Ogilvy has released a study in which it analyzed the advocacy content of about 7 million social media conversations surrounding 22 brands and 8 feature films across 4 countries (Brazil, China, the UK and the US) during the first half of 2012. Conducted with CIC, Visible Technologies and Radian6, the study estimates that around 15% of brand mentions could be deemed “advocacy mentions,” in which the person made a positive comment about the brand. In each country, a plurality of these mentions were feature-related. (Examples of features for the hotel category include: room size; amenities; location; and cleanliness. For the feature films, they focused on actors, directors and other such “rational” features.)
Looking specifically at the US, advocacy was driven primarily by features (33%) and cost (24.2%), with benefits (19.7%) not too far behind. Customer service (12%) and ads (11.1%) were less popular reasons for advocating a brand. While features took the top spot in each country, there were some regional differences at hand. For example advocacy in Brazil was more heavily skewed towards features and ads and less so towards cost and customer service.
Taking a step back, levels of advocacy showed even more variance on a national scale. While the US was about average (13% of mentions deemed positive) in that regard, China was way out ahead, at 30%, while Brazil lagged at just 6% of mentions.
Other Findings:
- Skin care brands enjoyed a higher share of advocacy mentions (18%) than the other categories.
- Features drove 45.9% of advocacy mentions for feature films, compared to 30.6% for skincare brands. Among the 5 categories (coffee, hotels, fashion retail, movies, and skincare), customer service was most important for hotel brands (15.8% of advocacy mentions), while ads were most influential for skincare brands (19.2%).
About the Data: The study examined real world advocacy through the lens of social media mentions made in text. It did not look at advocacy occurring through the visual web (images and video). It also did not analyze advocacy expressed via means other than publicly visible social comments.
