i making sense? perhaps debatable!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

