7 Comments »Over breakfast this morning I was talking with someone from a large media company who was trying to determine their social media strategy. During the conversation the individual inquired about what the best strategy is for launching new applications on Facebook and what their overall general social media strategy should be.
Are Facebook Applications Part of Social Media?
It’s easy to jump at the bait and say that Facebook applications are part of social media. After thinking about it I’m a little more skeptical. While top applications provide platforms for communication, the owners of the applications don’t actively engage their users. Contrast this with a social media strategy which includes blogging, micro-blogging, commenting, tagging, etc.
A normal social media campaign is considered one because it is conversational. Many of the applications that brands are currently launching on social networks do not provide conversations between the users and the brand. If that’s the case can they really be considered part of a “social media” campaign? Just because the applications are on Facebook doesn’t mean the actual applications are social media.
As such I would argue that only some Facebook applications can be considered social media. It really depends on whether they are conversational. What do you think?
How Does One Build a Successful Facebook Application?
Regardless of whether or not you consider Facebook applications a core component of social media, there is another challenging issue for brands: launching a successful application. If you consider applications a form of advertisement, as Buddy Media says they are, success is based on the number of users that have ever engaged with your application.
For me success means being among the top applications in the Facebook application directory. Currently there are no branded applications at the top though based on the number of monthly active users. Ultimately building engaging content is most important and fine-tuning applications so that they attract repeat usage is important. This is an extremely challenging thing to accomplish though and the worst part is that nobody can guarantee you success.
With the new Facebook design and the decreased visibility of applications it has become even more challenging to launch a successful application. That doesn’t mean it isn’t possible, it just means it takes more time and a little more luck.
Do All Companies Belong on Facebook?
Many users on Facebook may read The Economist, but they don’t read The Economist on Facebook. Does that mean that the Economist shouldn’t be promoting on Facebook then? Probably not but ultimately I think the assumption that there is a Facebook application for every company isn’t accurate. While companies should experiment with other forms of advertisements on Facebook (including fan pages and Facebook ads), Facebook applications aren’t for all.
Over the coming months I think we are going to see an increasing emphasis on the feed through Facebook Connect. On Facebook and other social networks social presence is extremely important. Imagine being able to run reports to find out how many people are talking about your brand and sharing your content. In this environment brand evangelists become more important than Facebook applications.
It’s about empowering users to share your content rather then enticing them to temporarily interact in a branded environment. While branded applications will always work as a quick advertisement (or “appvertisement” as Buddy Media has branded it), the true long-term social media strategy both on and off Facebook is getting your users to talk about your brand whenever they engage with it.
It’s more than building one-off interactions. When a consumer uses your brand in the future encourage them to share their experience with their friends and educate them as to how they can share. Facebook and other platforms for social media will then naturally do what they were meant for: amplifying the signal about your brand.
Nick-
I disagree with the core of your argument about branded apps. Specifically, you write that “For me success means being among the top applications in the Facebook application directory. Currently there are no branded applications at the top though based on the number of monthly active users.”
Success does not mean being on top of the directory. Buddy Media has 50 clients and not once has the stated goal been to be on top of the directory. We often don't even list our branded apps in the directory.
Comparing the top applications to branded applications is like comparing the TV show Lost to the 30-second commercials that run during the show. Yes, they both run on the same ‘platform,’ ABC. But Lost has a star-studded cast, significant network promotion and a new, fresh episode every week, with some episodes costing up to $14 million each. Lost is an entertainment juggernaut. The commercial is, well, a commercial.
The applications we build for our clients are marketing programs. The applications built by the top Facebook and MySpace developers are uber-funded entertainment properties that are continually cared for, improved, tweaked and refreshed with new content and features. This takes significant resources and talent. The top 4 application companies alone have raised more than $150 million total. That’s a ton of money to build applications. I only imagine what we could do for a client if they gave us $150 million. Each of the app-vertising programs Buddy Media builds have cost much less!
I posted recently about the strenght of branded apps here: http://blog.buddymedia.com/blog/?p=69
If you compare apples to apples (i.e. banner ads vs. branded apps), you will see that Buddy Media's branded apps are a more cost-effective and engaging way to reach users of the major social nets. (I am specifically referring to Buddy Media's apps b/c we've compared them to the other major branded apps, and ours reach significantly more people than the average branded app. Most branded apps fail because the companies that create them create bad apps and don't market them properly).
For real data from several of our apps, check out this presentation I gave at Web 2.0 Expo in NY a few weeks ago:
http://www.slideshare.net/lazerow/social-brand-...
I don' t think that applications are the BEST way to use facebook for branding. the combination of facebook mini site+ ads + viral marketing are a much better way to succeed on facebook.
Sam
http://www.FacebookSpin.com
Interesting post Nick. We do a lot of FB advertising right now, and have found a way to make that work. But I am curious, as other commenters, on your definition for “success” for branded applications. I work for FreeCreditReport.com, and our “application” (if we were to go that route) would more than likely focus on providing value to the user (not entertainment). But, more than likely, our services are needed/consumed once or twice per month…so “engagement” by traditional FB standards would be quite low–and yet, for us, it would be a success. Thoughts?
Alan
http://www.peripheralvisionary.com
http://www.twitter.com/ACEdge
Very interesting. I've had the same conversation with peers. Honestly most businesses won't find a substantial amount of success on Facebook. It should be considered a complementary way to brand your business and have more online visibility but certainly shouldn't be relied on for success. Very few applications get to the level that one would hope and while many applications are GREAT, people have been so bombarded with new applications that the majority of people may never discover the app due to a close mind. Any application developer creating a new app now should not hold their breath.
[...] that success for me personally is having an application within the leaderboard. Commenters immediately suggested that this position was a flawed one and after thinking about it further, I agree. The first step [...]
@lazerow - Writer was talking about successful applications - the tv programs in your analogy. Commercials don't win emmys.
hi nick, i agree with lazerow on this one. “… success means being among the top applications in the Facebook application directory” is not true for most brands. traditional media buys can provide the reach while applications provide deep engagement that’s not possible elsewhere.
furthermore, “Currently there are no branded applications at the top though based on the number of monthly active users” is not true. Context Optional’s Kidnap application (http://www.facebook.com/apps/application.php?id=14057001167) we built for Travel Channel has over 2M monthly active users, is a top 10 game and the 28th most popular application on Facebook.