The social web is going in two seemingly opposite directions. Going one way is private messaging where people connect with each other in one-to-one interactions on platforms like WeChat and Facebook Messenger. In the other direction we have video broadcasting platforms like Periscope and Meerkat that allow people to easily share live video of what is happening in the here and now. Somewhere in the middle of those two directions lie our social mainstays: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and company.

Marketers for the most part have those “mainstays” figured out to a certain degree. Those other areas are still a challenge. Private messaging is a challenge because it flies in the face the idea of reaching many people. It’s a one-to-one approach to marketing. Video broadcasting, on the other hand, could potentially reach many people, and it looks like it may be here to stay.

This isn’t live video streaming’s first foray. Live streaming has been around for awhile (some called it life streaming). People have shared live videos on their webcams since the early days of the web, but Periscope and Meerkat have democratized live streaming for the masses. Today, Periscope has 10 million users only four months after launch, and those users consume 40 years worth of video content every day. Live streaming may finally be hitting its stride.

The users are there (or at least starting to be), and their attention is there. It looks like a prime place for marketers to at least start to consider for their marketing plans, but that can be a challenge.

Live streaming is… live. It is what is happening in the moment, and when something is live anything can happen. There’s no time for touchups and certainly no reshoots. Once the broadcast goes live, people are watching.

Are brands ready for this level of authenticity? After all, it’s always been social’s promise to connect brands and people in an authentic, transparent way. What’s more authentic than hitting the “broadcast” button and letting the camera roll?

It’s going to be interesting to see how brands respond to these channels. Will they be scared off by the potential legal risks? Or will they go to such extremes to stage everything that any potential for authenticity is removed? Most will be one or the other.

How Far to Pull the Curtain and for Who?

The approach a brand takes to live streaming apps comes down to content—creating video brands want to create and video people want to see. And despite growing user numbers, I don’t see the opportunity with these platforms being related to reaching large numbers of people. I see it as a way for brands to share looks inside their businesses for their most passionate advocates.

Is Social’s Promise Finally Paying Off?

Live streaming’s opportunity has more in common with intimate, one-to-one messaging platforms than large [paid] reach megaphone platforms like Facebook because, in the beginning, only a brand’s biggest advocates are going to take the time to view the content. These platforms offer ways to pull back the curtain for the people who care to look—those people who want to see new product announcements, how products are made and who is designing the products. Those are the people who will watch and then talk about what they see because they just got brought into a special, intimate experience with a creator (the brand) they care about.

Despite its name live video broadcasting platforms aren’t about the broadcast but about the connection because they can be real and intimate. Don’t see them as ways to rack up views but as ways to connect with people who care most. Live streaming is about the connection, not the broadcast.