"We had juicers, druggies, motor heads, hippies (yes I’m that old,) rockers, heavy metal rockers, jocks and nerds."
Each clique had its own coda, jargon, ethics, special interests, badges of honor (or dishonor) and tests of loyalty.
Products always are some part of how cliques identify themselves. That's the "hook" a brand hopes to put out there when using Facebook or other social networks as a marketing channel. But there are lots of obvious caveats. The products are not the groups. It is the people who are the social network, the products are props.
So most brands will not be authentic members of the social group, but the provider of key props. And not every product has high emotional value, or works as a key prop. Most social groups that have a product as an identifier or prop only have a few such props, just as most consumers have a handful of relevant brands with high emotional ties. Starbucks, Apple, Whole Foods or Lexis might be some of those types of "high involvement" products.
But it simply doesn't make sense that most products people use and buy actually have much chance of achieving either high emotional involvement or therefore effectiveness on Facebook or other networks. It's just like the notion of "followers" on Twitter. Only a handful of human beings actually have "millions" of followers, and nearly all are celebrities.
Something similar happens when brands use Facebook, and most businesses try to use Facebook these days. In most cases, most brands are not going to be among the handful of names that any single human being actually does want to interact with.
Also, it is the other people any person wants to have the involvement with, even when the brand is relevant. The point is to be realistic about what Facebook can provide. Groups are about "people like me," even when the badge happens to be a product or brand. The badge isn't necessarily part of the group.
