How ‘sticky’ is Facebook?

shutterstock_170062403

For most Facebook users, the social network has become a fully integrated part of our life. Our personalities now mesh with the online world in the form of Facebook making us all one step closer to eventually that in the not too distant future we will all in some small way become cyborgs. So the question becomes, how ingrained is Facebook into our lives?

With hundreds of cable channels, on-demand videos, HD video game consoles, and massive libraries of e-books all calling for our attention, Facebook continues to stand out as a major player for our time and attention making it one of the stickiest websites in the world.

Engagement Rates

FBsticky1

The engagement figures for Facebook are quite astounding, SimilarWeb PRO shows that visitors to Facebook spend an average of just over 23 minutes on the site which is roughly the time it takes to watch an episode of The Simpsons. Compare this to the data for Google Plus, where visitors spend less than 4 minutes, barely enough time to make a decent cup of coffee.

Bounce rates for Facebook are very low with less than 2 in 10 visitors leaving it immediately after entering as opposed to Google Plus where nearly 5 out of 10 visitors bounce. One key feature, which has kept visitors engaged, is the revamped news feed with its content rich images and ads.

After Facebook?

FBsticky2

Such huge numbers of traffic are a boon for advertisers, so understanding where this traffic heads after Facebook is very useful. SimilarWeb PRO illustrates that 1 in 5 visitors head straight to YouTube. We love to share videos and our platform of choice is YouTube. This is probably why Facebook is making such a hard push to get into video advertising.

From this, it’s clear to see there’s a real desire for online videos. Advertisers want to chase this traffic, so it makes sense to organize Facebook campaigns to be mirrored on YouTube and maximize the chances of conversion.

Opportunities on Facebook

Over the past year, according to SimilarWeb data, average time on site for Facebook has never dipped below 22 minutes per visit. This data looks at desktop visits only, so it is fairly safe to assume that combined with mobile usage, Facebook is a dominant part of our lives. Gone are the days when advertisers fight over Superbowl Ads to reach a billion people, because today Facebook enables any advertiser anywhere to reach a bigger and more engaged audience.

[Source: Inside Facebook]

Teens heavily use Facebook, Instagram more often than Snapchat

One of the most pressing questions about Facebook’s future revolves around teen usage. However, a new study by Forrester shows that maybe teens don’t hate Facebook after all.

Forrester surveyed more than 4,500 U.S. online users between 12 and 17 about their habits on social networks and apps. Among apps they use “all the time,” both Facebook and Instagram finished ahead dof Snapchat.

Nate Elliott, Forrester’s Vice President and Principal Analyst Serving Marketing Leadership Professionals,summed up the findings of the study in a blog post:

The results were clear: Facebook remains young users’ favorite social network. More than three-quarters of online youth use Facebook — twice as many as use Pinterest or Tumblr or Snapchat, and more than use Instagram and WhatApp combined. And 28% of young users who are on Facebook say they use it “all the time,” a higher percentage than said this about any other social network.The bottom line: The sky is not falling. Facebook does not have a problem attracting or retaining teen users.

Here’s a look at the graph, with different apps and social networks used by teens plotted in terms of adoption and hyperusage:

teensocialscatter

[Source: Inside Facebook]

The real Data Sources for Social Media Analysis and Insights: Facebook vs Twitter

social-media-data-tracking-620x330

Gnip, DataSift and Topsy are sanctioned tweet resellers while Facebook keeps its conversations under wraps.

Social data is the nectar all brands want to drink, but tapping into the source can be a costly and arduous undertaking.

Consider Facebook and Twitter, the suppliers with the most scale to offer. They have drastically different approaches when it comes to meting out access to the millions of conversations occurring daily on their platforms. And in Twitter’s case, the approach seems subject to constant change.

Twitter

Twitter’s “firehose” of tweets is already an important revenue stream for the company, and it takes a cut from sanctioned resellers that furnish raw data to enterprise customers. But it’s also been looking to restrict the firehose access of existing partners.

First, what exctly is an API? An API, or Application Programming Interface, is the instruction set created for developers to interact with some type of technology. In this case, Twitter has data and lots of it! Twitter created an open API allowing external developers to develop technology which rely on Twitter’s data.

There are three different ways to access Twitter data that we hope you will be able to differentiate by the end of this blog posting.

  1. Twitter’s Search API
  2. Twitter’s Streaming API
  3. Twitter’s Firehose

Twitter’s Search API

First up is Twitter’s Search API, which involves polling Twitter’s data through a search or username. Twitter’s Search API gives you access to a data set that already exists from tweets that have occurred. Through the Search API users request tweets that match some sort of “search” criteria. The criteria can be keywords, usernames, locations, named places, etc. A good way to think of the Twitter Search API is by thinking how an individual user would do a search directly at Twitter (navigating to search.twitter.com and entering in keywords).

How much data can you get with the Twitter Search API?

With the Twitter Search API, developers query (or poll) tweets that have occurred and are limited by Twitter’s rate limits. For an individual user, the maximum number of tweets you can receive is the last 3,200 tweets, regardless of the query criteria. With a specific keyword, you can typically only poll the last 5,000 tweets per keyword. You are further limited by the number of requests you can make in a certain time period. The Twitter request limits have changed over the years but are currently limited to 180 requests in a 15 minute period.

Twitter’s Streaming API

Unlike Twitter’s Search API where you are polling data from tweets that have already happened, Twitter’s Streaming API is a push of data as tweets happen in near real-time. With Twitter’s Streaming API, users register a set of criteria (keywords, usernames, locations, named places, etc.) and as tweets match the criteria, they are pushed directly to the user. Think of this as an agreement between the end user and Twitter – you agree with Twitter that whenever they receive tweets that match keywords relating to “hockey”, they will deliver the tweet directly to you as they happen.  This is a push of data by Twitter, rather than a pull of data initiated by the end user.

The major drawback of the Streaming API is that Twitter’s Steaming API provides only a sample of tweets that are occurring. The actual percentage of total tweets users receive with Twitter’s Streaming API varies heavily based on the criteria users request and the current traffic. Studies have estimated that using Twitter’s Streaming API users can expect to receive anywhere from 1% of the tweets to over 40% of tweets in near real-time. The reason that you do not receive all of the tweets from the Twitter Streaming API is simply because Twitter doesn’t have the current infrastructure to support it, and they don’t want to; hence, the Twitter Firehose.

Twitter’s Firehose API

The final way to access data is by having access to the full Twitter Firehose. The Twitter Firehose is in fact very similar to the Twitter’s Streaming API as it pushes data to end users in near real-time, but the Twitter Firehose guarantees delivery of 100% of the tweets that match your criteria.

The Twitter Firehose is handled by two data providers, GNIP and DataSift, which have tight relationships with Twitter. Similar to the streaming API, the firehose consists of an agreement between an end user and distributors of the Firehose (GNIP or Datasift) on what tweets the end user should receive in near real-time. As the data providers receive tweets they are pushed directly to the end user.

The two differences between Twitter’s Streaming API and Twitter’s Firehose access is that you are guaranteed delivery of 100% of the tweets and it’s not free. The Twitter Streaming API is free to use but gives you limited results (and limited licensing usage of the data). Access to the Twitter Firehose removes a lot of the usage restrictions imposed by Twitter but is fairly costly for access to all the tweets.

Why the difference matters

The Twitter Search API and Twitter Streaming API work well for a lot of individuals that just want to access Twitter data for light analytics or statistical analysis. Marketing companies and social media analytic companies use Twitter’s Search API to analyze trends in social media. However, these differences are significant when you are in a situation that requires you to monitor Twitter in real-time during a specific event or critical situation.

Sports ArenaFor example, professional sports teams provide security during games for spectators. It is critical that they be able to see what is happening in real-time at the venue.

Real-time, full access is also imperative for law enforcement. Whether it’s a specific situation that is evolving minute by minute or a high-profile event that is happening in their jurisdiction, the police need to know what is happening, when it is happening, and where it is happening to keep citizens safe. They can’t rely on just a sample of the information and have it delivered after the fact.

 

Facebook

Facebook, meanwhile, has nothing resembling a firehose and keeps the majority of conversations taking place on its pages under wraps. Brands that want to know what’s being said about them can use listening tools to tap into public posts that haven’t been hidden by privacy settings, but no more.

 

The social network has no agreements in place with data resellers, so in theory an individual who knows how to code can get just as much out of Facebook’s data conduit—its Graph API—as an enterprise-level service.  In practice, of course, the infrastructure that social-listening companies have built up makes them better equipped to handle the available data.

There’s a broad consensus among marketers that Facebook furnishes rich data insights on a one-off basis to high-spending media partners. (Facebook declined to comment.) If and when the social network decides to make enhanced data insights into a product that advertisers can pay for—offering a view into how many mentions of a brand are trending across the network, for example—it could have a robust new revenue stream.

“It would be a pretty valuable tool, one that people would be willing to pay for,” said Tim Fogarty, lead strategist for the social-media agency M80.

[Source: AdAge and BrightPlanet]