Why Most of Fortune 10 Still Hiding Social Media Involvement from their homepages

By B.L. Ochman

Back in 2006, I wrote a post wondering why so many large companies were hiding their blogs from their company websites. In 2009, it would have taken Nancy Drew to find the company blog, or Facebook page, or Twitter feed, or all of its YouTube videos.

Call Inspector Clouseau if you want to find the rest.

1. Exxon Mobile No sign of social media on the homepage.

2. Walmart links to Facebook, Twitter, blogs, community action network.

3- Chevron . No listing of social networks, but there is a Corporate Responsibility tab and a game about safe power.

4- Conoco Phillips' homepage contains links to twitter, Facebook and YouTube. They're below the first fold, but at least they're there.

5 - GE No homepage reference to social media.

6- GM No link to social media involvement

7- Ford lists it social media sites in a box on the bottom of the homepage. Ford also has popular, dedicated social media director, Scott Monty on Twitter.

8 - AT&T No social media sites listed.

9 - HP despite having been an early adopter of blogs, has no listing of social media involvement.

10- Valero Energy No social media involvement noted.

This lack of links from corporate homepages belies recent findings that 54% of Fortune 100 uses Twitter; 32% use blogs; 29% have Facebook fan pages, according to a recent study by Burson Marsteller and Proof Integrated Communications (where I am Managing Director of Emerging Media.)

My guess for why social media links are not displayed, even by those who are involved in Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, etc. is that the reasons haven't changed:

o fear that they'll lose control of their brand if too many people know they can have a say;
o lack of cooperation between marketing and IT;
o and perhaps pressure from lawyers who are nervous about all this new-fangled new media.

Sigh.

Good point. I think you're right when you tell the reasons why brands are sometimes still afraid to show their social presence on their home page.

In the very short term, it could be a good strategy: see how they work and decide which channels to privilege. In the long term, it could be good to have all of the social channels shown clearly, to set up an environment that is always coherent to the consumer.

Where is this other study that you are talking about that states "...study findings that 54% of Fortune 100 uses Twitter; 32% use blogs; 29% have Facebook fan pages."

I would love to see your research.
Thanks,
C

I think the lack of a coherent strategy play a big part in this as well. And the fact that it is not viewed as strategy means it can get relegated to the back room. Good perspectives - appreciate it!

I think it is funny that companies are scared to adopt an arguably free marketing campaign. I think points 2 and 3 are spot on. I can't imagine your first point to be true though. Whether they are involved in social media or not, they are aware of their brands presence in that arena. I don't think they are afraid to lose control of their brands by being involved, I think 2 and 3 really restrict their ability to be involved.

Lawyers and accountants should not write "creative" policy, which is why they don't!

I wish the first point weren't still true, but many companies are absolutely still holding on to the idea that they can control the message. Their fossil PR firms tell them they can, and they want to believe it.

I corrected the link to the research report. Thanks for the catch!

I think a bigger reason is ROI on the bottom line. What's the true gain for these orgs? In reality, top executives may be thinking they have more to lose than to gain.

Hey, B.L.! Thanks for the shout out. We're obviously proud to see that Ford is on the list. We've also made our social platforms available in one place over on The Ford Story as well: http://www.thefordstory.com/ford-social-networks/

And as always, we're looking for ways to improve. If there's anything you see, please let us -- oh, who am I kidding? Of *course* you'll write it up! :-)

Scott Monty
Global Digital Communications
Ford Motor Company

I work for GE and we do have social media on our homepage - GE reports is our blog!

Simple - it hasn't yet proven to contribute to the bottom line for most of these companies. Why would a company work so hard to bring someone to their site to only send them off the Twitter/Facebook where there is no sales proposition.

When Social Media starts driving sales it will get plenty of exposure. That's sorta how things work.

This is Justin with Chevron Corporation. Thanks for the mention! At this time, Chevron doesn't post a direct link to our social networking sites on our homepage. However, we are active participants on Youtube, Twitter, Linked, Facebook and our own site- WillYouJoinUs.

We have a number of links to our social media sites on our company "news" page. Nonetheless, we need to get better at promoting these sites- posts like yours underscore this fact.

Thanks again B.L.

All the best,
Justin Higgs
Chevron Corporation

I applaud the companies for not littering their site with this information. Very few of these companies have a firm grasp on their content strategy as a whole, and you end up with very disconnected message and branding.

Also, many only sign up just because everyone else is signed up - they have no idea the impact (good or bad) that it could have on their business, or how to even integrate it into their current strategies.

Give it a few years, when these fads fade out - then they all have this stale 'follow me on twitter' feel to their homepage. The brands that truly understand social media will 1) have a dedicated person and understanding of how to use it within their content strategy or 2) Ignore the fad until they fully realize the impact.

Too many 'social media experts' think you have to be there no matter what, and I believe that is a huge fallacy. In fact, most of these 'social media experts' have Twitter, Facebook, etc - where they sit and talk AT people - or themselves. They don't even know how to engage.

Maybe, just maybe - they have more important things to use that homepage (or other page) real estate for, and don't want to distract users or lead them down another path. They understand the importance of integrating these tools into the design in an unobtrusive manner - while still keeping a customers attention.

Smaller, less invested organizations need the networking exposure. Few have heard of our company, but everyone knows Chevron. I understand the big 10's strategy of involving social media, but they just don't need to attract as much promotional attention to it as the rest of us.

There is also the likelihood they are leery of political advocate spamming.

I was actually quite surprised when you said that HP didn't have a listing of social media involvement, because I had read case studies about their early blogging efforts, so I went to check it out for myself.

Turns out that they do have their blogs listed (along with videos and podcasts) on their site under the "Connect With Others" link on the homepage. That being said, it's not very intuitively located, and I actually had to Google search for HP's blogs before I found out where they were.

Way far from intuitive! In my book, that's still hiding.

Huh?

>
Social media is a fad in much the same way email was a fad about 20 years ago.

Enjoy life on your planet.

Hi Everyone -

maybe one reason is that companies don´t need to promote their social media engagements on their corporate websites ands maybe even shouldn´t do so....?!

why do marketing activities for your social media engagements?

companies should engage and communicate on social media platforms and talk to people where they are talking. people don´t surf via a corporates website to facebook or twitter. they go to facebook and communicate there. they go to google and search for products, services, etc. and should find a companies blog, etc, that way.

what do you think?

klaas

by the way -
it is really the wrong way to moderate comments. ;-)

I think you should disclose that Ford is a major client of Burson-Marsteller, your employer. I think your insights, for the most part, are right on. In the case of GM (a client), it doesn't take much to find an abundance of social media offerings on the web. In fact, they are often praised for trailblazing:
http://www.prsa.org/SearchResults/view/8548/105/What_drives_GM_s_social_media_strategy

This is my personal blog and what I write here reflects my personal opinions and observations.

I'd say Ford was a client if I worked on the account, but, frankly, I didn't know they were a Burson client.