Reading a piece today in the Wall Street Journal, it became clear to me that I'm in the wrong business. "Firms Get a Hand With Twitter, Facebook" talks largely about various firms that are providing social media expertise and the costs associated with their services. For example (with ratings!):

— Facebook status updates/tweets for an auto-detailing business: $450/month (Cheap)

— Organizing Twitter parties: $400 (Cheap)

— Arrange live-streaming Web conferences: $20,000 (Ridiculously over-priced)

— "social-media support as part of a package of advertising and public-relations services": $10-20k/mo. or $200/hr. (Insanely overpriced)

— Social media training for your staff: $5-10k per month (Reasonable, but this probably could be done in a few days, and I'd charge the same amount)

After yesterday's post about our social media strategy, I may be feeling a bit brazen about the subject. Operating successfully in this sphere obviously comes at a premium — but what strikes me is how eager companies are to shell out big cash to companies that couldn't possibly know enough about how to do this that they've formed services around it. In short, this is B.S. — alchemy.

I hear all the time about how ad agencies are so far behind in social media, particularly Twitter. But I would fiercely disagree with any company or person that calls himself/herself/itself an expert in the field, as it is clearly too young for anything of that nature. Are there people who have a few things figured out? Certainly. But the bottom line is this: think of social media like a party where you know a few people but the room is largely filled with strangers. You've been to a million of these. There are certain people who will be able to walk in to that room and schmooze their way into everyone's hearts and there are others who will try to interact but ultimately end up standing alone in the corner, trying desperately to break into some circle/conversation.

To say that you can be the schmoozer for some brand and then tell them it will take x amount of time for $x,xxx+ is either naive or a lie. Or both. A successful social media campaign requires (probably) a good six months of boots on the ground interaction. WSJ:

"Larry Chiagouris, professor of marketing at Lubin School of Business at Pace University, says it makes sense for some companies to pay for help to quickly learn social-media basics. But to use sites like Twitter and Facebook effectively, he says small firms typically need to be in control to show they are legitimate and sincere. 'Unless a third party lives with you a long time, they can't do that very well,' he says."

Notice that this quote, the only one regarding timelines, comes from a professor at Pace university. He's probably the only person quoted in this article who doesn't have anything to gain by fooling clients into thinking a social media campaign via Twitter can be developed and executed in, say, a month. Though it takes a long time to build a relationship, developing the practical skills to effectively communicate takes just days. From there it's hone and sharpen, stumble and fall.

Via PRNewser

More: "AgencySpy's Secret to Social Media"