FB vs FQDN :: What a difference a decade makes?

If you have been watching the evolution of digital property’s presence on TV and what companies value over the years, what’s been happening recently is fascinating.

It used to be all about the Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN — long form name for a URL). Run an ad and have it trail out with your URL. toyota.com.budweiser.com (we’re talking the big companies here)

But now, when you watch — it’s become all about Facebook.

Facebook.com/toyota
Facebook.com/budweiser

Companies are running top dollar, super bowl ads and directing their customers to go to another website that they don’t own or control, can’t define the user experience as they see fit or even guarantee what happens when a customer arrives there will be what they expect (Facebook launches new things all of the time that often change behavior).

A strong social media strategy is vital — no doubt about it. In the worse ‘containment’ mindset only because if you aren’t in your own social strategy — someone else will come along and masquerade as you and it probably won’t’ be to your liking.

But at the same time, why companies spending all of that money to create user engagement (and registered users you don’t control or own!) for another company?

It defies logic and yet at the same time, perhaps identifies an opportunity. The reason you drive rathere is easy of use for consumer. Maybe there is a play that provides consumers (smells a little like the failed Microsoft product called Passport (I think)) with a digital footprint that they can plug into with other companies but also allows the companies to maintain a direct relationship.