Industry


Ads by TechWords

See your link here


Dan Tynan's picture
Dan Tynan

Culture Crash

Social media? Booming. Social media advertising? Not so much.

 

Social networks are growing like kudzu in August. You knew that already; now the Nielsen Online folks have made it official. According to its Global Faces and Networked Places report [PDF], Netizens now spend more time on social networks than they do inside their email inboxes. (Though, given that most social nets have their own internal email systems, that's surely an oversimplication.)

The time people waste spend on social networks is growing three times faster than the overall Internet. Facebook time alone increased by a whopping 566 percent. (I knew I'd been frittering away too many hours on there lately; apparently I'm not the only one.) And though the Nielsen report features fresh young 20-somethings on its cover, Facebook is booming most among the boomers. The biggest growth is among the beer belly and cellulite crowd, aged 35 to 49. Meanwhile, nearly twice as many 50 to 64 year olds signed up for Facebook than those under age 18.

In other words, Facebook is no longer cool, rad, bitchin, gnarly, or whatever the kids are calling things they like these days. (Somewhere, my 12-year-old is groaning.) It's for old farts like you and me. The youth have moved on to hipper social networks, and it will be a frosty day in Hell before they tell us which ones they are.

But the real story is social network advertising, or the lack thereof. Despite solid revenues, advertising isn't clicking with social media users, or vice versa. To wit:

Whilst a few billion dollars of ad revenue can't be wrong, the prevailing wisdom is that the current level of advertising activity on social networks isn't consummate with the size - and highly engaged levels - of the audience. The social networks and advertising industry haven't quite yet found that magic formula to make this happen.

Why? Check out this amazing graphic, which is buried on page five of the report. According to Nielsen's "BuzzMetrics," the word most closely associated by Internet users with advertising is "false." It's a bit hard to see, but if you squint you'll find the word "false" right at the bullseye. The words least associated with ads? Deal, price, and quality.

False = advertising, per Neilsen

People don't trust ads. They don't like ads. They don't really want to see ads, but they'll put up with them if they have to. (Which is one of my big objections to ZillionTV; giving you a choice of what ads you'd like to see is like giving you the choice of what dogfood you'd like to eat. Would you prefer the chocolate cinnamon dogfood or the raspberry swirl? In the end, it's still dogfood.)

Nielsen says social media outlets like Facebook and MySpace have the potential to change the nature of advertising by making it more "social." In other words, it's not Nabisco or Procter & Gamble or Toyota that's trying to sell me something I don't want, it's my 3,247 close personal friends on Facebook, some of whom I actually know.

In theory, this could a beautiful thing for advertisers. People who love a product will tell two friends, and they'll tell two friends, and so on, and so on. Then I think about what products I use, and how many of them I would unreservedly recommend to my online posse. I can count them on both hands and still have fingers left over to type.

[For the record, they are Tivo, Netflix, the Sonos Music System, Google (the search engine, not the apps), my 2009 Honda Fit, and Red Bull. You may now go out and consume as many of these things as you can without exploding.]

As for the other 11,976,542 products vying for my attention? Feh. You can have them.

So instead of trying to manipulate us into buying their products, advertisers will spend their online ad dollars trying to manipulate us into recommending them. This is an improvement? I'm not so sure.

The Nielsen folks say it's time for advertisers to engage with consumers and be more "authentic, candid, and humble." Maybe they will. This will be the year we find out whether old advertising dogs really can learn new tricks - or if they'll just end up serving up the same old dogfood in a different can.

When not face down in his Alpo, Dan Tynan tends his blogs, Culture Crash and Tynan on Tech.

What People Are Saying

Social Media minus Blogs

You mention "Social Media" in your title, but your article is really about "Social Networks". This is an important differentiation since blogging is typically grouped into social media. Advertising on social networks doesn't work; however, companies blogging transparently and regularly about their products and services does work.

"When not face down in his

"When not face down in his Alpo" - love it!

security

But it must be remembered that social nets suffer many security issues. My research documents reports of the Koobface worm infecting (or attempting to infect) workplace-related computers by way of Facebook. Employers/organizations thus have security as a reason to block social network sites. --BenW

Maybe it's because the ads really are false advertising...

I've noticed that the majority of Facebook ads read something like this:

"Click here to learn how to get your $12,000 stimulus check"

"I'm lazy and I quit my job and now I make $1,000 a day online. Click here to learn how you can too."

"Tired of ugly yellow teeth? Here's the teeth whitening system that really works!"

And so on and so forth. The pictures that go along with these are typically just as misleading or distasteful.

With so many of the ads being spammy, is it any wonder that hardly anyone clicks on them?

To make it worse, legitimate advertisers probably aren't just chomping at the bit to have their ads shown in the same space as (and thus associated with) the spammy ads.

If Facebook would clean up the quality of their ads, they might just improve the quality of their revenue as well.

Consumer Evolution

Unlike greenhouse gases, consumers change, evolve, and ultimately continue to get smarter. Rewatch an old TV show that has commercials or google some old popular TV ad spots. These old advertisements we're chalk full of gimmicks and illusions intended to coerce a consumer into buying the product. This didn't work for long and consumers became smarter and so did marketers.

If as consumers we have reached our tolerance threshold for traditional ads, (TV commercials, banner ads, timed ads before content page loads) Maybe its time for marketers to again evolve as well.

We consumers, are the greenhouse gases and marketers need to focus on how to live with us.

If that means an ad-less future, maybe it is time to stop resisting and simply embrace the change.

response

"If that means an ad-less future, maybe it is time to stop resisting and simply embrace the change."

You make it sound easy H. Hass. But, as I mentioned in my post, who then pays for the significant cost of content development and production? If you expect an a la carte, consumer only pays scenario, prices will go way up and quality way down. Perhaps when you suggest that marketers need to evolve you mean more in-content advertising such as lower third banners over your content and blaring product placement in the content?

When you look at the macro-economics, a world without advertising means a world without content.

no ads is implausible

At a recent TED conference, physicist David Deutsch commented that it's too late to worry about reducing greenhouse gases - we need to instead focus on how to live with them. Save goes for ads.

Advertising pays for content. You like LOST, Heroes, 30 Rock? Advertising is necessary. Want no advertising at all and you can either forget about good programming forever or expect to pay $10 an episode (like a movie's price).

Piracy isn't the answer because it stops the flow of money to the content creators. I for one, would like JJ Abrams to continue making entertainment.

Also, your argument that all ads are like dog food and unwanted holds no water on days like SuperBowl sunday. Good advertising is good. Small amounts of relevant advertising is good. Bad, long, irrelevant ads are bad.

If Zillion makes gives us much less and smarter advertising, I'm game.