More on the Facebook value proposition, and I quote:
“wasting significant financial, technological, and human resources on social networks that don’t deliver value”
I am not a marketing person. I don’t have a Facebook account either. Maybe television, radio, and old fashioned billboards are okay but could use an interactive twist.
Efficient Minds™ 
This is super misleading. In reading the original blog on Forrester, the thesis is that organic (read: unpaid) reach on social media is dead. The WSJ writer took Forrester’s post and combines cherry picked quotes with illogical arguments to claim that all marketing on social media bears little fruit.
I followed marketing blogs/online communities to see where dollars were being spent, and the consensus was that their Twitter campaigns produced the greatest return and engagement per dollar than Facebook, and both Twitter and FB produced greater return than passive advertising on TV (bypassed with DVRs), broadcast radio, and billboards. Radio was also generating lower returns as people move from live broadcast radio to internet radio where ad space is far more limited (increasing competition/cost). Social media marketing is still a great value proposition, especially with the benefit of real-time analytics, and the cost curve will undoubtedly hit an equilibrium in the future- this just hasn’t happened yet.
In regards to “traditional advertising platforms”, look to their internet counterparts for growth (i.e. internet radio & video streaming). ROI of broadcast TV marketing- with the exception of ads aired during live events- died with the onset of DVRs.
A good speaker does not waste words so I make this brief. For every truth the opposite is equally true. The anti-“social media” perspective suggests ROI does not exist and presents evidence. The pro-“social media” perspective suggest ROI is there and presents evidence. I say both are true.
To be truly pro-“social media” your actions should include purchasing Facebook/Twitter stock at current prices, sending your resume to those companies, launching social media campaigns with your current employer with tangible dollar-based ROI metrics, actually clicking through advertisements and making purchases, and being in the top quartile of usage with those services. Absent those actions, speaking many words pro-“social media” is nothing more than a clanging symbol or sounding brass, i.e., noise.
I don’t use FB or twitter nor do I own their stock.
My point is that this WSJ article at best completely misinterprets the cited blog and at worst makes me question this writers relationship to social stocks. Allow me to cite the original research note’s intro:
“Despite widespread investment in social media tactics, marketing leaders still struggle to deliver solid business outcomes with their social efforts. And “social exceptionalism” — doing social for social’s sake — is often the root of the problem. To become more advanced with social, you need to adopt a new mindset and first think about where and how you can do social better, not just more.” -http://tinyurl.com/kome8b3
The problem is that most marketers are still learning how to effectively utilize these platforms. I’ve spent hours with Facebook’s advanced targeting tools and, since implementation, we’ve seen a massive boost in constituent post engagement and event turnout (especially college-aged events). As Forrester stated, marketers cannot achieve optimal results without highly targeted campaigns; this WSJ article completely misrepresents their message.
I see nothing wrong with the WSJ blog’s interpretation or that by many other sources. For example: http://www.businessinsider.com/forrester-facebook-social-relationship-strategies-that-work-report-2014-11
Everybody is entitled to an opinion just as we are. Nevertheless, as I said before, one can easily find (and comment on) studies pro-facebook and many studies anti-facebook. One can trumpet the merits of Facebook or actually put time, money, and energy into what they believe in. Without action words are meaningless in my opinion.
It is your privilege to use Facebook and buy its stock. It is my privilege to avoid the “service” and not buy the stock.