WebProNews Ad Rates Click Now!
Read WebProNews
With Friends!

Study Says Social Media Sucks at Driving Traffic

People, apparently, don't want to leave the comfort of Twitter and Facebook

Get the WebProNews Newsletter!
By · August 14, 2011 · 111 Comments
Study Says Social Media Sucks at Driving Traffic

Quite simply, when it comes to driving traffic to your website, social media sites like Twitter and Facebook kind of suck at it, at least according to a study done by a company called Outbrain.

Once the study is taken into account, even the Drudge Report, a much smaller operation by comparison, out does Twitter and Facebook combined. It should be noted that the king of traffic referrals is, of course, Google. So much so, in fact, they are lapping the rest of the field.

Comfortably.

If the study’s validity is intact, the main lesson from Outbrain’s findings is social media sites do not drive traffic like content sites and search engines do, and it’s not even close. That means that, while all those retweets are nice to see, apparently, few people are clicking the actual link embedded within the tweeted message. The study also sheds doubt on just how effective social media marketing campaigns are. Sure, things are good if it’s part of a current trend, but if not, no traffic for you, apparently.

The same, according to the study, is true for all those Facebook shares, as well. People evidently only react to the subject line, and not the content contained within, or that’s being promoted. A look at the chart of Outbrain’s study shows these surprising numbers quite clearly:

Traffic Driving

David Sasson, Outbrain COO, had some thoughts on the study:

“With our second report, we’re able to provide a compelling look at fluctuations in traffic referral and reader engagement across some of the leading destinations online. Our hope is to leverage our unique data to paint a picture of macro-level trends in content consumption over time. As Outbrain expands on a global level, we’re able to introduce additional metrics into our report and evaluate international trends, comparing reader behavior across continents.”

It does make sense that Google is a clear leader in such a category. When people search, they usually click a result, which takes them to a webpage/site, ergo, traffic driving has occurred. Same with aggregate sites like Drudge Report and Reddit, although, Reddit’s score is a low 1.10%, which, while still higher than Facebook’s score, brings the study’s validity into question.

Ask Imgur.com how many traffic referrals they get from Reddit.

With all of that in mind, does the study make you doubt the effectiveness of a social media marketing campaign? Especially if people aren’t clicking the links? Even for stuff they apparently like? Let us know what you think.

Update, the report has been pulled, and an Editor’s note from Amanda Lucci’s blog says:

Editor’s note: Since this post was published, Outbrain has reached out and said they are rerunning the numbers “to ensure they’re accurate” and might have an update later.

Perhaps they, too saw the Reddit discrepancy and wondered if they needed to remeasure.

Update:
Outbrain has reposted their findings, and while the gist is the same–content sites drive more traffic than social media–their metrics aren’t as specific. If you look at the first table they created, you’ll notice Drudge Report drove more traffic than Twitter and Facebook combined. Now, that’s not the case:

Updated Study

As you can see, Facebook now ranks above Drudge, but Twitter still trails both properties. Another observation is the percentages are no longer with the new table. It’s also noticeable that Reddit didn’t improve much either. Considering the nature of the site, essentially, a news aggregate site, not mention the wide appeal of the site–just check Reddit’s Alexa ranking–the fact that Outbrain’s study says Outbrain drives more traffic than Reddit is almost laughable.

Granted, their Alexa profile is respectable, but it’s not as powerful as Reddit’s. With that in mind, despite Outbrain’s confusing devaluing of Reddit, the following statement continues the theme from the initial study:

…finally, social media sites (Facebook, Twitter, StumbleUpon, Fark.com, reddit, Digg) send 11% of traffic to content pages.

And it continues the theme of this particular post, which is social media isn’t very dependable when it comes to driving traffic.

One of our reader’s comments captures the theme quite well:

Art Butcher says: I’m not surprised by these findings.

I believe people look at tweets or posts with links as a sales pitch.

And many are.

What would be different if the links were content oriented and provided value as you say content is a critical driver. My guess is it takes time to build a reputation as a value driven content provider.

Does the spammy nature of linked tweets make them less attractive to potential link clickers?

RELATED ARTICLES:

Google Changes P.O. Box Rules for Businesses

Google Changes P.O. Box Rules for Businesses

Google Small Business just announced in its Product Forums that it's changed some if its policies regarding P. O. boxes. Basically, P. O. Boxes are no longer permitted in either address lines 1 or ...
Google Gets Over a Million Takedown Requests Each Month

Google Gets Over a Million Takedown Requests Each Month

Google's yearly transparency report is available, and right away, they make one thing perfectly clear: They get and respond to over 1 million takedown requests on a monthly basis. Not only do the...
Google+ Gets A Little Less Emphasis From Google Search

Google+ Gets A Little Less Emphasis From Google Search

Beyond algorithm updates, Google has made at least two major changes to its search engine this year: Search Plus Your World and the Knowledge Graph. The former was designed to offer users a search ex...
Top Rated White Papers and Resources
There are 111 Comments. Add Yours.

  1. I agree my big part of traffic comes from Google… even I have a strong page in fb

  2. I disagree with the fact that we have been getting great results from both FB and Twitter. I believe that if you take the study as a whole then yes most traffic coming from social sites cannot be considered a heavy hitter. I think for smaller companies such as ours we can benefit greatly in the fact that we target rich and wanted traffic to all of our sites. Take our newly designed site for example: http://www.weightlossdietplanforfree.com We structured a micro niche site targeted at people looking for a free customizable weight loss plan that can be downloaded through the site.

    We expanded our visibility through both twitter and facebook and our visitors have been coming from all three major search engines based on the seo work done but both twitter and FB have given us some great results as well. For the smaller guys out there dont give up on socialization yet because it works….

    • Kate Lennon
      Reply

      You lie. And you spam.

  4. I think the stats seem pretty reasonable. With 18K followers, I’m lucky to have 6 click on any given link I post. I think Twitter’s become much too spammy. Since FB is more conversational, most of the content is posted directly on FB and links are less likely to be followed.

    Still I think they have a greater value than just providing direct traffic. As a small business owner, it’s improved my name recognition greatly. I believe it’s improved my standing in my market place and for that it’s a cheap and easy way to get our name out there.

  5. If it looks too good to be true (i.e., the Social Media fix) it probably is. I have told my clients from the beginning of all the hype to put their money on PROVEN ways to generate business (i.e., Search Engines) instead of grabbing the next BIG thing. We are living in a time of quick fixes … there simply aren’t any magic pills for business growth.

  6. Not so sure. I am a partner in a consulting firm and a small business marketing firm that markets only through social media with great results. Specifically LinkedIn with the consulting firm (Compleat Consulting Group) and twitter and facebook for whocanihire.com.

  7. Browsing websites with many of my website traffic/ranking tools turned on, a majority of the sites I visited where webmasters had healthy social media profiles… traffic statistics never added up to what I thought they would be. Now I know why.

  8. Finally a study and some facts that deal with the obvious. You want business you go to Google, you need to socialize you go to Facebook!

  9. There is little doubt the study reflects social behavior. In addition people on say twitter are weary of clicking short urls in fear of Malware and similar threats.
    The 32 odd percent in Google traffic is what counts most, and this brings us back to good old SEO. The right number of quality back links to your site is worth a thousand tweets with short url links attached.
    This statistic can be seen easy on bit.ly.
    Search engine ranking is still the Nr.1 factor for getting traffic to your site.
    wordpress” rel=”nofollow”> wordpressed

    • This brings up a good point though … this study looks at social media traffic going directly to a web site, but what about the effect of having posts and links on social media sites which in turn affect your search engine ranking? Maybe people are getting more traffic than they think indirectly from Twitter, FB etc. via Google? It would be great if someone did a more in-depth study on this.

  10. Everybody knows Google was # 1 and I thought Yahoo would be next but you surprised me with AOL being # 2 and I see another surprise having the Drudge Report counted in the top 5.
    I always thought social media advertising was a waste of my time which is why I try to only tweet links to an articles I`ve just had published or I just keep my tweets personal in nature and I might even throw in a link to a new post or new content I have added to my site.
    Facebook was a little of a puzzle as to what the value really is but with this post I have a much clearer understanding for when I put out my new Facebook plans for my site – right now it`s just thumbnails of pages from my site.
    As for spammy looking links in tweets I personally don`t like them unless there is something of benefit such as new information about a subject or some content that has some value and not just a link to a product or sales squeeze page.

  11. This is something I was looking for. I did not think that Social Media could out do Google for driving traffic to a website.
    I base my business on getting sites to rank on the 1st. Page of Google which is what any business needs.

  12. Biff
    Reply

    Twitter and Facebook are so overrated as promotional tools for business it’s sickening … social media sucks in general…long live person to person contact

    • teetee98
      Reply

      Great Statement! Nothing compares to the “personal touch”.

  13. It is surveys that suck, how many times do we read a seemingly authoritative survey on a particular subject only for it to be contradicted a few days later.

    Rely on your own statistics not any skewed survey.

  14. Camping Dude
    Reply

    Our business is seasonal, but our traffic breaks down like this 35% Google, 12% Facebook, 12% StumbleUpon, 8% Bing, 7% Yahoo, 26% others. The big 3 search engines make up 50% of Traffic, 24% just from Facebook and Stumble alone, the rest from blogs, article dir, shopping portals, YouTube, etc.
    Twitter is basically no where to be found. Never did like that place, seems to be mostly a waste of time, maybe i should try posting what i ate for breakfast, had for lunch, what i am watching on TV! Depending on what you include in the Social media realm, i would say our traffic is very good from this. Maybe somebody’s not doing it right.

  15. The study seems rather broad. I wonder if there are industries where social media sites fare better. There might be other variables where rankings would be different.

    That said, in my experience, social media doesn’t perform as well as Google (when perform is defined as sales not as number of visitors).

  16. At last a survey that shows what I have thought for a long time. Social media sites are not nearly so important as SEOs would have you believe.

  17. It’s not at all surprising that search engines send more traffic to websites than do social media sites. At #4 Facebook still has clout and can be an influence on how well a website does as can the lower ranking contributors.

  18. No surprises here. Even the correction makes sense. Search engines (like Google) will rule the roost for a while yet. Social media? What many don’t realise is that the Twitters and Facebooks are, in fact, search tools … and that’s where the crux lies. You have business and you have social. Social is a big market, in fact, it is THE market. everything is evolving and all will evolve or fail. Why? Here’s the ting, I have never used Twitter or Facebook to gain followers (who, in business, wants a thousand Bieber fans following, who will never buy from you and have a tendency to Tweet stuff like “Follow me and I’ll follow you back”?!? Anyway, my point is, social media is good for search, because if you can fit loction, product and service in 140 characters, you CAN gain top 10 results on Google. I can give you a hundred targeted Tweets of mine which appear in the top 10 on Google.

    I’ve read elsewhere (i’m going looking for the article again after I’ve posted this) an article which suggests Google is all? Nah! As powerful as she is in bringing content to browsers, MSN (Bing) has a big trump card which I am not sure she even realises … and it’s all related to search. Bing search will, soon, start making serious gains on Google. With every computer/windows program bought, Bing becomes the default search engine for that user …

    Give it some thought … as a developer I track all … Google (of course I track Google … HOW? :-) Simple. but anyway, read this article again in a year from now … watch Bing, and never overestimate Google. Although I am, and have always been, a Google FAB FAN, the last 8 months of tracking, research and practical exercise has made me realise that where Google has provided my bread (as a developer) for a good few years now, there’s a new player who has a lot to offer and the tools at hand to make history repeat itself. All will fall and all will walk again, but never the same and ALWAYS REINVENTED. That’s life, that’s Google and for the next while … keep an eye on Bing in the search market.

  19. SMM is not the same as marketing on search networks. To harness SMM one has to analyze ones fans, group those findings into silos, and then reanalyze each silo in order to create marketing content that is relevant. Easy? Not! Art Butcher is hitting it on the head for the most part. Offline push yields poor results when taken online. Google leads in search since its technology evaluates the worth of a site’s content along with context to what the searcher seeks. SEM content has to speak to the searcher to fill the need for what is sought, and ad text to landing page content needs to be uncluttered. So as the web continues to evolve into becoming the ultimate source to find what one seeks, businesses will need to conform to meet the needs of the consumer instead of the reverse. Ask yourself, when was the last time you clicked on an ad your favorite social network? So why would you think a consumer would be any different? Thanks for affirming what I already knew!

  20. this is a no brainer. I’ve said it for years that its a waste of time.
    people on twitter and facebook are only looking for friends not to buy anything. So, Duh! Google says links have to be similar to your site too. So, unless you are a social media site I say you are wasting your time trying to get traffic from these sites. It amazes me how many webmasters jump on these trends just because its the thing to do.

  21. All these marketers that have been claiming Facebook is bigger than Google , I guess they did not have the facts. People go to social media sites to socialize not buy or search for products.
    On the other hand if you are looking for products , you go to Google search.. Stands to reason that Google is tops as far as traffic is concerned

  22. So if social media does not work, and Google won’t raise a page’s ranking without backlinks and traffic; what is a guy to do?

    • I got wind of this months ago in another report. I had always thought that social media marketing was pretty much a waste of time, unless you can pay. The time it takes and the negilgable returns didn’t seem worth the trouble. Another reason is the Google Plus/Facebook thing. Why would Google give any value to what a major competitor’s site is doing in the social market? Frankly I think Tweets are just downright silly anyway. I have never met anyone that can prove that Tweeting has done anything major for their business.

      I say keep social media social. In real life I don’t meet my friends for a conversation and a drink in a supermarket. It probably works for some to build relationships, but for me it just doesn’t seem like worth all the effort.

  23. I’m not surprised at this at all.
    With facebook there is so much stuff, mostly game stuff being posted that it’s pretty easy to miss things. I do get a little traffic from facebook though, but probably not enough to make it worth my time.

  24. Even if these social sites don’t drive traffic, backlinks from them are still important to rise in the SERPs.

    But it’s interesting that one of the oldest social sites – Stumbleupon does drive traffic.

  25. Social Media Is Good For Driving Traffic to your e-mail list.

    And Your e-mail List drives traffic to your sales or sales page.

  26. Weird. I don’t know what types of websites these people were studying, but I’ve worked diligently to build up a community of contacts on Facebook, people who are collectors of the toys I sell. And when I check my website’s stats, Facebook is always one of the top 3 sources of incoming traffic.

  27. From what I can see social media in many cases is more helpfull developing and maintaining a relationship, rather than driving new traffic. At a basic level SEM gets them in and SM then kicks in to try and retain, convert and leverage new customers.

  28. Toni
    Reply

    What a surprise!!! There is contradiction between Marketing and Social Media, simply they don’t match. You are missing the Top Law of Marketing: THE CONSUMERS POINT OF VIEW. I mean what is the utility and use that the consumer is looking for? With SM you are looking for fun, gossip, or gaming. You don’t want to buy anything or get information about something. With research engines your want to get information for your purchases. As simple as that.

    However, I do have presence in Twitter, I have found FB useless, just because it is more business oriented, and for the links. Can you easily find the Exxon (largest company in the world) FB account? I can’t. Have you seen how many friends GE has on FB? Less than employees, I would fire the Marking manager for such an embarrassing and ridiculous number!!! Some SM is really hurting the companies prestige!!! And my favourite example, Coca-Cola. They are supposed to be the best doing marketing… and they don’t have a link to FB on their site!!! Although they have Twitter, You Tube and Flirk.

    If you are selling a product or service related to leasure, then FB could be somehow usefull for you. Otherwise… up to you.

    • But you can find the Facebook account for Big Foot and Elvis :-)

      • Lloyd Sexton
        Reply

        Well, that’s because they’re always relevant! :-)

  29. Backlinks from social media networks are still good

  30. I’ve been looking at this data for my site for a long time now. I would agree; bang for buck (or time invested) the increase in traffic from social media is less than one would realize from utilizing traditional means, links from other sites, newsletters, posting on boards like this, etc.

    Indeed, I suspect my content site has lost more traffic than it has gained as a result of social media. Conversation on my very popular discussion boards have effectively migrated to facebook — even though facebook is terrible platform for indept conversation. I will begin to redirect invest more effort in improving site rather than using social media to drag people to it.

    I also noticed the click through rates for ads on my site are two orders of magnitude better than what I’ve seen on ads I’ve run on facebook.

What do you think? Respond.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

WebProNews Videos | Advertise | About Us | Newsletter | Archive | News Feeds | Terms & Conditions | Contact Us

WebProNews is an iEntry Network ® publication - © 1998-2012 All Rights Reserved.