Is it quantity not quality for user generated content?

As news feeds on popular social media platforms become swamped with promotional user generated content, we have to ask are these diverse new channels actually delivering for marketers?

Over recent years this blog has made frequent observations on the growing diversity  of publication platforms available for user generated content and on their business models.  Platforms that have evolved from social media origins such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and LinkedIn and where each started with a particular focus e.g. Twitter news headlines, YouTube video content, LinkedIn professional networking. There seems now to be a convergence of functions that see photo images and video on Facebook for example - and they are beginning to look alike. Not only is the sheer volume of content overwhelming, but the quality is generally pretty uninspiring, to the point of offering little interest in viewing it. Let me give an example - the video. It may be one that someone thinks amusing that they have shared, or a company video of some sort, but what you see is the first frame with an arrow head in the centre. Does anyone realise how boring and uninviting this looks? Why would anyone bother to view it?

Two important sources of income for publishers are advertising revenue or subscription income, with advertising content of sorts now a growing portion of the total content - paid for advertisements along with user generated advertorial. And yet  the publishers we have to remember, unlike in the print model, provide no editorial overview or control. It is pretty much a free for all, allowing users to publish what for print media would be the contents of the editorial trash can. So digital agencies are busy 'making new friends' and 'connections'  for their clients and pumping out messages by the hour. Looking at my LinkedIn feed there are messages from the likes of Microsoft, Cisco and O2, also advertorial style messages, some from actual contacts I know amongst the usual updates on who is now a contact of who. What is the marketing goal? Is it to promote a specific product, engage with the audience or maintain 'top of the mind awareness'? And does it work?

Unlike the print world there is a very worrying downside. The customers who 'don't like' the advertiser and oddly enough Microsoft and O2 apparently have their dissatisfied customers who use this channel to vent their frustrations. Probably because it is made so difficult to talk sensibly to such large companies, or indeed talk to anyone at all. O2  had a whole load of complainants commenting on their advertisement and a long complaint popped up on Facebook about a Ryanair flight which got shared.

PR  is about reputation and bombarding people with too much content, too often may be counter productive. So be aware that unlike a display advertisement in a printed publication, online you may draw criticism, so you will need to monitor comments and these could be shade who knows where.