Marketing and Social Networkiing Sites

Check out this posting from the iProspect Social Networking User Behavior Study (April 2007)
Sometimes we library folks have trouble taking consumer research from the corporate marketing space and applying it in our social entities’ context. We know we need to market and promote. We are marketers of the library ‘brand’ and our various products and services. This study offers up the assertion that we are at a critical point and that we, as marketers and users/builders of social networking tools “have the opportunity to build a relationship with them that could potentially last a lifetime.”
Here are some highlights but you’re better to read the whole post (and see the graphics too):
“‘In January 2007, iProspect partnered with independent research firm JupiterResearch to develop a series of survey questions focused on how the U.S. online population utilizes several of the most popular social networking websites (or social search engines).”
“For purposes of this study iProspect defines a “social networking website” as one that allows Internet users have the ability to add user-generated content such as: comments, reviews, feedback, ratings, or their own dedicated pages. All of the sites examined within this study allow posting of user-generated content. It’s because of its use of user-generated content, for example, that Amazon.com – a site which many see as a purely ecommerce site – was included in this survey. For visitors to Amazon have the ability to post “customer reviews” of products, allowing potential buyers to read the reviews prior to making a purchase decision. It should also be noted that among all the sites examined by this study, Amazon is the only one on which you can directly buy a product.”
All figures cited within this study reflect only the U.S. online adult population (ages 18 and over). The full posting has much more about methodology and definitions.
“Executive Summary
The iProspect Social Networking User Behavior Study findings should be of significant importance to both search engine marketers, and to the social networking sites themselves, as it uncovers a number of opportunities for both constituencies.

Findings & Implications
All three major search engines (Google, Yahoo! and MSN) have a much higher percentage of the total U.S. online population visiting their sites on a daily and weekly basis than even the largest, most frequently visited, social networking sites. So despite widespread search marketing industry buzz about “social search,” marketers should continue to invest time, effort, and resources ensuring that their Web pages are found in both the paid and natural search results of the major search engines in order to be exposed to the largest audiences.
The most frequently visited social networking sites are visited by approximately one out of every four Internet users at least once a month. So despite not receiving visits in the quantities, or with the frequency enjoyed by the major search engines, a significant number of Internet users are currently visiting these sites somewhere between daily and monthly. Marketers should take note of this and identify the social networking sites whose “communities” of visitors closely match the profile of their target customers and prospects. Opportunities to reach target audiences on these sites, and to obtain links on these sites to marketers’ own sites, are available through various types of “participation.” Finally, marketers should perform actions to expose prospects to this participation through a variety of channels (see #5 below).
Though sites such as YouTube and MySpace were designed to appeal to a high percentage of the online user population, many social search engines have been built to serve, and attract, a community that is defined by their affinity to a vertical industry, a business model, or an interactive activity type. Sites such as del.icio.us (bookmarking), LinkedIn (BtoB), and TripAdvisor (travel and hospitality), though visited by less than 10% of Internet users, nonetheless can serve as highly targeted, extremely effective means to reach very specific profiles of potential customers. Marketers should research their industry’s/niche’s universe of social networking sites, and explore those offering this special targeting.
Roughly one out of five visitors does not perform a search once they arrive at a social search engine. One probable reason is that in all cases, the user-generated content from each of the sites addressed by this study is indexed by at least some of the major search engines. As a result, these visitors are able to directly reach content on the sites without having to use the site’s own search functionality. Given this user behavior, marketers who identify a particular social networking site whose community of users closely matches their target audience should be sure to investigate how much of the site’s content is indexed in the major search engines. The easier the site’s user generated content is to find on search engines, and the more channels that are available for Internet users to find content on one of these sites (see #5 below), the better the chance for marketing success.
Visitors primarily arrive at social networking sites through direct navigation/bookmarking, Google search, Yahoo! search, and links in emails (in that order). So aside from making certain that a marketer’s particular form of participation on these sites can be found by users of Google and Yahoo!, they can also help their cause by ensuring that their content is of high enough interest, quality, or value that it will serve as “link bait” or “bookmark bait.” Doing so will encourage repeat visits, as well as the ability for direct navigation to the content. It is also apparent that the proactive pushing of potential visitors to social networking sites via email (from a current site user or from a marketer) is an important activity and channel in which to engage.
Internet users who visit social networking sites do so for a variety of reasons (or intents) including: for entertainment, to connect or network with others, to research a product or service, to purchase a product or service, and “other.” The vast majority does not go to these sites with the intent to research or purchase products/services. But those marketers hoping to place their products in the path of motivated prospects (“pull marketing”) should consider developing a strategy for participation on those sites where visitor intent is to research or directly purchase products or services. On the other hand, brand marketers should take advantage of the sheer numbers afforded by the majority of sites where visitor intent is to be entertained, or to connect/network with other people – where “push marketing” can be employed. These sites are more suited to introduce, or build awareness of a brand, product, or service to a community.
It’s still early in the history of social networking, yet one out of three Internet users is already taking advantage of a site containing user-generated content to help make a decision to buy, or not to buy something. This bodes well for the future of these sites that take advantage of our human nature to trust the recommendations (and warnings) of fellow consumers more than we do the claims and “marketing-speak” of professional marketers. Given this user behavior, marketers need to initiate ethical mechanisms within their marketing mix to help drive, or provide incentive for the creation of positively-focused user-generated content about products and services on social networking sites. They should also perform a thorough “online reputation assessment” of the positive, negative, and neutral user-generated content on the leading social networking sites that apply to their target audience – especially any that appear within the first page of results of the major search engines. Once identified, positive steps can be taken to mitigate the impact of damaging content (see #8 below).
The majority of visitors to social networking sites have not posted comments on those sites. This creates great opportunities for marketers to create their own content for these sites (if allowed by the site’s functional model) or to devise ethical ways to cause their current customers to post positively-focused comments. Though there is a mix of positive and negative comments about products and services across these sites, there is also a trend toward non-product-related comments being posted on sites where user intent is not to research or purchase a product, and little purchasing influence is generated. Depending on marketers’ goals, they should participate on sites where the type of content that matches their marketing strategy can be found. It is also vital for marketers to “embrace” negative comments about their brand, product, services, employees, business practices, etc., that is discovered on social networking sites. By openly, honestly, and transparently addressing each piece of negative content – admitting to mistakes, explaining the steps being taken to fix or to improve – and doing so in a sensitive, factual, and non-promotional way, marketers can accomplish three important things: 1) they call their side of the story to the attention of their target community, 2) they demonstrate that they are human and are deserving of forgiveness and trust, and 3) they add neutral-to-positive content to the sites that contain the negative content.
The 18-24 year old age group is more prolific at visiting social networking sites and the major search engines weekly, as well as at posting content on social networking sites. This was the youngest age group surveyed and it’s no surprise that the extremely Internet-savvy users visit these sites more frequently and are more interactive once they arrive. Marketers whose products or services target this age group have even more reason to establish a form of participation on sites frequented by these ultra-interactive users. Proactively engaging this age group (if, and where relevant) can both facilitate a rich channel of customer feedback and other user-generated content, as well as help establish a feeling of trust within this target community.”
9 Detailed Findings
“1. Social search engines are far from replacing the major, traditional search engines in terms of quantity and frequency of visits. Consequently, marketers need to continue to take action to ensure their websites are found in both the paid and natural search results of the traditional search engines.
2. Social networking sites are being visited regularly by a meaningful percentage of the U.S. online population, with many sites attracting specific “communities” of visitors whose characteristics match those of specific audiences targeted by marketers.
3. Some social networking sites that received visits from a very small percentage of the online population may nonetheless be viable vehicles for niche, or vertical-specific marketing.
4. Visitors to social search engines don’t necessarily launch a search once they arrive, posing challenges to marketers who want their “participation” to be found.
5. Social search engines’ visitors arrive through a number of methods, requiring marketers to facilitate multiple incoming channels to maximize the traffic to their content on the site.
6. Some social networking sites are inherently better for marketers with selling and ecommerce goals, while others are better suited for brand building and awareness.
7. Social networking sites are influencing the purchasing decisions of a meaningful percentage of the Internet users who visit them, requiring marketers to identify the sites where the level of influence is high, and to devise ways to positively engage with the visitors of those sites (“communities”).
8. While a percentage of visitors to social networking sites add user-generated content to the sites they visit, the vast majority do not. This provides marketers with opportunities to ethically influence their customers to produce content on these sites which portray their brands in a positive light.
9. The younger the user, the more apt he or she is to visit, frequent, and proactively interact with a social networking site, enabling marketers who target younger prospects to effectively do so through prudent participation on these sites.”
Cool, eh? We could adapt much of this to our promotion plans and our portals and websites.
Stephen