This study, which measures the CTR of different social network users, was conducted using a referrer based methodology.

To summarize, the CTR in question is calculated as (# of clicks generated from impression set) / (# of impressions received on a publisher webpage from a link posted on Google+/Facebook/Twitter). Hope this helps.

Original Article: Chitika Insights has a new report indicating that Facebook users click on ads more than twice as often as Google+ users or Twitter users.

“Given the announcements and roll out of new social media advertising programs on platforms including; Google+, Facebook and Twitter, we wanted to investigate where advertisers will have the highest potential to engage with users based on CTR (Click Through Rate),” a representative for Chitika tells WebProNews. “To quantify this study, we analyzed a sample of data from the extensive Chitika ad network, covering hundreds of millions of impressions, to compile a data set which yielded the CTR (Click Through Rate, or likelihood of a user clicking on an ad) of the average user on the three social networks.”

The firm isolated the referrer domain for Google+, Twitter and Facebook, to compile a data set which yielded clickthrough rate of the average user on each social network.

Google+ and Twitter users click on ads with about the same frequency, according to Chitika’s findings.

Facebook measured a .24% CTR, while Google+ and Twitter users ranked at .1 and .09% respectively.

“As always, a cost-benefit analysis is key to identifying which platform (if any) is worthwhile for your product or service,” Chitika says. “One of the biggest factors in deciding which form of social network advertising is the best choice is highly dependent on the type of campaign being run. For instance, in marketing a time sensitive campaign, utilizing an analytical approach with Twitter’s promoted trends could be more effective than pursuing standard Facebook ads. Moreover, it is possible as a marketer to optimize for all segments of traffic, and when making the final decision on an ad campaign, it is essential to keep your target market in mind.”

Of course, simply using Google+ to promote your products or services, may have new benefits to search visibility.

This week, Google+ VP, Product, Bradley Horowitz said that people will be shocked by forthcoming announcements about the service’s growth.

This above graph comes from a new report from Chitika, which says traffic and user count is on the rise.

“Chitika Insights has covered the heavily publicized launch of Google+ amidst a variety of reported statistics, some which stated that Google+ hosted a user base comprised of over 40 Million people, others which described the fledgling social network as nothing more than a ghost town,” says Chitika’s Gabe Donnini. “Initially, traffic on Google+ saw a rapid rate of growth, but was accompanied by a period of significant decline. Since then, Chitika Insights has been regularly keeping tabs on the condition of Google+, in order to determine the relative success of the social network.”

“Between the months of September to November, Google+ saw a 118% increase in overall online activity,” he adds. “From September to October Google+ posted the biggest growth figures (55%), followed by a growth in online activity of 41% between October and November, as seen in the graph below.”

The numbers in the graph are based on Chitika’s activity index. The highest level of activity observed gets a value of 100. “The other data points are simply a function thereof,” says Donnini. The arrows represent the percentage increase in activity witnessed (sampled in the second week of each month). The firm says it used a referrer distribution methodology to conduct its report.

Chitika attributes the growth to integration among other Google services, heavy advertising, and increasing functionality and accessibility.

Based on Horowitz’s comments, we can probably expect some official numbers in the near future.

Do you use Google+ regularly? We’d love to know.

While the fact of declaring it “dead” is debatable, there are some definite signs that should cause Google to be concerned. For instance, Dan Reimold, the Assistant Professor of Journalism at the University of Tampa, wrote a post entitled “Google+: Social Media Upstart ‘Worse Than a Ghost Town,’” in which he not only called the social network dead, but he also gave a bleak prediction:

“At worst, in the coming months, it will literally fade away to nothing or exist as Internet plankton,” he wrote. “At best, it will be to social networking what Microsoft’s Bing is to online search: perfectly adequate; fun to stumble onto once in awhile; and completely irrelevant to the mainstream web.”

In an interview with WebProNews not long ago, Reimold told us that he came to this conclusion after he realized that he wasn’t finding anything on Google+ that was more interesting or different from the information he was already finding on his other social networks.

Also, a chart released by Michael DeGusta showing the inactivity of Google’s own management on Google+ has done nothing but add to this negative outlook. However, since this chart was released, Eric Schmidt, Google’s Executive Chairman, has begun to use the service.

The biggest blow for Google and its social network was probably last week when Steve Yegge, one of its own software engineers, accidentally published a not-so-flattering post about Google+ on the network itself. In the post, Yegge essentially pointed out what his employer was doing wrong with Google+, making statements such as:

“Google+ is a prime example of our complete failure to understand platforms from the very highest levels of executive leadership (hi Larry, Sergey, Eric, Vic, howdy howdy) down to the very lowest leaf workers (hey yo). We all don’t get it.”

And this: “Google+ is a knee-jerk reaction, a study in short-term thinking, predicated on the incorrect notion that Facebook is successful because they built a great product.”

Yegge’s post was intended to only go out to his Google circle but was instead shared publicly.

More recently, data analytics firm Chitika released some research that gives Google yet another reason to be concerned. The company looked at Google+ before and after its public launch in late September. Even though Experian Hitwise reported that Google+ grew 1269 percent in the week following its public launch, Chitika’s data shows this surge was only temporary.

Gabe Donnini, an analyst with Chitika, explained to us that the traffic to Google+ grew to peak levels immediately after the public launch but then fell over 60 percent shortly after.

“We just looked at the stats to investigate this trend, and as it turned out, there was a sharp spike and then a sharp decline almost immediately after the days following Google+’s public beta,” he said.

Donnini told us that he believed the traffic spike was driven by the publicity surrounding the public launch. However, Chitika decided to investigate further and extend the research period beyond the week after Google+ opened publicly. What it found was that the downward trend actually got worse. According to its research, the largest drop in traffic for Google+ was more than 70 percent.

Last week in Google’s Q3 earnings report, CEO Larry Page proudly said that Google+ had surpassed 40 million users.

“Google+ is now open to everyone and we just passed the 40 million user mark,” he said. “People are flocking into Google+ at an incredible rate and we are just getting started!”

This is a large number especially considering that the network has only existed for a few months. But, as Chitika data shows, it doesn’t mean that all these users are active.

According to Donnini, the lack of activity from users is due to many reasons. First of all, users can’t import or sync their existing networks into their Google+ network.

“There’s very little incentive to share if you don’t have anyone to share with,” he said.

He also believes that users are inactive because it took Google a long time to make its API available to developers. As he explained, a large part of the success of social networks is due to the network of services that are built on the overall platform.

“By not providing a developer API in which a useful network of services could be built for their users, Google basically made it much harder for their users to find a way to (a) stay on the site, and (b) they kind of lowered the utility of Google+ as a site for their new userbase,” he said.

He also pointed out, “They don’t need to become Facebook, they need to become what Facebook is going to become.”

Interestingly, Google co-founder Sergey Brin and Google+ czar Vic Gundotra spoke about the social network at the Web 2.0 Summit yesterday. Both indicated they were pleased with the progress of Google+, and Brin even said, “I’m not a social person myself… [but] Google+, I instantly found compelling.”

Gundotra also said that Google+ would allow support in the near future for pseudonyms as well as for Google Apps users to be able to log into Google+ with their accounts. He also indicated that brand pages would be coming too, but not as quickly as the other features.

Are these additions enough to save Google+?

The FTC alleged that in its privacy policy the company says that it collects data about consumers’ preferences, but allows people to opt out of having cookies placed on their browsers and receiving targeted ads. The privacy policy includes an “Opt-Out” button. Consumers who click on it activate a message that states, “You are currently opted out.”

According to the FTC complaint, from at least May 2008 through February 2010, Chitika’s opt-out lasted only 10 days. After that time, Chitika placed tracking cookies on browsers of consumers who had opted out and targeted ads to them again. The FTC charged Chitika’s claims about its opt-out mechanism were deceptive and violated federal law.

The settlement blocks Chitika from making deceptive statements about about consumers and the extent to which consumers can control the collection, use or sharing of their data. Every targeted ad must include a hyperlink that takes users’ to an opt-out options that allows them to opt out for at least five years.

It also requires that Chitika destroy all identifiable user information collected when the defective opt out was in place. In addition, the settlement requires that Chitika alert people who previously tried to opt out that their attempt was not effective, and they should opt out again to avoid targeted ads.

"July is over, and we have stats: in looking at the full month’s traffic, Google remains unassailable in its #1 spot, and Bing beats out Yahoo! by a few percentage points for the #2 spot," the firm says. "AOL and [Ask] continue to jockey for 4th place."

Yahoo and Bing recently announced that Yahoo’s organic results will be fully powered by Bing (in the U.S.) by late August.

Another element worth considering in the search market is the browser. Earlier this month, Chitika indicated that Google Firefox-based searches were more than total Bing or Yahoo searches. This could make things very interesting when Google’s contract with Mozilla as the browser’s default search option expires.

Let’s not forget that Bing powers web search on Facebook, which currently has over 500 million users. Bing will also make its presence felt more in the mobile space as Windows Phone 7 phones make their way to the market.

It’s important to note that this isn’t representative of the entire search market, but it’s an interesting finding that may indeed have bigger implications in that market.

"The next big shift in the search engine wars may come in 2011, when Mozilla’s contract setting Google as the default browser in their popular Firefox browser comes to an end," says Chitika’s Daniel Ruby. "Based on a sample of over 14 million impressions across the Chitika advertising network, Firefox currently holds the keys to 9.17% of the search market – more than any one company except Google itself."

Of course Bing and Yahoo combined will account for more than Google’s Firefox share. If that means anything.

"Of the sample pulled by Chitika Research for the purposes of this study, Firefox drove 23% of all traffic to the network," says Ruby. "Of Firefox’s search traffic, 91.45% came from Google, and 39.87% specifically from the Firefox start page and embedded Google search bar."

He also speculates that we’ll see "a massive bidding war" when Mozilla’s contract with Google gets closer to the end. I guess we’ll see who wants it most. Of course meanwhile, Google will be heavily pushing Chrome, trying to get some of those Firefox users themselves into their own browser.

How much does the browser play into your search habits? Tell us about it.

Where does your most loyal traffic come from? Facebook or somewhere else? Comment here.

"We’ve received the most clients from Facebook than any other social media website," a reader commented on the article. "Although we’ve received slightly more visitors from Digg and Stumbleupon, the viewers have not converted into customers the same way they had through Facebook."

There has certainly been plenty of talk about how Facebook can drive traffic, but clearly there are still a lot of people struggling with just how to go about doing so.

"Why am I not getting this?" another reader asked. "Blogs I’ve done are boosting my Google, Yahoo, and Bing ratings and getting traffic to my web site, but I’m not getting how Facebok can do this."

Comments like these are not uncommon, and to be fair, this one was made prior to Microsoft’s announcement of a deal with Facebook (Google has been rumored to be in talks with Facebook as well).

But not all traffic has to come from search, although Facebook exposure can certainly contribute to that as well, if nothing else, than simply through promotion leading to links.

When a Facebook user frequently checks for status updates, he/she is likely to see new posts made from Facebook Pages he/she is subscribed to. This means creating a Facebook page can have a great effect on page owners. Making readers aware of the page is key as well. Luckily Facebook has a widget called the Fan box, that you can put on your site, which can lead new visitors directly to your Facebook page.

Facebook has also just updated another important widget – the share button. Now it will provide a live count of shares, as well as analytical information. You can find out how people are sharing and engaging with your content, and gain further insight into how your stuff is doing with the Facebook community (and adjust your strategy accordingly).

Traffic is a common goal, but it is not the only one. Going back to the topic at the beginning of this article, brand loyalty is a big one.

A representative for Stuzo Group, one of Facebook’s exclusive development partners, shared some interesting case studies with us, looking at how they created branded applications and fan pages for brands like Doritos, Budweiser, Smashbox, and Purina.

"When Stuzo works with these brands, the goals that they have most often in creating these promotions is to increase brand loyalty and recognition, boost traffic to their website, and drive sales," the representative said. "These goals all go hand in hand, and explain why Chitika’s study was so valuable; hits to a website are great, but they don’t mean much unless they contribute to brand loyalty and positive recognition of the brand." (emphasis added)

A common theme among the case studies provided by Stuzo is that they all present clear objectives for what they want to accomplish with Facebook. For example, Budweiser’s were:

1. Create brand awareness through a strong fan base and social channel opt-ins

2. Incentivize users to engage with the brand on a regular basis

3. Convert new customers and drive increase in sales

Budweiser went the route of contests and competitions (which are viral by nature). According to the case study, this has resulted in:

- Hundreds of thousands of Unique Pageviews

- Sustained high level of brand engagement by all measurements

- Significant, continued growth in Budweiser’s Social CRM and social channel opt-ins

Budweiser is just one example of a big brand finding success through social media, and through the use of Facebook in particular. As I recently discussed, you can find new and interesting ways to integrate social media into your own plans by looking at some of the brands you use yourself and how they employ different tools. This helps you to put yourself in the customer’s shoes and determine the things that work and the things that don’t.

What brands have you seen using social media in interesting ways? Discuss here.

Related Articles:

> The Most Loyal Traffic Comes from Facebook

> Facebook/Twitter Use May Now Mean More for Google/Bing Rankings

> Some Brands Have Good Ideas For Social Media. Do You?

Chitika categorized the sites that get the most links from Twitter. Here’s how it shakes out by genre according to the ad network:

"Given Twitter’s unique ability to bring information instantly to large numbers of people, it’s not surprising that news leads the way," says Chitika. "From being the first to publish pictures of a Turkish Airlines plane crash to the social network’s breaking of US Airways Flight 1549′s dramatic crash into the Hudson River earlier this year, Twitter’s instantaneous and collaborative nature has made it out to be the bleeding edge of all news."

"Compare Twitter’s results, though, with older, more established social network Facebook, and the value and perception of Twitter’s speed become more obvious," the network adds. "While news sites do receive a good deal of Facebook’s referrals, they lag behind tech and lifestyle sites – tech sites dominate Facebook’s traffic with over 33% of the network’s referrals going there."

Here’s how Chitika’s numbers for Facebook traffic look:

On a semi-related note, a new real-time news discovery site called Thoora just launched. Thoora was a finalist of the TechCrunch50, and describes itself as a way to help people discover news attracting the most attention within social and traditional media by exploring the entire blogosphere, Twitter, and thousands of traditional media sources. Twitterers who are after the news may find such a service useful.

However, it is Facebook and Digg that are driving the most repeat readers according to a study conducted by online ad network Chitika. Traffic is great, but traffic that returns is even better.

The study was based on 33 million unique users across Chitika’s publisher network in September. It compared the number of visitors coming from major traffic sources Digg, Facebook, Google, Yahoo, Bing, and Twitter, to the number of times those visitors came back to the referred site. Visitors that went to a site four or more times in one week were considered loyal users.

By a wide margin, Facebook led the pack in providing loyal traffic. 20% of all visitors from Facebook visited the site four or more times per week. Digg was second with slightly over 16%. Digg was followed by search engines: Yahoo, Google, then Bing with 15.89%, 11.84%, and 11.74% respectively. Finally, Twitter came in at 11.08%.

"While Google naturally wins in sheer numbers, if a website owner can drive a thousand people to their site via Google, or they can drive the same number via Facebook, Facebook seems to be the way to go for creating a loyal reader," says Chitika.

The sheer popularity of Facebook and the time spent on the site must play crucial roles in driving repeat traffic. When a user frequently checks for status updates, they are likely to see new posts made from Facebook Pages they are subscribed to. This shows that creating a Facebook page can have a great effect on content publishers.

Twitter has historically been harder for users to manage and keep up with. That may change, however, once the Lists feature reaches the masses.

Various bloggers have been quite skeptical of this figure and their research methodology, including TechCrunch, Just Make Money Online, and various other blogs, though the main response seems to have been simply ignoring the data.

But if you do the math, it really does make sense and the numbers are not only reasonable, but perhaps just a bit low…

Let’s calculate things out. First off, $500 million / 50,000 blogs means that, on average, each blog in the top 50,000 list earns $10,000/year. Go a step further and that’s a fairly humble $192 per week or $27 in daily revenue.

Given that the dozens of blogs in Federated Media, B5 Media and related earn hundreds of dollars per day (and some, thousands per day), that means that the blogs at the bottom of the 50,000 list might well earn 25% of that $10,000 average figure, or a paltry $50/week in revenue.

The research study further posits that the average blog generates income from multiple revenue streams and that Chitika is not the greatest revenue stream for these weblogs (a degree of humility and one that bolsters the legitimacy of the research in my opinion). They also posit that the top few percent of blogs generate the lion’s share of the revenue, which is completely consistent with the Long Tail nature of the blogosphere (and the so-called "A list" phenomenon too).

Then the research closes with a curious comment: "If online advertising is like advertising in a mall, advertising in the blogosphere is like advertising in a country club." I’m not entirely sure what they mean, but their explanation is that there’s more social value to advertising on the very top blogs, that is, that adverts on the top few are worth far more. That’s undoubtedly true, but that’s true in any medium: having an industry authority talk about your product or endorse your company is always going to be worth more than the straight eyeballs count might suggest. That’s why different publications have different rate cards: if it weren’t true, CPM would be standardized and you’d just buy the number of eyeballs you can afford.

Nonetheless, I have to say that I think their $10,000/year/blog revenue projection for those top 50,000 weblogs is quite believable and, if anything, low. I know that this weblog earns more than that, and certainly my Ask Dave Taylor blog earns multiples of that. Two data points, but I know that there are plenty of other bloggers who have figured out how to earn quite a bit more than $27/day in revenue from their site.

What’s more interesting is to consider that according to their projections, the top 10% accounted for 80% of the revenue, which translates to the top 5,000 blogs earning $400 million, or $80,000 per blog for those top 5000 blogs. Now we’re talking some impressive numbers. (Conversely, that means that the remaining 45,000 blogs in the survey only earned $100 million, a miniscule $2,222 annually per blog or $6.08 / day in revenue. You can earn more than that washing windshields in a busy intersection!)

One more calculation. The researchers also state that the top 1% accounted for 20% of the revenue. This means that the 500 top blogs earned $100 million, which works out to $200,000 per blog, per year or $547/day. Yeah, I know blogs in that range, so that definitely works for me as a back of envelope calculation. If the top 50 blogs aren’t earning 10x that, I’d be darn surprised, actually.

How about you? Are you making money from your blog and do your earnings fit within this set of projections? Can you believe that bloggers are earning over a half-billion in annual advertising revenue across the entire blogosphere?

Comments