Over at AdAge, Comscore VP Andrew Lipsman discusses  a study by the Ehren-Bass Institute that showed that only  1% of Facebook fans actually engage with brands they follow on Facebook.

Essentially, the research said that 1.3% of Facebook fans like, post, comment, tag or share content from brands they follow.   In response, Andrew makes a parallel between measuring Facebook content by likes and measuring display ads by clicks, saying that by only looking at the 0.1% who clicked on the ad you ignore the 99.9% that saw it.

Secondly Andrew says that even a low incidence of likes can have a large impact citing previous research that showed “Starbucks fans and friends of fans spent 8% more and purchased 11% more frequently in-store than non-fans who were also Starbucks buyers.”  Note the emphasis on friends of fans as well as fans.

I’d raise another issue with the 1%  brand engagement figure.

The Ehren-Bass study involved the 200 largest brands on Facebook -  the Starbucks and Cokes of this world where a lot of the likes are purely incidental and quickly forgotten about.   There is in fact evidence that the larger your page, the less engaged your fans.

A PageLever study last year showed that the larger the Facebook page, the fewer the % that even *sees* items in your newsfeed

PageLever found that daily unique newsfeed impressions were 9.38 per 100 fans for pages that have between 1000-10,000 fans.    Once you go up to pages with a million fans though, daily unique newsfeed impressions drops to 2.79 per 100 fans.

Visibli came up with a similar study last year.   It  found that for brands and media organisations, pages with more fans received proportionally fewer likes per post (not the case though if you are an artist).  Engagement went down as likes went up

The other week Diageo marketer Philip Gladman said if you don’t have a million Facebook fans you should stick your budget in TV.   Leaving aside for the moment the issue of how far that TV money will even take you  the question should be why a million, and what are they going to do for you?

Arguably as some of the studies I mentioned have shown, working your way up to the big number may not always be the best tactic.   There may even be a case for keeping it small by breaking your communities down by product or interest group to get a series of smaller, but more committed groups.

Top image – Find your search

Related articles

• How Email Subscribers and Facebook Fans are Similar [INFOGRAPHIC] (contently.com)
• Visual, Interactive Content Gives Facebook Timeline Engagement Early Boost (searchenginewatch.com)
• The Evolution of Facebook for Brands (mashable.com)

Here’s some research from Microsoft and Carnegie Mellon University that again shows the level of trust we place on the opinions of social media contacts – people we may in many cases have never met in real life. (via Poynter.org)

What’s the most believable source on Twitter?

A retweet from someone you trust (4.08/5) followed by a tweet from someone with ‘verified author expertise’ in the subject (4.04/5).  In addition to showing the power of peer recommendations, that also demonstrates how false information can spread quickly online.

Interestingly, the list of top ten trust factors includes the Twitter verification mark.  Getting that blue tick does seem to raise the credibility of your Twitter account.

At the same time, tweets from twitter followers inspire the least credibility concerns, with ones found via search having the highest.

Meanwhile a study published in searchengineland (via Simply Zesty) says that 72% trust online reviews as much as they do recommendations from friends.

In all, 58% say positive customer reviews would make them trust a business more, 25% say they have no impact and 17% pay no attention to them.

Related articles

• Twitter Tool Will Help Journalists Break News [VIDEO] (mashable.com)
• Only 36% of Tweets on Twitter Worth Reading via Marketing Charts (michaelhartzell.com)
• Research claims that 25% of tweets are not worth reading. So what? (freshnetworks.com)

Research out by Pew shows that when it comes to the major US hard news story of 2012, the Presidential election, voters prefer tried and tested news sources.

Only one in twenty (6%) Americans hears about the campaign from Facebook, and while 20% get election news from online news apps or websites, 36% get it from cable TV.Similarly, 41% of Twitter users ‘regularly’ or ‘sometimes’ get election news on Twitter, compared to 40% who never do.

Two observations about this study:

Pew headlines it by saying “Twitter, Facebook play very modest roles.”

I would add the words “so far.”   Pew’s research also shows that younger age groups who are most likely to get news from social media, have so far been turned off by the campaign

Secondly, we’ve yet to have the set piece events of the election, the live Presidential debates.   The recent US Superbowl showed how social media and live TV now goes hand in hand with 10,000 tweets a second being sent in the closing minutes.

Related articles

• Which Superbowl Ad Got The Most Social Media Love? [INFOGRAPHIC] (ubervu.com)
• Election 2012: Voters Expect Candidates to Be on Social Media [INFOGRAPHIC] (mashable.com)
• Poll: People Don’t Rely On Facebook, YouTube, Twitter For Election Information (readwriteweb.com)

Who gives the most on social networks?  The answer if you are a charity is Twitter users, who donate on average £30 ($46) compared to Facebook users who on average give £18.

This comes from charity donations site JustGiving (via The Telegraph) using their own data.    However, JustGiving also shows that the vast majority of donations (97%) were made through Facebook.

That’s probably more an indication of how JustGiving works, the fact that they have apps they want to push (another stat – apps drive more donations) and that Facebook appears to be the default for charities.

However the JustGiving research does show that Twitter is a potentially fruitful area that charities should consider.

Related articles

• Twitter users most generous charitable donors on social media (telegraph.co.uk)
• Barclaycard Freedom partnership announced at inaugural JustGiving awards (moneyexpert.com)
• The Guardian: Charities need to understand Facebook if they want to raise money on it (guardian.co.uk)

The other day research company TNS came out with research claiming that social media users were sick of so-called “digital waste” from brands, with 60% of US and 61% of UK consumers not wanting to engage with them on Facebook or Twitter.

In fact, separate research from analytics firm Crowd Science does show that liking a brand Facebook page is the exception and not the norm.   ‘Only’ 9% of Facebook users have liked a brand page.  And not surprisingly, the older the user, the less likely they are to give up a like.

Of course, a pool of 1/10 Facebook users is still significant given the ’1-9-90′ school of thought that you need to target the 9% of people who actively comment and share.

So how do you get that 9% to actually like your page.   The most effective routes are also the obvious ones.   Crowd Science’s infographic shows that many Facebook users simply want to show support for a brand, while good and interesting content works well too.

As a result, placing prompts for visitors to like your Facebook page on other social properties / your website makes sense.   As does a widget or preview bar displaying the type of content they might expect to see.

Related articles

• Crowd Science’s Facebook Study: People Most Often Click Like to Show Support and Enjoyment (insidefacebook.com)
• Less than 20% of Facebook content is Liked (infographic) (zdnet.com)
• 58% of Facebook Users Expect Exclusive Content From Business Pages [Data] (hubspot.com)

The other day I mentioned that Twitter had seen its best UK traffic figures, following the use of the social network to circumvent gagging orders that celebrities had employed to prevent various indiscretions appearing in the press.

Hitwise now has the latest UK stats, and visits to Twitter keep on growing.   According to analyst Robin Goad, on Saturday, Twitter accounted for 1 in 184 UK Internet visits online.

The chart above pretty much says it all:   Previously there have been questions about the high level of Twitter churn with various estimates showing that 80%+ of accounts might be dormant.   This however will answer the question I used to hear quite a lot: “yes but my mum in Milton Keynes doesn’t use it.”  (or variations of that)

My answer at the time was usually – she might not use it, but the people who she reads about or watches / listens to do.

Now that answer can be changed again – she might not, but having had Twitter splashed on the front pages of the UK tabloids, she will almost certainly now have some kind of awareness of it.   Indeed, Robin’s post shows that Twitter visitors are becoming more mainstream and are moving closer to the UK population average.

Recently Comscore estimated that Twitter penetration was 12.9% of the UK Internet population.   It will be interesting to see how this changes in light of what has been happening over the past two weeks.

Related articles

• ‘CTB’ and the media trust issue (liesdamnedliesstatistics.com)
• Super-injunction: Twitter breaks traffic record (mirror.co.uk)
• Twitter: mightier than the sword? (markborkowski.co.uk)
• Super-injunction: Twitter traffic record broken (telegraph.co.uk)
• Twitter’s Super-Duper U.K. Censorship Trouble (techland.time.com)

How many people are really using Twitter?   According to Twitter’s own stats, there are 175+ million registered users.   But as Silicon Alley Insider points out that’s not the same as 175 million human beings, as it includes duplicate accounts and more to the point – dormant ones.

Last year RJ Metrics figured out that Twitter’s rate of churn was 83% – or rather this was the % of accounts that had seen no activity for a month, a pretty good indicator for lack of interest.

Silicon Alley Insider similarly decided to look at Twitter’s “real” user base, by looking at its API.  It found that only 10% of Twitter users follow more than 50 people, while 38 million follow 16 – probably the minimum threshold at which you can make any real sense or use of the micro-blogging service.

From that you could draw the conclusion that Twitter’s actual user base is anywhere between 20-40 million (most likely at the lower end of that).

That does have the ring of truth about it, when you consider that Twitter’s penetration in the US and UK hovers around 12% and 8% of the Internet population respectively according to Comscore and Pew – this compares to 70% for Facebook.

Do these figures matter?  In one sense not really – those of us who are very active on Twitter always knew that the network’s real and published size are not one and the same.    And, Twitter is simply not a mass market service, rather its useful for targeting so-called influencers as the network over indexes with journalists and bloggers who will take what they read and amplify it on other media.

Also its worth noting the evidence that Twitter is starting to perform significantly better in emerging markets.  Last Summer Comscore found that Twitter grew 305% in Latin America compared to 22% in North America.

And so, while Twitter penetration is 8% in the US, it is over 20% in both Brazil and Venezuela.

Related articles

• No 1 for Facebook? The Philippines (liesdamnedliesstatistics.com)

The other day fellow Rabbit Kate put up a post on the Rabbit site congratulating sandwich chain Pret a Manger on how they responded to a twitter complaint she made.

Kate highlighted the speed of the response, the sincerity of it and the evident internal coordination between whoever was handling their social media feeds and the rest of the company.

Unfortunately not all companies are that progressive, as I saw 1st hand the other day with giant US carrier United Airlines.

If you take a United flight chances are your napkin will have a message printed on it, inviting you to follow them on Twitter.   But don’t expect any kind of speedy response if you elect to talk to them rather than the other way around.   When I was stuck at Washington’s Dulles Airport the other night after our plane had a fault I tweeted them out several times (the last time that I was writing a blog post).

Among other things I was curious to see what would happen as we have travel clients ourselves at Rabbit.

The answer was nothing.

OK it was 7pm and not every brand has the resources to run an out of hours account, but the merger with Continental will make it into the world’s largest airline and (given different time zones) a 24 hour operation.

But they didn’t reply the next day either.   In fact, with 167k followers, United has sent out four tweets in a week.   Compare that to JetBlue and Virgin America, held up as the benchmark for effective use of social media among airlines – JetBlue for example has responded to customers 16x in 24 hours.

Between printing the Twitter ID on promotional literature, running the feed and making it part of United’s comms strategy something has obviously gone wrong.   Not everyone has the means or inclination to run an account properly, but if you are advertising it to tens of thousands of people every day, it’s definitely important that you’ve moved beyond seeing it as purely a piece of broadcast media

Related articles

• [INFOGRAPHIC] How Airlines Use Twitter – customer engagement done right, or gone wrong? (simpliflying.com)
• Is Twitter a Customer Service Platform, Protocol or Channel? (customerthink.com)

Probably not a huge surprise to anyone familiar with Twitter, but worth reinforcing, the quick fire stream of tweets people see from their followers means the vast majority of Twitter posts have a life-span of an hour or less.

This is according to Canadian research company Sysomos, which found that 92.4% of re-tweets happen within the first hour of the original tweet being posted.

Sysomos also found that 29% of tweets generate some kind of reaction, either a reply (23%) or retweet (6%).   While you could turn that into a headline of ’71% of tweets get ignored’ (and here’s the story from Mashable saying exactly that), I actually think a rate 3/10 tweets eliciting some kind of response is quite high – this is especially when you consider that a lot of tweets are simply personal musings that wouldn’t warrant any kind of reaction.

According to Sysomos, 85% of replies are ‘one level’ deep, 10.7% go down two levels (ie have two ripples of responses) and 1.53% are three levels deep.   Again, you can interpret this statistic in a number of different ways.   Sysomos says that “only” 1.53% of tweets go down three levels.   I look it like this:

There are nearly 100 million tweets a day (image from Twitter above).   So, every single day 29 million tweets elicit some kind of response.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Report: 71 Percent of Tweets Do Not Get a Single Reply or Retweet (socialtimes.com)
• The Short Lifespan of a Tweet: Retweets Only Happen Within the First Hour (readwriteweb.com)

Last month email marketing system Exact Target came out with a study showing that people on Twitter are more likely to spread the word about brands by posting on forums, commenting on blogs and posting ratings and reviews.   Now there’s a new Exact Target / Co-Tweet study (via Marketing Charts), showing that once they start engaging with you, Twitter users are more likely to buy your products.

Conducted among US Internet consumers, the study showed that 27% of subscribers to an email newsletter were more likely to purchase from a brand while 37% of Twittewr users were.

Meanwhile less than one in five Facebook brand fans (17%) said they were more likely to buy – a surprise considering that 49% disagreed with that statement (which is obviously not the same as saying that they were less likely to make a purchase).

Exact Target has produced a handy chart showing that while Twitter has the lowest reach, it provides the greatest opportunities for customer acquisition.   However, it’s email subscribers who are the most interested in getting discounts, promotions or freebies.

Finally, it’s worth looking at who conducted the survey.

Exact Target is an email marketing system, and Co Tweet is a Twitter management tool…no Facebook app developers involved in the study then.   I’m not suggesting the data is wrong.

A lot of it is definitely interesting, and personally I am a big Twitter fan, but you do wonder if some of the questions were skewed to produce a certain result.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Study Finds Customers Value Email, Facebook and Twitter as Collaborators, not Competitors (eon.businesswire.com)
• Study Finds Twitter Users Three Times More Likely to Impact Brands Online (eon.businesswire.com)
• Smartphones, other mobile devices boost social networks (macworld.com)
• Despite Fanfare, Only 3% of General Public Use Twitter for News (socialtimes.com)