Socially Engaged brands

I've written a number of times about brands who have unique ways of engaging their followers and customers through social media like twitter, instagram, and facebook.

So it was really interesting to me to see this analysis of the 25 most engaged brands on Twitter (Hat Tip to Ashley Tevatia for linking to this in her daily brief!)

What Are the 25 Most Engaged Brands on Twitter?

Some of the most interesting takeaways may seem pretty obvious from a user's standpoint, but it's remarkable how it plays out in terms of actual engagement.

The first point is that a high follower count does not equal high level of engagement with those followers. This is clear from a somewhat surprising metric which shows that 73% of tweets sent out by major brands never have responses. This, to me, shows that these tweets are basically a one-way marketing vehicle and really no different than a TV or magazine ad.

There are also some metrics about how the frequency and timing of tweets really affects engagement, but the actual needs for the frequency and timing depends on each brand. Basically, a brand should stay consistent with frequency and timing of tweets, but other brands may choose to tweet more or less frequently and it may still work well for them.

The final thing that struck me is that the top two "brands" in this list are things which I would barely consider brands: @notebook and @disneywords. They're basically social media accounts that have developed followings and they followers really "connect" with the social content they're delivering. Either through quotes from Disney movies or love notes.

How the heck did two such random twitter accounts achieve such success? Well, that's something the marketing guys are these other bigger brands should look more closely at! My guess is that a lot of the engagement that @Notebook and @DisneyWords generate is in the form of retweets, but a retweet still spreads the word and brand message of a twitter account so even something as simple as an interesting quote can spread branding. Similarly, seven of the top twenty on this list are news or sports brands. MY guess is that those brands have a lot of news in their tweets and their followers want to retweet and comment about the news item. For the non-news or sports sites, I'm very curious to see how they achieve engagement and whether they follow a similar model to @Notebook and @DisneyWords.

Tweet

Getting the right social content...it can be more involved than you imagine

Earlier this week, I wrote about how LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter still live and breathe content, even though we think of them as social companies.

LinkedIn's mechanism to show content to users is much more traditional in the sense that people (Influencers) write articles and they're in the feed that users see when they login (or when they read their emails)

Facebook has long had something called EdgeRank which determines what you see when you view your newsfeed. It's actually somewhat of a mystery how any particular piece of content (photo, status, link, etc) gets posted onto someone's timeline, but a recent infographic has been making the rounds since it helps explain the major factors really well.

Demystifying How Facebook's EdgeRank Algorithm Works

All of this interest in LinkedIn's Influencers and Facebook's EdgeRank just confirms for me that what's displayed on social media sites - the content - is still the most important thing which drives usage and really helps to connect people to what is important for them

Tweet

Is Content Still King?

What's more important about Social Media Sites? The "Social" or the "Media"?

I read an interesting article earlier this week about how LinkedIn has created a massive media empire. Of course the headline sounds a bit outlandish since most people typically think of LinkedIn as a social (albeit professional) site, but what the article gets at is something which is pretty core to any social media site: the content that matters in your social group.

Each of the major social sites has a different focus of content, but it's still the content which users are typically referring to on the sites themselves.

As the article above states, LinkedIn has created a unique niche with Influencers and the daily emails which are sent recapping a series fo interesting articles. In fact, I actually subscribe to those emails and find them pretty interesting. So I can personally vouch for the idea that this method of having a small number of content creators and very focused articles drives a lot of views and engagement.

Unlike LinkedIn, I'd say that most Facebook users aren't heading to facebook to read articles. They're typically looking to catch up on their friends' activities. The activities are listed in the newsfeed are content. But if you've visited your newsfeed lately, you obviously know that it's not just a listing of random status updates. People post articles they've read, photos they've taken, music they're listening to, etc, etc. So the newsfeed is actually full of a wide variety of content posted by a large number of users (ahem, the content creators). So while Facebook may seem like just a place to read about the lives of your friends & families, when you visit the site, it's about a lot more than that.

Similarly, Twitter has long tried to enhance the content of the timeline after recognizing the types of things people were tweeting about. So rather than just seeing 140 characters of stream of consciousness, you'll see content summaries of articles, you'll see twitter cards linking out to other sites, and if you go to the #Discover tab, you'll see summaries of that. In way, it's quite similar to what Facebook is doing.

On the face of it, it may seem like LinkedIn is taking a completely different path to engagement than what Facebook and Twitter are doing, but at the core of it, it's quite similar. LinkedIn has determined what can drive interest, engagement, and page views. Facebook has done the same. Twitter has done the same. Yes, it's social, but it's still about content. It may not be long investigative articles, but it's still content.

The methods of displaying that content may differ between sites, but it's clear to me that content is still king.

Tweet

Being more social

There's been a lot going on with features recently introduced by some of the major social media sites. And I want to take a few moments to talk about how these features are built to encourage us to be more social.

Some of the most recent rundown of features, as you may know, are:

• Facebook Home for Android phones and a revised Facebook iOS app featuring chatheads and some other goodies
• Twitter with it's #music foray
• LinkedIn with its completely revised mobile apps

Facebook's Chatheads

What would be the purpose of these new featuresets other than to entice users to stay on the site longer? Of course, that's the purpose of any website (or storefront) improvements...get the user to stay on the site longer and come back more often (or get the shopper to browse more in the aisles). But the major features we've been seeing lately aren't just about spending more time on the websites or apps, but about using the services in new and different ways.

LinkedIn's new mobile app

Chatheads is meant to pull people into using messaging more like a IM app and not just the pseudo-email it has been typically been used as.

Twitter's new music suggestion

LinkedIn's new apps re-focus them and shift a lot of the intended use to researching people you might be meeting with (the website continues to stay more focused on news & article posts)

#Music is meant as a new resource connecting your twitter-verse with other services that you'd probably not connect otherwise.

So this isn't just about showing more updates from your contacts, it's about connecting with them in different ways...whether it's real-time updates & messages, quick lookups for their professional background, or about what type of music their listening to, these companies are finding new ways which they're hoping pull people back over and over and over. Just like we instinctively head to google to look up anything and everything, these companies are looking for their own sort of "just google it"

Facebook's "Suggested Page" layout has
improved to be clear and separated

Facebook's "Suggested App" started
showing up last fall, but its layout has
improved over time.

Now, let me also say that the features these companies have been focusing on are not just whiz bang new features like chatheads or #music discovery, the features also include incremental improvements to each of these sites & apps which make them easier to use or just plain more useful.

The facebook website and mobile apps look quite a bit different now than they did just six months ago and many of those differences are about making the app look better and I've definitely noticed the improvements...and yes, I'd call them improvements. I've provided just two examples from the Facebook iOS app, but Twitter has made lots of tweeks which make it easier to scroll through your tweetstream, click on links for other users or websites. Each of these seemingly small improvements make each service more friendly to use

I love to see all of this change in this space. While we may sometimes wonder what big new feature a site may release and we may sometimes be underwhelmed those big features, each of those big changes is a try and expanding and changing our usage on the site. Additionally, between those big feature announcements, there are so many little things done that over the course of just six months, those incremental changes amount to big things.

And I believe that is all designed to encourage us to use their services more often, for different reasons, and help us all be more social.

Tweet

Social Media Platforms Playing Well With Others

If you're reading this, then you likely frequent Facebook and Twitter. And while you may see a lot of content from friends, family, and other contacts, when there's an article, photo or video posted, you pretty much experience in a couple of ways:

• Embedded within the stream
• As a click to a new page with the full content

This isn't a big deal when you're on your computer, but it can be sort of a pain when you're on your smartphone.

• If it's embedded in your stream, it's likely just a tiny snippet and you'll have to click through to the site anyways
• If you have to click through to the full site, you may end up some place that's not well formatted for smartphones. You might get popups to install their mobile app, interstitial ads, or you simply have to double click on the content column just to read an article

Basically, you have to leave what is a pretty well designed mobile app into an unknown. Twitter and Facebook may be fine providing you links to other content outside of their networks, but they typically leave it at that. They don't care if they leave with you a nice pat on the shoulder or a kick in the pants.

Well, Twitter just announced an expansion of their "tweet cards" which may be an interesting way  help ensure that as users walk out of Twitter, they're given a nice handshake and pat on the shoulder.

Tweet Cards first showed in June 2012 and they're a nice way to show some good embedded content within the stream so you can make a better decision about whether you want to click through to another site. This is actually pretty nice on a computer, but on a smartphone, it's not always helpful for the reasons I mentioned above.

So what's new? Now tweet cards can actually be really helpful on smartphones. Not only will they show some additional content within the stream, if you click through, they don't have to simply go to a website, they can actually open up the relevant app on your phone. So if it's a photo on Flickr, you don't just go to their mobile site, if you have the Flickr app on your phone, it would open up the photo in that app, which is a much nicer experience than their mobile site. Presumably, the same could happen  with a Pinterest or Tumbler link.

While this can be seen as a double-edged sword, as noted on this GigaOm article by Mathew Ingram, I think this is a great sign. It shows that social media platforms are actually thinking about how to provide a good experience for users. Not just a kick in the pants as you leave the network, but hopefully a warm  "Au Revior". Not only that, users can be made aware of interesting or useful smartphone apps. As the article notes, this could mean that Twitter could wield its power to push developers and smaller players around, but that's just part of reality. Twitter can do that since it is indeed so popular. And while doing so, it can presumably make more money without degrading the experience for its users through more in-stream ads.

I'd love to hear from you all about your experiences in frequently multiple social media sites and how you discover new sites or content through them.

Tweet

Insta-Market-Gramming

As you may know, I've been following a lot of interesting tidbits about how social websites make money off of their users and how companies are using social media to their benefit.

One kind of interesting wrinkle in this has been corporations finding people who are very active in social media and having them become sort of brand ambassadors. Not by wearing their logo, but by giving "insider access" to these people and having them use their social media presence and prowess to show a new side of the company. I wrote about this how this was done for the US Open last summer.

I think this is a pretty cool way for companies to provide unique access and reward people who really love their products or to take nascent individual talent and apply it to their brand.

Well, Business Insider has written an article about 15 Instagrammers who have taken their talents and converted them into some pretty cool work for big companies. The companies range from Nike and Volvo to Johnnie Walker and Samsung. (The article is a bit difficult to follow to be honest since it mixes photos of the individuals with photos they've Instagrammed for the companies)

I see this not just as corporations taking advantage of a potential new marketing stream, I see it as recognition of the way in which media itself has changed to a much more two-way, grassroots thing. Just like the internet has allowed people to connect in so many different ways, I think companies across the world have recognized that their marketing and connections with the customers needs to change.

Tweet

Is Facebook following you to the supermarket?

Are you paying attention to ads
like these on Facebook?

I've been trying to get back to documenting some of my thoughts and one of the things I keep coming back to is about the engagement that users have on social media sites is turned into something more for the company itself. I wrote before about how Facebook is looking to monetize user engagement on their site and how Facebook gets "mid funnel" users to act on things they see on the site. 

I read a really interesting article by Farhad Manjoo about the very structured analysis Facebook has done to determine how users are actually responding to ads they see on the site. They may not be clicking the ads, but they seem to definitely making buying decisions based on the ads they see on Facebook? Don't believe me? Well, read the article to learn more:


Facebook Followed You to the Supermarket: Even if you never click on Facebook ads, they are making you buy things.


What do you think? Do you pay much attention to the ads? Even if you don't pay attention, do you at least notice them?

Tweet

Social Media for Big Time Events

(via Fstoppers.com)

I came across this article and thought I'd share it. It's a great way to bring a big time event like the US Open to individuals in a very unique way. It harnesses the power of social media rather than discouraging any "non-official" use. Since I have a photography background, I find that socially sharing photos is a particularly great way to share experiences, especially things like special behind-the-scenes access or one-time events. After so many headlines at the beginning of the London Olympics about not allowing personal photographs, etc, this is really refreshing.

Top Instagram Users Receive Red Carpet Treatment at U.S. Open

via SportsGrid.com

On a related note, I never mentioned the really cool way that the US Men's Basketball team personalized their experience at the London Olympics. As you may have heard, many of the players used Instagram to document things like taking the Metro or having lunch. I thought that was REALLY cool and gave a much better feel for what it might be like to compete and was much more authentic than the overly-produced athlete profiles which NBC provided. Here's a link to an article about some of those Instagrammed photos:

The USA Basketball Team’s Instagram Shots Are Ridiculously Awesome

And more highlights:
The U.S.A. Basketball Team’s Olympic Journey, In Fantastic Instagram Photos

Tweet

Innovative Social Engagement

There's a lot of talk about how companies and brands should engage their fans & followers on social media. In the title I use the work "Innovative", but let's face it, social media is so new and ever changing that everything could be considered innovative.

But I have seen a good deal of movement away from the stale model of posting brand specific content on a regular/set schedule. I see two aspects of the move away from this model to something which is much more fluid and also not quite as specific to the brand itself. In my mind, the moves broaden the usefulness of the facebook page (or twitter presence) for both the company/brand as well as the fans & followers.

The first simple part of this is the frequency of updates. People check facebook and twitter at different times of the day and for different reasons throughout the day. Mornings might be all about sending birthday wishes. Afternoons might be to see how the day has been going and plans to make for the evening. Nighttime might be for a quick update before heading off to sleep. Each check can be a valuable time for brands to be on the timeline.

This post from PostRocket goes into much more detail and after reading it through, it's obvious that a single daily post isn't really that useful (via @maneesh1):
4 BIG Reasons You Should Be Posting to Your Facebook Page MORE Than 1x Per Day

So it's clear that posting more often is a good thing, but what if the company doesn't have much unique content about their brand to post so frequently? A software or service provider could post tips to make their service more useful (eg, how can Evernote be used while landing on Mars?!), but what I've started to see is something way more interesting than simply "more posts, more often"

I'll call it expanding the relevance of the brand and I'll provide two examples. Essentially, it's all about finding things that brand followers & fans would be interested in. Call it playing to their sense and sensibility.

The first brand who's doing a great job with this is Oreo. They are finding significant news events and tying them back to the simple Oreo cookie. Read more about it here:
Oreo’s Facebook Salute to the Mars Landing Will Make You Hungry

They obviously have a big budget for this, but they've expanded the relevance of the simple cookie by tying it to things that their followers are probably interested in anyways. Whether it be the Olympics, Batman, or Air Conditioning; they've found a way to remind their followers about Oreo cookies (and hopefully go buy some!). I'd consider Oreo's social media brand work to be cutting edge. Finding interesting & relevant news events, creating a cool message about that news event, and inserting Oreo cookies as the key ingredient for the message. With thousands of likes and hundreds of comments for each post, it's obviously getting the attention of Oreo lovers everywhere.

Another simple example is by a company that my friend Maneesh runs, MightyText. The company provides a service for Android phone owners to enable SMS texting from anywhere. You'd think the brand page should focus on texting and the Android OS, but as you can see from their facebook page, there's a good deal of content that's just slightly related to texting or not at all related. But the commonality across those posts is that they are things which MightyText fans are probably interested in.  As you skim through their facebook page, each post has a dozen or so comments and many dozens of likes. So they're getting increased engaged by NOT JUST posting about their service or even just Android phones. As a startup, they don't have a huge budget to create brand new content, but they're finding content which their followers find interesting and running with it.

I'm looking forward to a lot more interesting and engaging ways that brands get their message out. Have you seen other cool social media from brands that keep you engaged with them? Let me know!

Tweet

Facebook's Money Engine - "Mid Funnel" Users

Back in March, I wrote about ad placement on social versus search sites. I was basically trying to break down some of the differences in a person's intent when they go to a search or social site and what they might do with ads. It seemed pretty clear to me that someone going to a social site isn't likely to just click on ads and immediately purchase something, but that much of the marketing on facebook is to build awareness.

I just read an interesting piece on Wired about Facebook's advertising products (via @Lessien). The piece is actually an interview with the director of Facebook Advertising Product Director, Gokul Rajaram, and gets at some things which I find really telling. They seem to match with many of the ads or sponsored content I've been seeing on Facebook of late (both on the desktop and on mobile)

Here are some interesting tidbits which align pretty well with what I wrote previously:

Facebook’s advertising mission, then, is not to inject commercial messages into social discussions, but to amplify the messages that are already there. And it’s not to drive immediate purchases, as Google’s contextual advertising does, but to influence buying decisions a little further down the road. 

They use a term, "mid-funnel" which I find a little odd, but makes sense because a person on Facebook typically isn't ready to buy something that might be shown on an ad, but specific other things they see on Facebook may nudge them lower into the funnel to actually buy something (such as a gift for their friend's birthday or a Groupon type offer for a local restaurant that a friend loves.

To that end, here's a quote from Rajaram exactly on that point:

“We always think about, how can Facebook add that extra social, viral dimension to advertising,” Rajaram says. “We always think about stories and how, it’s not just businesses communicating to people, it’s businesses communicating with their loyal lists of fans and how then those fan’s interactions with that message can lead to their friends being impacted.”

It's nice to see that a research article posted recently aligns pretty well with what I wrote almost 5 months ago :)

I've been compiling examples of ads on Facebook over the past few weeks (again, both on the desktop and on mobile). I promise to post those along with my commentary soon!

Tweet

Facebook - Featuring Pinterest Pins more visually

Yes, I've been very lax in posting updates so I'm trying to get back in the swing of things now.

Since I usually login to Facebook both on the desktop and iPhone everyday, I tend to notice things out of the ordinary. Sometimes it's rollout of new features I've heard about and others I think it's just A/B testing.

The latest feature I saw was a different, more visual way to show Pinterest Pins. One of my facebook friends pinned a few things to her boards and they showed up in my timeline like this:

The tiles go the width of the timeline and graphically feature what she pinned. Moreover, there are "Like" and Comment links for each one. When you hover your mouse over images, a Pinterest logo pops up in the top left and you can click-through to the pin on Pinterest. This was the first time I noticed this new format and I like it.

More broadly, what I've seen Facebook doing is not necessarily about adding brand new features, but making existing features more readily available and customized based on the content. In this case, even though they're featuring the pins prominently, they're also featuring their own Like and Comment features very prominently. They've found a way to make the timeline more visually appealing while also encouraging interaction on the timeline.

Have you seen other similar formatting for other content on the Facebook timeline? I'd love to see!

Tweet

P'Oh My Gawd! - What you're obsessing about on Pinterest

A few weeks ago, I wrote about the differences in marketing to search vs social users and how Facebook is working towards monetizing user engagement. I thought I'd expand a bit more on this and talk about the hottest social/discovery site out there: Pinterest

If you're not familiar with Pinterest...well then, why are you reading this blog?! Go there and check it out now!

I'm not a huge Pinterest user, but in my several months of usage, I've seen a lot of Facebook friends begin following me on Pinterest as well. Since I don't pin very many things, those followers don't see much from me. But since I follow-back everyone, I see a lot of new pins every time I login. What have I noticed?

Well, safe to say that the stereotypes about Pinterest users are based on some fact :)

• Lots of female users
• Lots of pins about recipes, fashion, & home decorating

A series of desert recipes. Hmm...where to buy organic raw sugar?!

The more interesting thing I've noticed is that people seem to pin a series of items all about the same thing in a short period of time. It could be holiday dinner recipes or kids' bedroom designs or hairstyles, but people seem to obsess about really specific things. They may move onto other obsessions sooner or later, but pinning habits definitely show what users are thinking & obsessing about.

I'm not going to get into the pinning habits themselves, but I want to compare this with typical social and search usage:

• Social - Lots of random sharing about life, things you've read with a few specifics like check-ins or location-tagged photos. It's hard to really know what a social user is thinking at the time they login since the sharing is kind of random.
• Search - Lots of specific queries typically layered on with location specifics. It's easy to know exactly what a search user needs right at that moment, but the user will move onto different searches and may or may not come back to the topic.

Compare that with a Pinterest user:

• Pinboards are typically well-organized and if the "Pin-It" bookmarklet has been used, it's easy to link back the pin to the original site, therefore it's easy to build further organization based on where the pins came from.
• Users seem to focus on specific topics for a day...could be shorter or longer, but it's really clear what they're obsessing over during that time.
• Users may not be looking to buy anything at the time of pinning, but the pins are certainly things that inspire them or what they want to buy or re-create in the future.

So taking those thought onto the ad/marketing side of things...

There's been a lot of talk about click-through of Pinterest users where they end up on the original site from which the pin originated and maybe even buy. However, I think Pinterest as a targeted ad platform could be just as interesting. Afterall, pinboards are well organized and you can tell exactly what the user is thinking about. Not just randomly thinking about for a moment in time, but obsessing over.

Lots of wonderful decor ideas...time to get DIYing!

Sure, the user may not be ready to re-decorate the living room as displayed in a pin from Martha Stewart's site, but targeted ads from the brands highlighted in the pin or from related vendors will have a step-up with the user since they're already engaged and interested in what they have to offer. It could be an ad from Ethan Allen for a current sale or from Lowe's for paint which matches the one in the pin. On the local front, it could be an ad from Whole Foods for the maple syrup in a recipe or from Target for the mixing bowls.

It may seem difficult to tie-back all of this to specific products for which ads can be placed, but the reality is that most of the details aren't that difficult to obtain. Martha Stewart doesn't always list out brands especially if it's a home tour, but many other sites already do. Recipes already have the details listed out and fashion is typically tied back to specific designers.

My point is that Pinterest is positioned well to monetize the user engagement they've developed. Clicking-through to the original pinned site is an obvious way, but targeted ads are another possible direction. Due to Pinterest user-behavior, those targeted ads would likely be way more relevant than  ads that Facebook users see. Additionally, users aren't at the stage of searching for something they want...they've already FOUND things they love.

It's the perfect opportunity to convert interested and engaged users into buyers.

Tweet

I'm skeptical of the 2012 JOBS Act. And here's why

If you're on twitter, you may have seen a lot of tweets from people supporting the JOBS Act. The act is actually an acronym for Jumpstart Our Business Startups and isn't a jobs act in the traditional sense where companies are encouraged to hire people through deductions, etc.

Among a host of things it aims to accomplish, the JOBS Act is looking to make it easier for small companies to get funding and go public. Here's a good article about the Act as it relates to Silicon Valley Investing:

JOBS Act to rewrite rules of Silicon Valley investing

In general, I like what the JOBS Act is trying to do. Afterall, supporting startups through novel means of funding should result in a more equitable way of getting innovation out to more people. And this isn't just about technology startups; it could certainly help with many types of small businesses.

The part I'm not too keen on is the transparency requirements for companies which are looking to get funded. Essentially, the reporting requirements that companies have to abide by right now can be pushed out for up to five years. Those requirements were put in as part of Sarbanes-Oxely (eg, after Enron) to help ensure that investors and shareholders know what the company they've invested in is really up to.

Here's a transcript of an NPR report on this matter of transparency:

Unintended Consequences Emerge In JOBS Act

My concern is really around the information that companies need to provide to investors. While I like the open-ness that many parts of this Act allow for (especially around what incubators are allowed to publish about companies they invest in), I just don't see enough reason for lifting reporting requirements on "emerging" public companies.

All it takes is one instance of an emerging company hiding its books in creative ways. Investors will be the ones who are taken for a ride all in the hopes of hitting it big with small companies. It's one thing if you're funding a Kickstarter campaign for a new iPhone tripod with $25 of your own money. It's a wholly different situation if you're funding a company that says they're the next great thing in social networking and you hand over thousands of dollars to get in early.

Incubators, VC's, and Angel Investors take risks, but they're educated risks and they're privy to a lot of information about the ideas and the risks they're getting into. The changes coming due to the JOBS Act may make it easier for the average joe to invest in tech startups, but I think it's with the consequence of inadequate transparency about what those startups are doing behind the scenes. Sure opening up investing to more people will bring more money into the startup world, but will those new investors have any way of really finding out what they're getting into? Additionally, I see this as a fast-lane to another tech bubble if average investors just pile their money into any tech startup with just an inkling of an idea.

It's hard to make it big in tech startups. It's hard to invest in the right startups and actually make money. I don't think we should make it easier to invest in such startups unless we also continue to require enough information about the companies that will help us decide if they're "right".

What do you think about the changes that the JOBS Act has in store for Silicon Valley?

UPDATE: I've added one more great article about the problems with the JOBS Act. This piece goes a lot farther in opposition than me, but it demonstrates very well what we would be losing if this act is passed:
A Colossal Mistake of Historic Proportions: The “JOBS” bill

Tweet

Software design on mobile vs desktop. What drives app choice on each platform?

I'm going to change things up a bit and talk about software rather than social media.

In the past week or so, the idea of the post-PC world of devices has come back to the fore as a discussion point. No surprise since the new iPad and the latest beta of Windows 8 and the Metro UI were announced. I wanted to share some thoughts on how software is impacted due to this movement away from PCs and towards touch & mobile devices. Specifically, I've got some thoughts on how the quality & design of a mobile app can actually encourage me to change my app of choice on my laptop.

In the post-PC world I live in, I may have strong habits based on how I've done things on my laptop. However I'm finding that a well-designed mobile app will very quickly change my mind about how well my laptop apps are serving my needs and, more fundamentally, if those laptop apps even meet the needs they're designed for.

I've been trying out different ways of keeping my thoughts and to-do's organized. I normally keep things very simple by just using text files for notes and Google tasks for to-do's. Both can be accessed from my laptop as well as my iPhone and iPad. My method is barebones, but it keeps me on-track. However, I wanted to see if I was missing out by not using applications designed specifically for staying organized.

So I pulled up Evernote and Wunderlist. Evernote is well-known for providing a robust way to take notes and organize them. The desktop UI has no frills, but it's pretty easy to use. Wunderlist is the relative new kid on the block. It's focused on tasks and encourages short, to-the-point "notes". The desktop UI is pretty, but stil straight-forward.

The desktop versions of these apps have their differences, but if you're looking for a way to organize everything, then Evernote wins. If you're looking to just track tasks, then Wunderlist is more focused for that, but I think a simple text file or Google Tasks may actually be better. The design doesn't really matter, the amount of functionality is what matters. Yes, that functionality needs to be put together well, but the look of the app and the general chrome don't really add to how useful the app is.

For the desktop, I prefer Evernote even though it's overkill for my needs.

However, the mobile versions of these apps tell me a different story. Both apps are essentially ported over to iOS for full functionality that you find in the desktop versions with nods to touch & tap. But in creating a mobile version, the focus on accessing the functionality and the method of interaction really comes to the forefront. Evernote still allows you include notes, photos, etc but if you want to include any formatting or tagging, you have to go through the additional menu and close out the keyboard. It's very robust, but I feel it's actually a little difficult to use for doing anything more than finding & creating/editing simple notes. Wunderlist's chrome and more limited abilities change how I use the app. More specifically, I enter in quick notes or reminders and I'm in-and-out. Even though I can't use it to write full meeting notes, the structure of the UI makes me focus on smaller things and I don't miss the ability to add photos, tag, etc.

So on the mobile platform, Evernote still allows me to track everything under the sun, but that actually becomes a detriment. The main thing Evernote does is track or organize detailed notes for everything in my life. However, if I want to use the full organizational methods it offers, I've got to do a lot of tapping and it can actually be a little frustrating. Wunderlist does a lot less, but it presents that functionality to the user right up front with very little tapping required to do it's "thing": track, edit, and re-order tasks. It's really efficient for the set of functionality it offers.

For the iPhone, I far prefer Wunderlist. It's quick and to-the-point.

And that made me re-think my choice on the laptop.

On the laptop, Evernote is clearly better for note-taking or organizing thoughts, but not so much better for me that it stands out over simply keeping notes as email drafts. On the iPhone, Wunderlist is by far the best way I've found to keep track of tasks. So after comparing both of these apps on the laptop and on the iPhone, I believe I'll continue to use Wunderlist on the phone and laptop. For more detailed notes & thoughts, I'm still going to give Evernote another week, but I'm pretty sure I'll revert back to simple text files or email drafts.

What would change my mind about using Evernote on my laptop? It wouldn't be changes to the desktop app, but changes to the mobile app that would bring me around. Given how fast we're progressing to using phones and tablets as key devices we use all the time, I believe this will happen more and more. Desktop apps can do a lot to differentiate themselves, but the meaningful differences will be more apparent on the mobile/tablet versions and will drive software choices not just on phones & tablets, but on laptops too.

A year ago, I'd immediately say that desktop software choices don't have much to do with mobile software choices. As long as the data syncs, it doesn't matter. However, I'm seeing a greater and greater connection. Sure, I can use different apps for different devices, but design choices on mobile are affecting how useful any app can be to me and I see those choices as driving my decisions on my desktop software too.

Evernote and Wunderlist are just two examples, but I expect to see this happen more and more.

Tweet

Ad placement on Social vs Search sites

After my last post about experimenting with the ads on Facebook, I had a hearty FB convo with a friend about how ads on Facebook are almost always less relevant than what could be presented to a user if they're doing a search (Google, Bing, etc). It's interesting, since I sort of had that in the back of my mind, but it didn't click until this friend mentioned it and then I couldn't get it out of my mind.

In fact, I asked others on Twitter as well as Facebook about this and EVERYONE said they avoid the ads on Facebook. The most common reason I heard is that they're just not interested in looking at them while on Facebook and many said that when they did look at the ads, they were usually not very relevant. This general marketing malaise is pointed to in this article about brands shutting down their Facebook stores since users don't seem to go beyond clicking 'Like'.

As I've thought this through, I broke this down as follows:

On Facebook (or any social site for that matter), the user is very casual. They're likely on there to share something about themselves (status, photo, check-in, etc) or see what others are sharing. While they may stay on the site for a long time, the casual nature of their usage means they're not there for any particular reason. So even if an ad is relevant, it may not be relevant at that moment in time. If that's the case, then it can be very difficult to convince that user to spend more than a moment even glancing at the ad let alone actually click on it.

My friend's comments about FB ads

It may happen sometimes, but it's rare. Just to note how rare it may be, I've provided a screenshot of a friend's status talking about the ads she sees on Facebook.

On Google (or any search site), the user is typically very transactional. They're likely there for something very specific and want to get the most specific answer or result. The search results may be what the user is after, but an ad with dead-on relevance can be very important for the user. So even if they generally try to avoid ads, the ad placed at that moment can be exactly what the user is looking for.

I've got some thoughts about why ads aren't relevant in the moment when on Facebook, but I'll get to that in a future post when I talk about "big data"

This all seems so obvious now that I've mulled it through, but it does make me wonder what kind of ads could ever work in the context of a social site?

Well, lo and behold in the last two weeks we've actually seen some glimpses on Facebook itself and at their Marketing Conference (fMC). I saw the first instance as is described in Ryan Spoon's post about a sponsored Macy's ad which shows up at the top of the news feed. When I saw this ad, I was actually kind of confused by what I saw, but I think it's something we should (and will) get used to seeing. Here's a liveblog of the fMC from last week which goes over a lot of the direction that Facebook's headed. In some sense, they're breaking new ground in the ways that ads are presented to users and the ways in which they allow brands to use the platform to build awareness and potentially even sell.

And that for me is the key thing. It's very clear that a brand can build awareness through smart usage of social sites like Facebook. Whether it's a specific ad placement or an on-going engagement with users, I do think users will pick up brand messaging while they're on Facebook for casual, social purposes. However, I'm still very much wondering if that casual user can be converted into a transactional user who will do more than click 'Like' but will also go on to purchase something. That conversion is pretty clear on search sites, but I'm keen to see how that plays out in the new social web.

In future posts on this subject, I'm going to try and tackle the ways in which "big data" could be used to provide more relevant ads. I've got some thoughts on that, but I'd prefer to have further discussions with friends to help crystallize my analysis. For now, I hope you've found this interesting!

What are your thoughts on ad placement on social sites like Facebook? How do they compare to search sites? How does your mindset on either type of site affect your impression of ads?

Tweet