Tag: Facebook

  • Search me..

    I was quoted in a recent Social Samosa post – on Facebook Graph Search. Do check it out on their website, it has useful thoughts from various others as well.

    Given that it is a fairly large move, (third pillar, Facebook calls it) I thought I’ll add to my quote there. As a final goal, both Google and Facebook are trying to organise and display information to users, because contextually relevant information is still a means to revenue, especially in the era of information overload. Google crawls the web, and Facebook uses social connections as a means to gaining this information. Google is also trying to add social as a context, and Facebook has Bing’s support. It’s not a war now, but it’s definitely armament.

    Facebook has tons of data to get this right, and this is dynamic data, thanks to the information we supply, and this is going to get better as Pages (and people) start optimising for Graph Search. Also, once the Open Graph is integrated and actions outside FB also start becoming data, it will become a larger treasure trove of information. Though there’s no advertising product in sight, I will wager that it is an advertising foray in the guise of a consumer tool. As I wrote in the article, Facebook now has the user’s intent broadly divided into 4 categories (people, places, photos and interests), along with his/her ‘influencers’. All of this will allow for some massive segmentation, and thus better targeted ads. And this is not necessarily evil, it can be damn useful because discoverability will be increased.

    In terms of implication for brands, (like I said in the quote) brands with organic signals (eg. for a retail outlet, check in at a physical location) will have a starting advantage. Once the Open Graph kicks in, social actions on websites will become a huge advantage. Content marketing takes on added significance since every action on FB increases the chances of a brand being discovered. Oh yes, Like is a back with a vengeance! On a tangential note, recruiters could use Graph Search as a hiring tool.

    It’s a long shot, but what would happen if Graph Search was thrown open to Pages. Think about it – as a page admin, I already have the ability to target my post to a certain level (about 7 parameters) but that’s really basic demographics. What if I were able to target (organically) (as Myntra) an Angry Birds t-shirt post at people in India who Like Angry Birds. (or even standard apparel brands)

    Meanwhile, there are two immediate concerns. One – privacy. Users will, over a period of time, calibrate the information they supply to Facebook with the advantages of doing so, but it will be a difficult process. The second, I will highlight through a comment made by Romit on Twitter

    But this is just version 1. I’m sure Facebook will have/build more signals inside the hood to filter data. Social just became even more interesting. For that. Facebook gets a thank you.

    until next time, Like I said…

  • Broadcast 2.0 then?

    Facebook is planning a new video-ad product that will offer video advertisers the chance to target video ads to large numbers of Facebook users in their news feeds across devices. It is also becoming more public about its Publishing Garage, that aims to put into place a set of measurements to demonstrate how well campaigns are working. Twitter has partnered with Nielsen for the the “Nielsen Twitter TV Rating” – an industry standard metric for measuring the conversation that TV shows spur on Twitter.

    The commonality I see is the shift from social to media, though to be fair, the Twitter-Nielsen partnership also talks of sentiment being measured in the future, in addition to tracking the volumes generated. I am using the term ‘social’ for two of the biggest platforms around now – FB and Twitter, but considering they have been the trendsetters, it is likely that the others will follow suit. Yes, there would be exceptions, I’m sure, but let me generalise a bit. While time will dictate whether this shift is smart or not, I’d think this shift is massively underplaying the true potential that social has thus displayed as a disruptive force. Social is now walking the measurement rules laid for a thoroughly different kind of media. (I liked this post at GigaOm because it throws light on, and questions why every social network is trying to turn into a broadcast platform) Doesn’t this put them on the same path of vulnerability that traditional media is facing now? Is this inevitable or is this sheer laziness and/or conforming? Also, from a user perspective, isn’t this a fundamentally different direction from the original premise/reason for existence of these platforms?

    Meanwhile, it is interesting to note that this is happening at the same time as users (increasingly) are treating social as broadcast – from the shoot-from-the-hip opinions on everything to the careful posturing. Not so suddenly, it’s more about numbers than actual conversations. Now what does that remind me of? 🙂 I don’t know how much of it is unconscious and how much of it is subtle nudging (read) by the networks and their features. But whatever the reasons, imagine a future where everyone behaves the way media behaves today – loud, pompous, full of themselves, ignorant to their own faults, violent towards any criticism, and generally abhorred. What happens then?

    So in the current direction I see the networks (and users) taking, the future media mashup will show more characteristics of traditional broadcast platforms than the social traits displayed by the social networks in the early days. My concern in such a scenario is because of what Godin has stated in another context – “Media doesn’t just change what we focus on, it changes the culture it is part of.” That’s when I wish social/we would be more ridiculous.

    until next time, growing pains

  • HireRabbit

    HireRabbit helps companies boost their existing recruitment strategy with social-media. In conversation with co-founder Prafull Sharma

    [scribd id=113574291 key=key-16y50vfjlos6nxyvesnc mode=scroll]

  • With a little help from friends…

    It’s official now. I had suspected it for a while, but this post from Simply Zesty

    shows that page admins across the world are wondering why the ‘Reach’ figures of their posts are on the downswing. This then starts affecting the other ‘vital stats’ of the Page as well – like PTAT. It really doesn’t matter whether FB is showing the actual reach number (you may question that if you’re also monitoring via 3rd party apps) or decreasing it further just to pile on the pain, because fundamentally they’re throttling the reach and you would have to go by the numbers they claim, because well, it’s official!

    I’d say that FB is now behaving like a true media monopoly. It’d have been fine if the % of people who saw a page post were dependent on the positive/negative action taken by the people who liked the page. But this is just an “offer you can’t refuse” for the various advertising products that FB has begun pushing out aggressively. Should have known that IPOs have side effects. It hurts more because just sometime back, I’d written – in my ‘Social grows up to be media‘ post – that of the two (FB, Twitter) I had better hopes for FB. While Facebook owns the platform, (some) brands have done a lot of hard work in attaining fans organically through excellent content and engagement. By not allowing the content to reach these very fans, FB is being unfair. It becomes even more interesting when we figure that FB is now allowing brands to truly broadcast (beyond fans and friends of fans to everyone) their posts. On one hand, they are making their money from brands and at the same time, showing me an ad I never asked to see.

    This could be just the start. I’m already hearing ‘viewpoints‘ of Facebook charging brands for pages. Knowing the way PR works, FB is probably setting the scene for this and we’ll be seeing more articles of this nature. Is this an unfair way to monetise one’s platform? That, in Facebook’s own words, is complicated.

    More importantly, the larger debate of whether one should build (on) owned properties now becomes even more pertinent. What do you think?

    until next time, pay walled…

  • The Things that FB Connect Us

    Facebook’s ad film, released last week, reminds me of its redesigns – I hear it getting dissed across the web, starting with the place I saw it first. (check the comments) In case you really haven’t seen it yet, here it is

    The film is titled “The Things That Connect Us”, it uses real world objects – chairs, bridges, doorbells, dance floors, nations and so on – as analogies of how Facebook connects us, and suggests in the end that perhaps we make these things to remind us that we are not alone.

    I have read perspectives on how some of the ‘metaphors’ are not universal enough, and that this ‘connect’ idea has been used by several brands already. At 1 billion monthly active users, I wonder if Facebook really needs a positioning statement and if this film was supposed to be that. It is different things to different people but at its base, it connects us. The film is not meant to acquire users, or retain them. There are other things that Facebook does that will achieve these ends more efficiently and effectively. It’s when marketers see it through the prism of a campaign or advertising that it seems a #fail.

    So why did I like the ad? A couple of lines from the AdAge article (linked to earlier) are pointers – “Great brands don’t talk about themselves, they talk about what they really love.“, attributed to David Kennedy, and “The best marketing that we have is people coming to Facebook every day connecting with their friends, families, local business, but every once in a while we’re going to want to define for ourselves who we are and share our values…” from Facebook’s own consumer marketing head.

    The first statement is about a purpose that the organisation has found for itself – the things it loves to do as an organisation. (A few quotes here would give a sense of what Zuck’s aspirations are) Call me naive, but it’s a compelling purpose that has the potential to go beyond business and profits and one that many people would love to work on because they can identify with it. That defines brand Facebook, and purpose is what the best of brands strive for. The second sheds light on the audience it is intended for – themselves primarily, and then users who can share their values.

    So then, why not show it in their internal network, you might ask. Probably because they’re Facebook, sharing is in their DNA, like it or not. 🙂

    until next time, share a like (or a dislike)

    PS: In case you didn’t like it, you might like this parody 🙂