Your question got me thinking. I think we cannot really answer that for everyone, nor can we generalize it. I guess it's different for everyone. It depends on what really matters to you. Some people actually want more clicks than they do having conversations with others. Some value the conversation more than the clicks, so it's really hard to know where social media really stands.

You make a very interesting distinction and not one that occurred to me before. Yes, you're right. These tactics use web 2.0 tools, but don't really allow for genuine communication. There's clearly a different agenda at work. I this is rather disingenuous, actually.

Great insight! I think TRUE social media doesn't line up with most corporate marketing goals. At its core, social media is organic. Once you start injecting things like ROI and Gross Impressions, it automatically pollutes the conversation. The end result is exactly what you describe.

I think there are many companies who think, "We can do social media marketing, this is easy" but when they really get into it they don't have the time to dedicate to building relationships and it turns into this hybrid marketing as you described it. It becomes all about click-through rates and getting the customer involved in a one-way conversation where the company gets the feedback and the content, but the customer never hears back from the company! Talk about a backward view on being social.
You nailed it with this post. Many companies are using social media outlets but are not putting forth the effort to really be social and build up those customer relationships.

Thank you all for continuing this conversation. I was/so curious to understand the sm community's take.

@Elizabeth @Laura - it seems many companies are not comfortable without traditional metrics and I know that many are still skittish when it comes to joining in on discussions even on their own brand platforms.

@Margy - interesting the word you use "disingenuous." If we were to look at the same tactics but without the words social media overlaid would you feel the same way?

@Marcy - if I understand your comment the definition of social media might be morphing? It always goes back to goals. Clicks or convos? Perhaps ideally it's both?

Toby - You had me at your opening paragraph! The social web is creating fundamental change in the business-customer relationship and the savvy ones can sense this coming. Those who don't, see social media only as a tactic "out there" rather than one that actually effects change back inside the organization.

I think people and relationships are still important for effective marketing in Web 2.0. Creating that video for YouTube, AdWido, and Veoh that people will want to share or that contest where people will make videos for you generally showcase your business's "coolness" and improves your potential customers' image of you. It's true that this doesn't have to be the case though; maybe your video is just designed to cause controversy and attention. Either way, this affects the image you have in hopes that someone will approve of this image you promote and be attracted to your product.

Great food for thought. I think that as time goes on, we will see the situation that you describe progress to even even more impersonal levels. In my opinion, it is not so much individual companies and their marketing departments that move social media engagement away from actual conversations, it is advertising agencies flounder with clients if they cannot find specific ways to tie the spend to very specific outcomes. It doesn't help that most large agencies, in spite of their loud claims of being forward thinkers, are usually dinosaurs that abhor change!