How FIFA misjudged the digital natives
The FIFA carnival has come and gone, and like any traveling circus it was filled with heart-stopping thrills, breathtaking skills and a few clowns to add some comic relief. In its wake, we are now left to nurse the football craving, ponder what to do with our shiny new sports cathedrals and consider how best to capitalize on the nation building euphoria, before reverting back to our true national sport - bickering.
2010 was a first in many respects for both South Africa and the World Cup. It was the first World Cup to be held on African soil and the first time vuvuzelas became a global talking point (potentially our next biggest export opportunity since the wooden giraffe). South Africa was, unfortunately, the first host country not to proceed to the second round. It was however, also the first World Cup where fans were armed with new technologies: social media and the opportunity to vent and publish online.
For me, the last point is the most significant, and one that FIFA should be placing at the top of their post-mortem discussions. Like the Olympics, the World Cup is held every four years. This adds an exciting element into the tournament's dynamics. In a digital age, however, four years represents a quantum leap in altered social dynamics, and the 2010 World Cup just proved how out of step FIFA had become with this fast-changing world.
The tongue lashing FIFA received from fans and media is well documented, but the one word that kept cropping up in relation to FIFA sponsorship deals and interaction with the public was "draconian": a word derived from a 7th century law maker who was notorious for severe punishment of the most trivial offences. The heavy handed manner in which FIFA dealt with the Bavaria ambush marketing incident was the most publicized, but that was just the tip of the iceberg.
One of the most important social trends that completely bypassed FIFA is the shift of power to the people, and in this case millions of faithful football fans. This shift – which any business ignores at their peril – has been made possible by social media and online publishing. Both platforms have provided consumers the opportunity to mobilize like-minded groups, share information and question the voices of authority. The effect this has had on publishing world alone is startling. The voice of one (the editor) has been challenged by the voice and opinions of many (via blogs and forums). Citizen journalism, powered by social media platforms like Twitter, is now a force that cannot be ignored. In the fashion industry, live streaming of fashion shows - from catwalk to consumer - has practically rendered industry-only fashion shows and the opinions of fashion editors obsolete. Consumers have moved from being passive recipients to very vocal, and active, participants of brands – FIFA included.
It is no longer acceptable to use a "broadcast mentality" (or one way conversation) with your intended customer. People have grown accustomed to engaging, networking, and customizing their experiences online, and expect the same freedom offline. Throughout the World Cup, FIFA has been painted as an out-of-touch, old school, bully that uses outdated one-way conversations to communicate and impose their draconian laws.
The fully booked budget accommodations compared to the vacancies at expensive hotels (sold via FIFA approved tour packages) speaks volumes about what the fans really wanted versus what FIFA thought was best for them. The fact that many of the non-official sponsors, from competing sportswear brands to beer and chocolate brands, received more online and media coverage than the FIFA affiliated sponsors, further illustrates how fans respond more to innovation and direct engagement than rigid repression. FIFA's obstinate refusal to use video technology to check a referee's decision – while billions of fans watch televised instant replays – further illustrates just how blinkered their perspective is.
The one attempt by Sepp Blatter to engage with social media backfired horribly when he decided to start a Twitter account. He racked up an impressive 20 000 followers with his debut, but unbeknown to him, this was not a benign following. He, and his team, underestimated the skill required to handle a very public social media platform, the need for an open, two-way engagement with his followers, and most importantly the rising dissatisfaction with FIFA. For his troubles, he received a brutal, and global, "Twit-slap" of note when the fans finally found a gap, and opportunity, to storm the FIFA ivory tower and air their grievances.
I hope it was a lesson well learnt, because if technology has changed the world so dramatically since the 2006 World Cup, you can be certain that Brazil in 2014 is going to be a whole new ballgame.
