Why Google+ is Hot While Facebook is Cold

The pundits, journos and others all seem to focus on the “numbers” of Facebook vs. Google which, in reality, means shite. Really. Right? Obviously Facebook has seriously superior numbers. But that actually means nothing. In fact it is just a quantitative number and has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on anything of actual value. While a newspaper may have 3 million subscribers that number is pointless if only 500 people actually read the newspaper.

The Real Perspective Is Engagement
So we set out to look at activity between Facebook and Google+ and we found something very, very interesting. Of the 15,000 profiles we compared, only 24% of the Facebook profiles posted more than twice per week, while 72% of Google+ users posted more than three times per week. In other words, those that use Google+ are far more active than Facebook users.

Activity Equates to Reach
For advertisers of course, you need people to see your ad right? If they see it, they may click on it. Problem for Facebook users is…they aren’t on Facebook very much in a given week, whereas Google+ users are.

Then It’s About Demographics
But when it comes to Google+, we’ve also found that these folks are generally quite active with technology. They’re hip to new technologies and they adopt new services. But they prefer the “easier” engagement of Google+ over Facebook. With Facebook there is more “friction” involved in finding and connecting with people and there are  more restrictions on how to connect and engage. With Google+, the advantage of Circles is actually reduced friction. For advertisers this may mean more truly viable opportunities for potential click-throughs on advertising messages when Google introduces them.

The Locality of It All
The upside of Facebook is that they can, truly, get very “local” or hyper-local, with their ads. This is a bit elusive for Google+ in terms of hyper-local advertising. But what matters is those that actually click through to an ad and can be converted and this is where things equal out a little bit. But the real issue for ROI is the advertiser – just how good are they at converting a “click-through” to a purchase or whatever their goal is? That is neither the fault nor issue of Google or Facebook.

Overall
Our conclusion is that Google+ is a better platform for finding those that are actually active and engaged on a regular basis, while Facebook is a far more “latent” platform that equates to patience.

Of course, we have a lot more data behind this research, but we are a business so if you want to find out more, just give us a holler! If you’re a Halifax search marketing firm or an SEO consultant agency, this is insight to help with your SEO strategy. Firms like Norex, FreshEgg and Alpha Search would well be served by looking into data such as this.

Facebook Dangers for Global Marketers

You’re a global company, or maybe a small to midsize business and your marketing your products around the world. For your social media marketing efforts the first natural assumption would be, of course, Facebook. You’d be partially right. But focusing all your efforts on Facebook may mean you’ll miss between 30% and 50% of your target market. While Facebook is certainly the world’s largest, there are hundreds of other social networks like it and they service cultural, special interest and country or region-specific peoples. Here’s what you need to think about;

Orkut - This is the choice for people in Latin America – majority in Brazil. While it has people from other countries, it is a superb channel to reach Hispanics and Latin Americans. Note that Orkut is owned by Google. They are building tight integration with Google+ and it is working.

Google+ - Our research here has found an increasing engagement by Eastern Europeans, Asian countries and the Middle East. In the Middle East it is seen as having more privacy controls than Facebook and being more “trustworthy”.

India: You’ll want to look more closely at Fropper and Ibibo (Ibibo is more games focused) for the top social networks in those countries. Especially amongst youth. In India, Facebook is more often used for international business, students and family members (diaspora) living/working/studying abroad.

hi5 - Yes, it still exists and it’s thriving in Jamaica, Romania, Latin America (the most), Thailand, a bit in India, Mongolia and Central African countries like the DRC. It has also begun to shift more towards games for youth. A trend we see in some of these sites that have no doubt lost some traffic to Facebook.

iWiW – Pretty much exclusive to Hungarians with some Latvians thrown in for good measure.

Nasza-Klasa or NK: Very popular with Polish youth and some Polish diaspora, especially those that study in other countries. Average age is about 25.

Renren – Pretty much China, with the added enjoyment of government overseers so you’ll want to be sure you tout the party line in your marketing efforts here. Remember, Facebook is banned in China, though there are indicators of workarounds and spotty reports you can access Facebook in Shanghai.

Vkontakte – This is Russia’s Facebook and if you really want to reach Russians, this is the channel. Recent reports however, indicate that government may be monitoring this channel. With the upcoming federal elections and protests being organised, we may see a shift to Google+ and Facebook.

Xing – This is the choice mostly of Germans, Austrians and Swiss with a smattering from other European countries. It has also changed its consumer focus to become more targeted to businesses competing with eCademy in Europe.

Zoo.gr - A more game oriented site, but targeting Greek youth and young adults.

NetLog – Another European centric social network. Like Bebo in the UK, NetLog is now targeting youth more and more. Still it is a platform worth looking at if you’re targeting youth in Europe. For some reason it has a good number of Canadians – likely diaspora.

SkyRock - Mostly the French speaking community. France-centric but Skyrock has French and English speakers around the world. It is also popular with former French colonies in Africa.

CaribShout - Want to connect to Caribbeans? This is their social network. Very popular with young adults up to 35 and for dating.

These are the “mainstream” social networks around the world. There are many others, over 200 in fact. Other social networks become increasingly “niche” such as hobbies, sports and special interest (as noted in a previous blog post.) There are a few business focused social networks as well, like LinkedIn and we’ll review those in a future post.

If you’re focus is international, do your research first. Find out where the best opportunity may rest and develop a strategy accordingly. Also consider that many social media monitoring tools don’t access these services and so you’ll need to do that more manually.

The Occupy Movement & Social Media

The use of social media technologies to create awareness and organise protests and “camp-ins” last year (and some continue today) was the first time these tools were used on an international scale. This is unprecedented in the history of mankind, at such speed and with incredibly well organised precision. As the Occupy protests lengthened, most often, it would seem, those protestors featured by many news media channels were the down-and-out, hippies and young students disenfranchised. Stories of partying, drugs and alcohol seemed the perfect fodder. But were they? Are they? We did some digging to analyse just who is online and who makes up the Occupy movement. What we found was not what we thought we would find.

Forget About Youth In Occupy Movement – The Demographics
It wasn’t just a bunch of university students. In fact, as we analysed the age groups, we found the average age to actually be 36. We also found that across the 5,000 profiles and commentaries we looked at, over 50% had a university education. We also found they weren’t poor either. Perhaps the “working poor” – yes. We estimate an average income of about $45,000CAD from  USA, Canada and UK. We suspect this median would hold up in many other countries as well. Certainly there were those who are on the margin of society and the students or youth movement. But they do not represent the majority. Involved were doctors, lawyers, entrepreneurs.

Nor was there racial or religious divide. All forms of faith and races were represented as were men and women.

It’s Not A Union Driven Thing
That unions played a key part there is no doubt. Unions have and likely will continue to, play a key role. But unions, mentions of unions and references to union messages we estimate were less than 10% of the overall social media engagement. The Occupy movement is not owned or being driven by unions. The unions help in rallying and organising but it is being driven not by any one organisation. It is truly driven by the average citizen.

Activist Groups & Agitators
While some may suspect underlying activist groups with more radical agendas, this doesn’t appear to be the case. We found little evidence of more fringe, radical activist groups. The organisations that support the Occupy Movement are more socially oriented, those that are necessary in a functioning democratic society.

Our Summary Conclusion
While we haven’t provided all the detail of our research here, we can quickly surmise that the Occupy Movement is international in nature, it is still active and likely to become increasingly more organised. What started out in anger and protest with no  defined agenda has developed an agenda and is refining that agenda. This is truly a movement more of the disenfranchised middle class who are also looking to the margins of society to help them as well.

Our forecast is that we will see increased Occupy activity and a clearer agenda form. There will likely be “fractioning” of the movement, if it can be said to be organised enough for there to be fractions occurring. Even the thought leaders of Davos have realized this is a serious societal issue of significant scale across multiple countries. We suspect the Occupy Movement to be a significant indicator towards a demand for greater change within current political systems.

Influence Competitors: The New Corporate Threat

A whole new scale of threat has evolved for corporations, and governments as well, in the court of public opinion. We call them Influence Competitors, some have called them Irregular Competitors. Regardless, these competitors are looking to influence the views and opinions of the same market businesses and governments may be looking to influence. Only they’re opposed to your views.

The way citizens and consumers receive, consume and share information today is highly complex, fast and easily spread to their own networks. Every person has a network of people that they have influence over, just as companies, governments and other organisations do, from markets to the general public. Today, it is very easy to influence people. It is also very hard to influence people. The biggest Influence Competitors that pose a threat to corporations and sometimes governments are activist groups. Non-Government Organisations and Non-Profits who target the practices of corporations they disagree with and government policy attempts or legislative moves they feel threaten their agenda or audience. Sometimes, competing companies will align with Influence Competitors as well, providing an entirely new dynamic to a company’s competitive landscape. At other times, activist groups will work with opposing political parties to the one in power, again adding a new dynamic.

Influence Competitors leverage social media as their primary tools with industrial news media used mainly to drive the message to social media where the battle for influence really begins. In industrial news media, an NGO may only get 3 minutes tops in the news cycle and then for only limited periods. Once they have eyeballs online, compelling content is used through video, images, text and sound to deliver sophisticated messaging and even encourages dialogue.

The Confidence Factor
Once an Influence Competitor has developed online dialogue through social media services and an audience has grown, it’s influence grows and they may then become an Authority Competitor. When citizens or consumers see others engaged in dialogue, actively contributing and adding content, this provides individuals with a sense of confidence – that others are committed to the cause. This creates the authority of the organisation (you might call it crowdsourcing your citizen activists) and it becomes increasingly difficult to unseat an Authority Competitor. Corporations or governments that don’t respond, or offer very little response, quickly lose influence share and citizens then take action.

So What? Why Does Citizens Shouting On Facebook Even Matter?
It’s easy to think they don’t. It’s easy to shrug off people venting on Twitter or blog posts and Facebook group pages. The reality is, it does matter and it has a very tangible, measurable and direct impact. The real-world results are phone calls, emails and letters to Senators, Members of Parliament, Congressional Representatives, industrial news media. Petitions go round. Protests happen. Sometimes, employees are attacked or facilities burned down or otherwise damaged. Or in the case of London, riots occur. Social media tools go from driving the idea to then being used for organising direct real-world activities.

Understanding Influence Competitor Threats
No social media monitoring tool will help. They may tell only part of the story and they’re not good warning indicators. What’s needed is a deep analysis into the lead Influence Competitor social graph, their connections, size of community, past campaigns and outcomes, current activities and more. Monitoring tools play a part, but analysis and insight from industry specialists, anthropologists, sociologists and law enforcement adds an unparalleled level of insight. Once this is known, then a strategy can be used.

Mobile Will Increase The Threat Level
As more and more citizens use SmartPhones and tablets like the iPad to participate in social media services, the threat from Influence Competitors will only increase. With the ability to live-stream video and instantly upload photo’s integrated with real-time services like Twitter, the challenge to monitor and then dig deep into the issues will become increasingly difficult. This will present a new challenge for public and investor relations teams, marketers, corporate legal counsel and the C-suite. CEO’s if they are the spokesperson, will face some interesting challenges. These are issues well beyond simple reputation management of a brand.

What Kind of Threats?
This is where influence and authority trump reputation management. The types of threats coming from Influence Competitors are those that can cause significant economic damage or bring down a government (such as Egypt, but that’s okay, it was a dictatorship) or potentially cause catastrophic damage to a company. These threats include;

- Derailing legislative efforts

- Destroying lobbying efforts

- Changes in legislation that derails a corporate plan

- Causing damage to physical assets

- Threatening employees or causing harm

- Cause a stock price to plummet or a competitors to rise

- Balance the influence in favor of a competitor

- Create petitions and enable an opposition government to cause collapse of a government in power

Fortunately we provide analysis and monitoring of Influence Competitors. Look for our White Paper coming soon. In a world of Big Data, companies and governments need to be able to quickly sift through vast amounts of information to find the intelligence that matters.

Why Social Media Really Works in Civil Actions

Issues for protest or causing some form of unrest aside, the real reason social media tools have been a key technology in driving significant societal changes comes down to one reason we propose – lowered individual risk and group comfort. One person protesting in front of city hall is unlikely to cause a change. You need a lot of people. Our research into Keystone XL and the use of social media by civil society groups showed how now even groups can connect with other groups to take action on issues.

Herd Mentality
The truth is that we as humans prefer to act in groups. We have to. One person alone cannot build an office tower. When we see others gathering, we are more likely to join in when we share that groups values, ideas, opinions or vision.

Social Media Shows Commitment
Look at a Facebook group page on an issue of society, a celebrity or brand. If one group has thousands of followers we assume that group is generally more popular. A group page with just a few members isn’t as compelling. We’ll go for the group with more people – in general. An individual will go where there’s the perception of others with similar views. As social media tools thrive on high volumes of users, require little to know technical skills and are available through mobile devices as well, a person can quickly see when something is becoming popular. When we see others are committed, we’re more likely to commit.

Digital Mob Mentality
When an issue takes off, like #Occupy, Egyptian revolution or the London riots of 2011, people go into what we term Digital Mob Mentality. They are fast to comment and quick to share with their peer networks. This becomes a feeding frenzy of information. Coordination is quick, communication is essentially at zero cost and there is no friction. To those that suggest “slacktivism” takes place, yes, to some degree. But as the above events and many others show, the slacktivists are far less than those who can and do actively participate in the issue.

Hyper-Momentum & Networks
Because of the significant increases in the use of mobile data devices (SmartPhones and Tablets) and the easy access to social media technologies over increasingly higher bandwidth networks, an issue gains what we call hyper-momentum. The story spreads fast and furious. Far faster than ever before in human history. No one has to wait for mail to arrive or has to be at home to take the phone call. And every one of us has social networks of friends, family, co-workers etc. And we trust news and actions of friends very quickly. More so than official government communications. In several research projects we’ve done for governments around the use of social media in both natural and man-made disasters, we see a greater reliance on information passed through social networks or the social graph than that coming from government (including policing and fire services.)

In Summary
When we see other people taking part in something we are curious. Whenever we see a crowd, we are curious as to what has drawn other peoples attention. These behaviours are simply translated to online services through social media. The more we see others with a similar view are committed to an action, the more likely we are to participate. It’s as simple as that. And we have plenty of evidence.