Comparing the value of social media users
As companies scramble to measure their social media efforts, new social networks emerge every quarter, forcing businesses to make decisions as to where they will or will not have a digital presence. Photo sharing sites take up effort, as do blogs, Twitter accounts, Facebook Pages, Pinterest boards, Foursquare accounts and the like. Decision makers are looking for legitimate ways to justify why the company is spending time and money on each branding effort on each social network.
Based on the estimated value of the following social networks, Backupify has estimated that accounting for the number of users each network has, each user is worth the following:
- Path – estimated value of $25 million, so $12.50 per user
- Yelp – estimated value of $1.4 billion, so $21.21 per user
- Pinterest – estimated value of $500 million, so $28.09 per user
- Foursquare – estimated value of $600 million, so $40.00 per user
- Twitter – estimated value of $10 billion, so $71.43 per user
- LinkedIn – estimated value of $9.61 billion, so $104.46 per user
- Facebook – estimated value of $100 billion, so $118.34 per user
Some of these numbers seem a bit off to us, but let’s go with this and focus on the point that a user is worth more or less, depending on the size of the community of each social network as proportionate to their estimated value.
The value of social media content
Backupify broke down what a user is worth to each social network, but they also divided each company’s revenue by content to reveal what they call the “Social Currency Exchange,” or the cost of each piece of content, for example, how much a single tweet is worth, asking the question, how many pieces of content does it take to make $10?
While this analysis pertains to what a user is worth and what a piece of content is worth to each of the social networks, it is a similar metric companies should be using as they closely track the results of their social media efforts. Are you measuring your brand’s efforts in a detailed enough way that you are aware of how much it actually costs (in time or money) for your company to obtain a new Facebook fan or to get someone to retweet you? It is time to start measuring results as more than just hits to a website because you might be putting time into an expensive Facebook effort when you could be pushing Yelp and getting much better ROI.
Reactions to Twitter Blue from real subscribers, p.s. its not worth it
(SOCIAL MEDIA) Twitter’s paid subscription service, Twitter Blue, gives more control over tweets and custom UI, but subscriber reception has been lukewarm.
Twitter Blue, a paid subscription service that gives users increased control over their tweets and the appearance of their interfaces, launched this summer. Subscriber reception has been lukewarm, foreshadowing some resistance to shifts away from advertising-based revenue models for social media platforms.
The allure of Twitter Blue isn’t immediately apparent; beyond a relatively low price tag and increased exclusivity on a platform that emphasizes individuality, the service doesn’t offer much to alter the Twitter experience. Twitter Blue’s main selling point – the ability to preview and alter tweets before sending them – may not be enough to convince users to shell out the requisite three dollars per month.
Other features include the option to change the theme color and icon appearances. Twitter Blue subscribers can also read some ad-supported news articles without having to view ads courtesy of Twitter’s acquisition of Scroll, a company that provides ad-free news browsing.
But even with this variety of small customization options and the promise of more to come, users are skeptical. Android Central’s Shruti Shekar is one such user, beginning her review with, “Right off the bat, this feature isn’t worth the money you’d be spending on it every month.”
Shekar posits that the majority of the features are wasted on long-term users. “I think a lot of my opinions come from a place of using Twitter for so long in a certain way that I’ve gotten used to it, and now I find it challenging to adapt to something that would theoretically make my life easier,” she explains.
One of those adaptations centers on Twitter Blue’s “Undo Tweet” feature – something that belies the notion of proofreading and using common sense before sending thoughts into the nether.
“For me, 95% of the time, I really do pay attention to my tweets before I send them out,” says Shekar.
Shekar does praise Twitter Blue’s “Reader Mode” feature that allows users to view threads as uninterrupted columns but argues that the feature would probably end up being underutilized despite being a cool concept.
The aforementioned color and theme customization was of little interest to Shekar. “I actually found it a bit challenging to get used to the other colors, not because they’re ugly, but again because I am just so used to the classic blue,” she says.
One problem here is that the options to change link and theme colors and put threads in reader mode seem more like accessibility features than premium content. Twitter might do well to make these available to all users, if for no other reason than to avoid criticism about locking quality of life updates behind a subscription paywall.
Shekar’s criticism hits on a crucial point for any social media company looking to emulate Twitter Blue’s subscription model: Even if the subscription price is low, companies have to be prepared to make actual meaningful changes to the user experience if they want satisfied subscribers. That includes building in options that don’t fundamentally alter the basic aspects (or appearance) of the platform.
For more on Twitter Blue, check out their blog post on it here.
Instagram flaunts new features, including a decked out desktop experience
(SOCIAL MEDIA) It’s been a time of exciting product and feature announcements for Instagram with additions of Collabs, fundraisers, and desktop posts on deck
It’s been a time of exciting product and feature announcements for Instagram on both mobile and desktop.
“Collabs” allows up to 2 accounts to co-author a post or Reel, both sharing joint ownership of what is ultimately published. The post or Reel will show up equally on both users’ feeds with the same amount of engagement numbers, but combined, including comments, view numbers, and like counts. This is initiated through the tagging screen and the invited account will have to accept the offer before the collab can be complete.
Fundraiser & Reel Features
Instagram was quick to jump on the short-form content trends taking the social media world by storm. With the rise of TikTok, the Insta platform that was originally focused on static photos added Reels, along the same wavelength of short 15, 30, or 60-second videos, though the competitor has now expanded with the option of 3 minutes. Even so, Instagram is taking the time to improve music-related features within the Reels section of the app, adding “Superbeat” and “Dynamic.” The first adds effects to the video matching the beat of the chosen song, while the latter offers unique and interesting ways to display the song’s lyrics on screen. In addition, they are beginning to test the option to run fundraisers on a post by clicking the + button in the top right corner of the interface.
FINALLY! Instagram is now realizing just how many users truly enjoy the desktop experience. If one were to compare the platform on the mobile app vs. desktop, they would see the slew of differences between the two with the desktop interface looking like the 1st year Instagram was even introduced. Functionality is no comparison; they only just added the ability to DM on desktop last year. As one can see, there is an extremely limited experience on desktop, but Instagram is now rolling out the ability for users to post from their browsers. Catch us enjoying posts on the big screen!
Truth Social: Trump’s long-standing battle against Big Tech backfires
(SOCIAL MEDIA) Truth Social is an example of how a new platform, though necessary to keep competition alive, can prove to be fallible before it succeeds.
Former President Donald J. Trump announced a new social media platform, dubbed “Truth Social” last week. The platform has since been the recipient of cyber attacks by hacker collective Anonymous and the Software Freedom Conservancy has accused the Trump Media and Technology Group of violating the terms of their software agreement.
The circumstances plaguing Truth Social provide a small (if nuanced) look into the rigors of creating and sustaining new social media platforms in the modern-day. While expanding the number of social media platforms available creates more competition, this platform, in particular, raises some questions about the wisdom of investing in a service that creates an ideological echo chamber, as well as demonstrating that not just anyone can run a social media site.
There’s no denying that this new entry into the world of social media is off to a rocky start. Cyberattacks just hours after Truth Social’s test run left the site in disarray, with fake user accounts for Mike Pence, Steve Bannon, and Donald Trump appearing at various stages of the launch. Truth Social’s hosts eventually took it offline, and the sign-up process is halted for the time being.
Truth Social also has some interesting rules regarding user interactions on their platform, including a non-disparagement clause and the assertion that users can be sued for the content they post, Time reports.
This clause is in stark contrast to the ethos behind Truth Social – a platform that, according to the press release, was “founded with a mission to give a voice to all” and “stand up to the tyranny of Big Tech.”
The disparity in messaging versus reality is an understandable mistake, as much of Trump’s mindset was most likely impacted by criticism levied against him on mainstream social media when he had his accounts – and anyone in the same position might reasonably make the same call. However, restricting users to agree with one set political ideology is a perilous precedent to set. Echo chambers aren’t particularly conducive to longevity.
The Trump Media and Technology Group also violated the terms of their open-source software of choice when they uploaded the pilot version of Truth Social. According to the licensing agreement associated with Mastodon – the software company TMTG used – users must have access to the source code for the product in question (in this case, Truth Social).
Since the initial users of Truth Social did not receive that access, the social media platform is at risk of permanently losing its rights to the code.
While some of these pitfalls feel proprietary to Trump insofar as his high-profile battle against social media is concerned, the truth is that any development of new social media entries will be messy and fraught with obstacles. Truth Social is just one example of how a new platform – something that is absolutely necessary to keep competition alive – can prove to be publicly fallible far before it ever succeeds.
Business News2 weeks ago
Everyone should have an interview escape plan
Opinion Editorials7 days ago
The actual reasons people choose to work at startups
Opinion Editorials6 days ago
10 tips for anyone looking to up their professional work game
Opinion Editorials2 weeks ago
7 ways to carve out me time while working from home
Opinion Editorials1 week ago
4 simple tips to ease friction with your boss while working from home
Business Marketing15 hours ago
Cooler temps mean restaurants have to get creative to survive
Business Entrepreneur1 week ago
4 easy ways to keep track of inventory this holiday season
Business Entrepreneur15 hours ago
Choose your startup business partner wisely