tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36473641.post-34044351465050594662008-07-03T09:17:00.004+02:002008-07-03T09:36:07.924+02:00<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://bp2.blogger.com/_550VzG6eH3s/SGyAd78JIRI/AAAAAAAAARA/KL0uwPKO65s/s1600-h/keller-fay-wom-credibility-offline-vs-online.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer;" src="http://bp2.blogger.com/_550VzG6eH3s/SGyAd78JIRI/AAAAAAAAARA/KL0uwPKO65s/s320/keller-fay-wom-credibility-offline-vs-online.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5218687320010072338" border="0" /></a><br />Keller Fay, along with OMD, produced this <a href="http://kellerfay.com/?page_id=222">challenging study</a> showing that offline WOM is still more powerful than the online one.<br /><br />This should not come as a surprise (and it is not to me, as I mentioned in my <a href="http://www.slideshare.net/gianandrea59/wom-workshop-english/">WOM and its metrics workshop</a>) because, even if our lives are more and more entangled in the Web 2.0 context, a vis-a-vis chat with a friend or a relative is far more credible and positive.<br />And <span style="font-weight: bold; font-style: italic;">positive</span> is the crucial word in this research.<br />Because when we talk vis-a-vis with someone we care about, most of the time is in a positive way and our advice are directed towards positive experience with a brand or a product.<br />Online conversation are far more a wall of shame. We get online to cry to the world our disappoint for a bad experience.<br /><br />That's why the two worlds, online and offline, should be tackled with a global view.<br />And that's why this research should not be read as a good reason to postpone any online activity.<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/36473641-3404435146505059466?l=bizandbuzz.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>gianandreahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01705198210724351037gianandrea@mac.com0