Marketing Pilgrim Published: “If Mobile Is So Important to Facebook, Why Does Its Android App Suck So Much?” plus 3 more |  |
- If Mobile Is So Important to Facebook, Why Does Its Android App Suck So Much?
- Twitter Reports 200 Million Accounts. So What?
- Parade Launches Opt-In Video Ad Program
- Study Shows Internet Users to Be More Community Minded
| If Mobile Is So Important to Facebook, Why Does Its Android App Suck So Much? Posted: 20 Jan 2011 03:35 AM PST
The Facebook blog post from Mark Heynen tells us
Good move. There are a lot of people out there who have feature phones rather than smartphones and they deserve a chance to waste time on the go as well. Here's my question. If mobile is so important why does the Android Facebook app suck so bad? I have stopped using it altogether and go to the site even on my smartphone. Why? Because getting information off of it is a spotty proposition at best. I did an extremely unscientific and limited test just to see if I wasn’t just whining. It looks like I am not alone in my assessment and no one rushed to the defense of the app.
With the growth of Android devices and the types of users that are getting them (at least for now) wouldn't it make sense for Facebook to make sure its app in that environment (as well as iPhone's) is as close to flawless as you can get? Apparently not. This is the one major flaw I see with how Facebook does business. It seems to want to do things so fast that it is OK with putting out inferior offerings just as long as they can say they are in the field. Then they will hide behind the 'newness' of all of this as an excuse why everything doesn't work better. The reality is they look more and more like a social media chop shop every day as they push everything through their mill as quickly as possible and then get it on the market and wait to see if anyone notices that it's not that great (or that it runs roughshod over privacy like the mobile phone number for developers mess). I guess today is a day to piss and moan about the shortcomings of social media (for me at least!). But the reason I do it is because I think that the major players in the space should do a better job. Bigger does not mean better in this space. It appears it just means bigger. If Facebook were to concentrate on high quality offerings with a much cleaner interface and more direct communication with what they are actually doing with your information they, and the rest of us, would be better off. Honestly, I suspect that posts like this are just an exercise in futility though because Facebook will do what Facebook does regardless of what users say. The only way that Facebook will truly listen to users is if people start to leave the service and I just don't see that happening anytime soon.
|
| Twitter Reports 200 Million Accounts. So What? Posted: 20 Jan 2011 02:53 AM PST
Where one can get confuzzled is in pinning down just how influential and widespread the actual use of Twitter is. On Tuesday, it was announced that they have entered into their seventh language for the service (Korean and most will need Google Translate to read it) and that international growth is moving right along. Twitter also has some new stats for the service as Forbes’ Oliver Chiang reports
Chiang’s user v. account recognition points out the current confusion regarding Twitter. It seems that Twitter suffers from the same problem of defining important metrics for the service just like many of its users do. The number one most misleading metric for Twitter users is number of followers. People tout these numbers and claim 'expertise' based on them but in most cases there is no clear line to be drawn between number of followers and actual influence. Now Twitter talks about 200 million accounts. OK, some overly simple math tells us that if these accounts were actual Twitter users then the average number of tweets per day per user would be about 1.8. Let's be generous and round it up to 2. That's fine. But let's take myself as an example. I have at least 5 placeholder accounts which do nothing other than protect a name I will be using in the future and I have set up countless other accounts for other businesses doing the same. In fact, it's a regular piece of advice I give to businesses all the time. That being said, in my rather small part of the social media space, I have some direct influence on many 'accounts' that don't do anything on the service (except get 'followers' without even trying because the Twitter bot world is alive and well). Also, take into account the social media industry, which one might argue is the source of any real usage of the service at all. Just a glance around to see those that average 10 tweets per day and much, much higher should give anyone pause as to just what these Twitter numbers of accounts and tweets actually means regarding reach and impact on the world at large. Of course, there will be those who say that many people make a great living using Twitter. If you want to go down that path, I would ask that you put an actual number to just what number constitutes ‘many’ and a clear definition of what a ‘good living’ is. I think it’s more accurate to say that a very select few have built very nice income with Twitter as part of the mix (the superstars) while some others make some money in a variety of different ways and the vast, vast majority don’t make a red cent (although they will claim they do). Look, I think Twitter is great for what it is. It works for me in the limited fashion that I use it but as I talk to more and more business people and people in general who are not social media hyper-users the real value of the service is hard to define. There is SO much junk in it that any numbers that are given by the company need to be looked at with a very serious critical (and skeptical eye). Couple that with the mystery revenue plan and you have something that is looking more and more like a Hollywood set everyday. The buildings look great on the outside but when you walk through the door you get nothing. This may be a harsh assessment of the service and feel free to tell me so in the comments but the more I hear about Twitter stats and compare it to what I actually see going on, the less I am convinced that Twitter is what it wants to appear to be to the world at large. Your thoughts?
|
| Parade Launches Opt-In Video Ad Program Posted: 19 Jan 2011 04:08 PM PST
The program is called PARADE Video Rewards and it’s pretty simple. You sign up, tell them a little about yourself and then you’re presented with a variety of video ad choices. If you watch, you get reward points and potentially a bonus reward such as a discount or coupon. The program is currently being advertised on Parade’s homepage and the initial sign-up form is very short. Name, email, date of birth, zip code and that’s followed by a few questions about your interests. I don’t know if they’re the same for everyone but I was asked to check boxes pertaining to the types of things I buy online, and what kind of movies and music I like. The whole sign-up process took less than a minute if you don’t count waiting for the email confirmation. To assure that you’re actually watching the videos, two numbers scroll across the screen at random times. You have to enter these numbers after the video in order to claim your reward. I am bad at this. I had to watch two out of three videos twice in order to remember the numbers. They run in the margins of the vid, kind of like those peripheral vision tests at the eye doctor so maybe I need my glasses checked. The program is new, so I imagine it will improve with time, but right now it’s very underwhelming. One of the ads I was offered was a poor quality cut from the Dancing with the Stars exercise DVD. At the end, I was offered a link to Amazon.com where I could buy the DVD at a discount, but it doesn’t appear to be a special discount, just Amazon’s usual cut price. If I did buy on the clickthrough, I’m supposed to get bonus points. I didn’t test this element. The second offer I was given was that cute iPod Nano commercial from TV. At the end, (after two tries at the bonus numbers) I was given a Nano sweepstakes entry. I’ll let you know if I win. I was also offered ads for Kodak and Shoebuy.com which paid off in reward points and Dolce & Gabbana with a sweepstakes entry reward. Not too thrilling yet, but there’s potential. Here’s the pitch from AdGenesis’ press release:
To sweeten the pot for advertisers, Parade is promoting the rewards program through its magazine and newsletter hitting a potential 70 million readers a week. My unscientific study says, that people who read Parade are people who love coupons and deals so the sign-up rate should be pretty good. In order to keep me on as a viewer, the program is going to have to start offering something more than points and sweepstakes entries. Coupons and samples would be best. Deals will have to be exclusive or they won’t be worth the effort. On the other hand, the points side of the program could turn out to be a winner depending on the levels needed in order to actually receive anything of value. The only thing showing at the moment is the cash value, $1.00 per thousand with an 8,000 minimum needed to cash out. They say they’ll also offer gift cards for Amazon, Starbucks and other venues. I watched two videos and made 80 points. I’ve got a long way to go and so has the Parade Video Rewards Program. What do you think of the concept of rewarding people with cash and prizes in return for watching an advertisement? Will you sign up?
|
| Study Shows Internet Users to Be More Community Minded Posted: 19 Jan 2011 02:37 PM PST
Says the study:
The majority of group members who used the internet said that the internet was an important communication tool, it helped them draw attention to their issues and aided them in connecting to other groups. Around 50% of respondents said the internet was useful for raising money, organizing activities and recruiting new members. Kristen Purcell, the research director at Pew Internet and co-author of the report said that respondents were proud of their accomplishments and that they were excited about the impact their actions had on society. As you can see by the chart below, 53% of respondents felt that the internet played a major part in getting a government official elected.
When it comes to social media, Facebook reigns supreme for group communication. Twitter only got 12% of the vote but 74% said they use texting to keep in contact with members. The survey also found that internet users tended to be more active within their group with a significant difference in the number of people who attend meetings, donate money and volunteer their time. If you’d like more information on this subject, you can read the full report by visiting “The Social Side of the Internet” at the Pew American Life Project website.
|
| You are subscribed to email updates from Andy Beal's Marketing Pilgrim To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar