I’ve seen chatter in the past and even recently about recommendations to go ‘all in’ on a social network with one’s digital presence. As in, a brand having its sole (or main) presence on, say, Facebook. Or in lieu of a blog, continuously writing on Google+ (like Robert Scoble did).
I think this is a terrible idea. And here’s why.
When you have an apartment, you rent it. You pay money each month and you have an agreement with a landlord. They make capital improvements so you don’t have to. However, they can raise the rent, change whether or not you get to park a car, and even give you the boot if they want to demolish and put up a storefront that sells top hats.
When you have a house, you own it (well, you have a mortgage). You can paint the walls. You can change the flooring. You can knock down a wall. It’s yours. Aside from zoning laws, what you do is up to you.
If you put all your brand’s social presence onto rented land like Facebook or Google+, and they ripped the carpet out from under you, what’s your recourse? None. If you blog or run your own domain, you own the control. You call the shots. You dictate the look and feel.
Having a presence on other sites is a great idea. Go where your customers are. But don’t make those places the only place. Use them as feeder networks. Go. Listen. Engage. But drive them from rented land to owned land. Your land (cue Woody Guthrie).
image generated using http://www.keepcalm-o-matic.co.uk