Essentially part eight gives a conclusion of spreadable media. Copied in below from the article is the major bullet points made in the article addressing what the papers have talked about, why spreadable media is useful, the long term benefit of using spreadable media, the reasons why companies would use spreadable media and what companies have the most to lose from spreadable media.
Conclusion: The Value of Spreadable Media
So far this white paper has:
- criticized the vagueness of existing models of “viral media” or “memes”
- outlined the differences between sticky and spreadable media.
- identified those factors which have led to the rise of spreadable media
- shown why spreadable media involves a collaboration between the gift economy and commodity culture.
- discussed a range of different kinds of communities that are shaping the spread of media
- pointed towards some properties shared by the most spreadable media content.
So what is spreadable media good for?
- To generate active commitment from the audience,
- To empower them and make them an integral part of your product’s success,
- To benefit from online word-of-mouth
- To reach niche, highly interconnected audiences,
- but most of all, to communicate with audiences where they already are, and in a way that they value.
Each of these factors suggest that such an approach may yield longer term rather than shorter term benefits:
- Spreadability may help to expand and intensify consumer awareness of a new and emerging brand or transform their perceptions of an existing brand, re-affirming its central place in their lives.
- Spreadability may expand the range of potential markets for a brand by introducing it, at low costs and low risks, to niches that previously were not part of its market.
- Spreadability may intensify consumer loyalty by increasing emotional attachment to the brand or media franchise.
- Spreadability may expand the shelf life of existing media content by creating new ways of interacting with it (as occurs, say, around the modding of games or the archiving of classic television content on YouTube) and it may even rebuild or reshape the market for a dormant brand, as suggested by Robert Kozinets writing on “retro-brands.”
All told, those companies which have the most to gain from this approach are those who have the least to lose from abandoning traditional broadcasting models, those which have:
- lower promotional budgets
- who want to reach niche markets
- who want to distribute so-called “Long Tail” content
- who want to build strong emotional connections with their consumers.
Those who have the most to lose are those companies which:
- have well established brand messages
- have messages that are predictably delivered through broadcast channels
- who are concerned about a loss of control over their intellectual property
- who have reason to fear backlash from their consumers.