Tuesday, June 12, 2012
Facebook's IPO performance may have proved to be a reality check for many; but the Research Firm ComScore, who interestingly happens to be an ally of Facebook, wants the world to change the Discussion on Measuring Facebook Effectiveness (Facebook's effectiveness in making money).
In a recent blogpost, comScore, who is all ready to publish new findings about the effectiveness of paid and earned media exposure on Facebook this week at the ARF Audience Measurement 7.0 conference in New York, along with its release of a new white paper, The Power of Like 2: How Social Marketing Works; says that its latest research examines the impact on consumer behavior as a result of media exposure (i.e. seeing a brand message). A metric which is much yielding, claims the research firm, than looking at whether the Facebook users ignore ads on Facebook or not.
ComScore says that it has gained critical new insights, which show that Facebook earned media is having a statistically significant positive lift on people’s purchasing of a brand.
The Research firm trashes all the previous methodologies employed to gauze the Facebook marketing effectiveness and says that the usual media headlines like “Facebook Comments, Ads Don't Sway Most Users: Poll”, and “four out of five Facebook users have never bought a product or service as a result of advertising or comments on the social network site.” may not be actually reflecting the right picture or essence of Facebook marketing or commerce or advertising (Social network marketing and advertising).
How ComScore arrived at the new insights:
The research is using a "test vs. control methodology" to compare the behavior, such as brand site engagement and purchase, of similar groups of individuals with their primary difference being whether or not they were exposed to a media impression.
ComScore finds this a valuable intelligence for brand advertisers. As the methodology has been commonly used over the years to measure branding effects of advertising due to the realization that clicks are a weak indicator of true campaign performance because they ignore the importance of simply viewing an advertising message (otherwise known as the ‘view-through’ impact of exposure).
The Research Firm further adds that the lifts in behavior as a result of exposure may be immediate or latent, often occurring weeks or even months following exposure.
In short, the Facebook marketing differs from the usual on-line marketing and comScore, plans to reveal this week to the world " How Facebook marketing really works".
Is comScore treating Facebook as Highway side Billboards or people discussing diverse topics while waiting to enter the Doctor's chamber:
First of all, there is no "Earned Media" on Facebook. There are Facebook pages, on which brands like GM invested heavily, but even those are owned and regulated by Facebook. So when Comscore speaks of Earned Media, one gets confused.
Secondly, since Advertising is in existence for many decades now, hence it's strange comScore wants the world to see the Ads on Facebook as simply viewing an advertising messages. You can't click and take action on highway side billboard, but on web you have always the option to click and Act. Don't You? And if Facebook users choose not to click on Ads, then isn't it an important performance metric to look at?
What do you feel about comScore's latest rabble?