Super Bowl XLVII, the third most-watched program in television history, was accompanied by 52 national TV commercials, according to internet marketing site Marketing Land. Twitter was mentioned in 26 ads, or 50 percent, aired during CBS' game coverage. Facebook took home four mentions for eight percent.
Facebook and Twitter each received eight mentions out of a total of 59 national commercials during Super Bowl 46 in 2012, wrote Marketing Land. That means Twitter received more than two times as many mentions this year, while Facebook saw a 50 percent drop in big game ad mentions year-over-year.
Why are brands, who shelled out an average of $3.8 million per 30 second spot, shying away from a social network that has 1.06 billion users for a micro-blogging platform that has just 200 million users?
While Facebook may have an extreme edge over Twitter when it comes to the amount of monthly active users, advertisers want engagement on the platforms most inhabited during a live-event.
Facebook, which celebrated its nine year anniversary Monday, has multiple barriers to overcome if it would like to be real-time relevant.
1) Non-Chronological News Feed
In an effort to enhance user experience, Facebook will display interesting content to users upon sign-in. The news feed's algorithm, using several factors to determine top stories, ensures that its users have a pleasant experience in each visit to the site.
"The bigger Facebook gets the slower it becomes," Elimeliah said. "Facebook has been errant in the way it serves up stories. They choose what the Top Stories are rather than force you to look at what the recent stories are. It's antithetical to a live stream." Because Facebook utilizes a Top Posts format and doesn't give its users the ability to view Most Recent Posts in chronological order, users have no reason to live inside the platform in real-time; a visit to Facebook the next morning will produce the previous day's most engaging content.
2) Walled Garden
Although Facebook recently added Subscribe/Follow buttons to give users access to content from those they may not be friends with, the social networking site is mostly used to connect with friends and family members. This means an interesting thought posted to Facebook by a friend of a friend or someone on the other side of the world has little chance of ever appearing in your news feed.
Tweets, on the other hand, by default, are published to the world. Twitter users are encouraged to follow and connect with those that share their interests, while meeting in real life is not a prerequisite. Facebook's mostly closed garden approach — while useful to create an intimate social setting — is a massive real-time barrier.
3) Lack of Brevity
Have you ever watched a movie with someone who makes long-winded points? It's not pleasant. Since Facebook's platform allows for a status of up to 63,206 characters, users aren't exactly focused on keeping it concise.
While not all Facebook posts are paragraphs long, it's hard to consume a stream of content that may require you to take your eyes off the first screen (your television) for more than a few seconds at a time.
"Facebook is an investment in time," Elimeliah said. "The Timeline itself tells us that Facebook is for collecting and scrapbooking your life so that one day, maybe, you will look back on those fond memories."
On the flipside, "Twitter is real-time. The speed of Twitter is what keeps it true. You can't polish your posts because there is no time to polish the post. You have to think fast and think smart. It challenges the way we communicate and is as real-time as real-time can possibly get."
If viewers already struggle reading 140-character Tweets in the vicious cycle of repeatedly checking the TV and their phone, longer status updates stand no chance. Facebook has also fostered a platform where most users share personal experiences and life events, not evoked thoughts while watching a Super Bowl.
4) Competition
Twitter could possibly be Facebook's biggest real-time roadblock. Users and brands recognize Twitter's platform as the current go-to second-screen. Even with a user gap of 800 million between Facebook and Twitter, the latter is clearly the more convenient medium on a companion device.
Obviously some solid points here by CNBC. While I appreciate Facebook's innovation in certain social media areas, its irrelevancy grows with each passing day. Everybody knows that the only people who still use it are bored moms posting daily kid pics, grandparents who comment on those kid pics, and insecure narcissists who need their happy hour at Chili's or their cat's silly sweater validated with an endless parade of emotionally empty "likes." Anyone who has been paying a lick of attention lately knows that Twitter has clearly been where real business takes place. If you want the best, most concise, tailored, and cleanest timelime to follow during a big event like the Super Bowl, it's Twitter. It's not even Twitter that's kicking Facebook's ass either. If a chick wants to post a quality cleav shot, it's Instagram. Facebook's bread and butter, suburban housewives, have moved on to Pinterest. It's not 2006, and kids are hooking up much easier on Tinder. Even the gayballs are stalking on Grindr. So honestly, if you're a dude still on Facebook, wtf are you doing?
No comments:
Post a Comment