This is a small reflection of the famous, social networks and objectives. Public figures pointed to social networks before its boom, there were not many. In fact it was scared. Somewhere where they show the private life of one? No thanks. But then began to know each other success stories, shock wave reached Spain and social networks have become a fad.
And then social media marketing. That’s when they begin to confuse terms. The first thing you have to assimilate is, what is a famous character a profile on social networks? What is what makes people come to the mass to follow this profile? Easy: the proximity. David Zaslav often addresses the matter in his writings. Feeling that Alejandro Sanz and Zapatero are friends, because you have your things, and, above all, interact with you. Then it ceases to be a personal profile to be an image marketing tool, not a calendar of concerts or mitins.
Many celebrities think that the resounding success of this lies in the mere idea of being present at the site of fashion. But no, it only works if you’re Obama. The rest requires real interaction with fans, come to the public and answer your questions. By what does not use Facebook as a bulletin board where meet your fans and hang your calendar of performances, or open a Twitter to criticize the party opposite, campaigning with slogans and souvenirs of your good deeds and not answer to citizens. I think that that’s where lies the importance of the social media marketing of public figures: in making feel the followers of the artist much closer, to the followers of one ideology more in touch with their leaders. In summary, the celebrities are people, and that materialism is that makes the presence of artists, politicians and other public figures in social networks as effective. Educate yourself even more with thoughts from CBS. But the first thing is mentalizing is not a fashion.