Online Marketing Symposium
The What Works...Marketing Symposium is not limited to authors but also to anyone in a business that has a promotional aspect – online or otherwise! The Brainchild of Arlee Bird and brought to you by Yolanda Renee, Alex J. Cavanaugh and me!
PROS: So I ran two "POSTS" experiments this week to see the amount of attention it would bring in without worrying about the time of day or even which day. Just did it and it's results are interesting that it did make a difference in the numbers gained.
TWITTER vs FACEBOOK!
I asked two different questions to two different types of groups one very specific and the other just people who might know me or just follow me.
Question looked like this, made it simple:
Q: What does RED, GAMES, CLEAR, SUM and SHADOW have in Common?
Ran only on Facebook to the 5 of the 10 groups I am part of, which features Soundtracks/Scores.
Howlin' Wolf: OLM - Howlin' Wolf: Question and Answer!
Ran only on Twitter and have roughly 350 people I follow, which is random group.
[Being Retro] - Q: What does RED, GAMES, CLEAR, SUM and SHADOW have in Common?
[Being Retro] - Q: What does RED, GAMES, CLEAR, SUM and SHADOW have in Common?
My results might be an easy one, but my soundtrack/score numbers to my site increased by 400% and the other only about 10%. More members in the Facebook group was enough for those within that group to at least click over. The Twitter post got burred within minutes to the hundreds of post that come in, so for me finding the common interest groups on Facebook worked better than Twitter. If you are writers find your subject matter example: SCI-FI, find groups that like this... not just writers who like to write SCI-FI. I have found you need to find "outside the box" fans/readers, it's harder to do, but more rewarding.
CONS: Now the problems I have and why the numbers or response for me is not higher and I have learned to live with this. I am horrible... horrible at responding to comments made on my sites, unless for some reason I happened to working on them at the time the comments come in. I run five or six sites that includes Facebook and Twitter, you can see above "WELCOME" or links to the side. In the PROS of the CON, I did find the numbers rise and that is a great thing.. I will continue to do this "Q and A" experiment. I don't really write I design, from banners, badges, headers, websites, book covers, etc. May I mention "FOR HIRE" with reasonable prices!!
IN THE END: What makes my site work best is "SNAPPY TITLES", "SHORT POSTS", "EYE CANDY" (Images) and "YOU" liking what I might be sharing.
Great partnership you have going; I do like Alex J and his work, but I'm (sadly) unfamiliar with the two young ladies you mention? At least, going by the proliferation of work both you and Alex have going on, I am assuming both ladies are equal in turnover.ReplyDelete
Good luck sir, I shall be watching this new cabal with interest :)
Not as much traffic from Twitter? That doesn't surprise me. Anymore, it's one long list of promotions or links. Few people actually discuss things.ReplyDelete
Still not enough to prompt me to Facebook though. Besides, the IWSG on Facebook is doing just fine without me!
Thanks for hosting. This will be plenty useful to those of us with books to market. I find that Facebook is good for getting the word out, but not for selling.
Thank you for hosting, Jeremy!ReplyDelete
I'm not at all surprised about the Twitter vs. Facebook experiment, though I've found FB next to useless for book sales. But that's another story. I think for Twitter to work, you either need to be a celebrity OR hit on something new and orginal - like Justin Halpern's Shit my dad says.
Forgot to say, I've been shockingly bad at responding to comments and visiting other blogs. In 2014 I'm planning to change that!ReplyDelete
Time is the biggest issue when it comes to replying to comments, and we all value our time, but if you want people to notice you, it is obvious you need to notice their interest.ReplyDelete
I am not overly impressed with either Facebook or Twitter, but they seem to be a necessity these days.
Snappy titles are key, I agree. I like sharing a blog with other writers because it gives me time off to not have to tour the Blogosphere and comment. When I post, I always go visiting. It's a great trade-off. Don't know how people who post nearly every day get anything else done.ReplyDelete
Thanks for hosting this blogfest!ReplyDelete
Just recently, I read that using numbers in your blog title also drives traffic to your post.
Sorry, that's supposed to be numbers in the title of your blog post... arrgh...Delete
you're hilarious! but i love the advice to seek out fans of your genre. twitter has always been a blizzard to me... i think it takes more work and time than i have to spend on it to form real relationships, but i hear it can be done! i'm still hopping around outside the mass of dancers on the floor looking for my date, ha ha ha (remember those old cartoons?)ReplyDelete
Facebbok is good because people share your post and show it to all of their followers and friends, while at Twitter it gets burried and nobody sees it (the exception being when a celebrity tweets you and then tones of their fans flock to your place)ReplyDelete
Thanks for hosting and putting together the symposium. Your designs for it are really great! I found the same thing as you, that Facebook garners more hits to my site, by far, than Twitter. :)ReplyDelete
I agree. Facebook definitely gets more traction. In fact, I had one publishing pro who basically said, "Why bother with Twitter?" Truth is, I still love Twitter, whether it gets a strong response or not.ReplyDelete
This was certainly an eye-catching post and you do these well. I was wondering about that question and now I understand. I like the experiment and the results make sense. Tweeting is like pissing in the wind. Mostly everything just dissipates but sometimes you'll hit a few people with the stream and catch their attention. Hmmm--I guess that kind of makes sense, but it's a weird analogy.ReplyDelete
Thanks for being a part of the Symposium.
Tossing It Out
Sometimes I think social networking is over-rated. Interaction (good old fashioned customer service) seems to be a key to the success of blogging. Interesting post, Jeremy - lots of food for thought here.ReplyDelete
Love that you went through this process of discovery and how you went about it. Snappy titles, questions and answers, and key words do seem to make a difference. Now, if I could just get better at witty quips.ReplyDelete
Great experiment! Thanks Jeremy, for hosting and for that awesome design. You Rock!ReplyDelete
I think FB can work, but it's building a base and being really active that seems to be the secret. You and the Geeks guys with the eye candy. I'm going to give that one more thought! LOL Twitter? I still don't understand it. Thanks again!
I agree. Finding groups really work. I've joined a number of them and I'm learning a lot.ReplyDelete
I may have to work on shorter blog posts, though. :-) Thanks!
The Musings of a Hopeful and Pecunious Wordsmith
FB is one place where I try to do my most/best marketing efforts. Sometimes I get great results, other times I get results that are below par. I don't even have Twitter yet and I'm not sure when I ever will. lolReplyDelete
What an interesting test. Thinking I may need to do the same. I've heard that tons of FB page posts get lost like the Twitter updates - UNLESS you put a link in the comments rather than as part of your posts. Going to test that one out as well.ReplyDelete
Thanks for visiting over at SS!
I loved your analysis of Twitter v FB effectiveness. I've been into scheduling my Tweets for AM and PM, but that's as scientific as I've become. When I do Tweet about a post, I can pick up a few new commenters, but there's not a stampede to reach me.ReplyDelete
As to reaching beyond the "authors group" I'm really positive about that. And you're right, that's hard work. Thanks for the carefully considered post. It was very interesting.
Interesting. I know adding the link in the comments allows for the image to be much larger on FB, rather than posting the link and allowing the image to appear, which will be smaller.ReplyDelete
That Twitter thing... yeah... your results don't surprise me in the least. People swear by it, and I have tried, but unless you're glued to your smart phone, I don't see how you can possibly see the tweets that keep coming and coming and coming... I find it overwhelming and am almost never on.ReplyDelete
You have so many sites - I couldn't keep up with all of them. I get all of my comments emailed to me so I don't miss them. Because yes, I would.ReplyDelete
Yeah, my comments and their responders come to me by email too.ReplyDelete
I think some of the tips about blogs depends on who you are trying to attract. If you're trying to get readers of your books, then it makes sense to give something readable, which may not be short and sweet.
I always feel guilty that I don't respond to comments as much as some people manage. I like that you have clear numbers to back up your opinions instead of just saying it did or didn't work.ReplyDelete
Twitter is great for those with short attention spans ... ah, what was I talking about? FB is look at me ... which is what debut blog tours have become ... informercials. I am beginning to despair of what works for authors. Maybe John Locke, snake-oil salesman that he is, had it right: do posts that entertain and perhaps even spark reflection. If a visitor is entertained by your post, she or he may gamble on the books you have in your sidebar. Good idea for a tour, Alex, Arlee, Yolanda, and you, of course, Jeremy. :-)ReplyDelete
I really try hard to respond to comments. Blogging, after all, is best when its interactive. I don't really like Twitter that much. As you said, any post there gets buried quickly.ReplyDelete
Thanks for sharing this and for hosting this great symposium. I used to reply to every single comment and then return comment on blogs. That took up way too much time. So I make a general comment back on my blog to everyone, answering any particular questions. Then I return comment on their blogs since I think it's more important that I visit them and see what they're up to.ReplyDelete
I like sweet and short posts with eye candy. Good Post.ReplyDelete
Short and sweet to a targeted audience always seems to work best. Great post! Nice to meet you today, too. :)ReplyDelete
My googness, you are everywhere. Interesting experiment -- thanks for sharing the results!ReplyDelete
I agree that Facebook is better than Twitter for marketing. At least for me. Maybe I just prefer Facebook.ReplyDelete
Interesting format for questions. I like it.ReplyDelete
(From Sarah, with Joy)
I don't think either Facebook or Twitter does much to generate views at the Dog Farm. Twitter seems to have potential, but it's such a shitstorm of info that it's just noise. I have a Twitter account specifically to promote the blog (@MoviesAtDogFarm), and I pick up Followers on Twitter that I'm absolutely certain have never seen the blog. Undoubtedly, I'm not leveraging the service as I should. I'm experimenting with using Buffer to schedule Tweets, but that doesn't seem to make any difference.ReplyDelete
The Dog Farm has been a Catch 22 from day one. I make a sincere effort to publish worthwhile content rather than blather, but just finding the time to devote to that is difficult. If I spend all my spare time trying to promote the Dog Farm, the content will suffer. I'd already decided I would only post three or four times a month for a variety of reasons, primarily because that's how frequently I seem to be able to consistently write something worth reading (IMO, of course - lol). I just haven't found a very good way to get that content in front of a lot of viewers.
I actually spent all day today combing the web for ideas, so your post was timely. I have no interest in selling anything with the Dog Farm, and that's what most traffic generating ideas are geared toward. This isn't my job. I'd just like to think more than half a dozen or so loyal readers are seeing my work. It's frustrating.
Interesting experiment between Facebook and Twitter! I don't have much success marketing on either, but I do prefer Twitter as a means of networking. Cool banners for the occasion! Thanks, Buck InspireReplyDelete
Short, sweet, and targeted sounds like a great plan! Thanks for hosting this blogfest!ReplyDelete
Mary Montague Sikes
Good experiment. I find Twitter is just a long lists of promotions, too - no real conversations going on there.ReplyDelete
Thanks for the blogfest, it's awesome!ReplyDelete
Your results re: the FB groups and Twitter were really interesting to read. I have been really bad about participating in groups on FB, I join and then forget to do anything else. I need to look at getting more active in groups. Thanks for sharing and for hosting this event!ReplyDelete
Making note that you do badges, etc at reasonable prices...that was a marketing genius...joining a hop with the people who might hire you.ReplyDelete
I don't do well at responding to comments either. I figure if I return the visit that's better anyway. I have enjoyed this marketing symposium, Jeremy. You guys really came up with a winner here. I hope it becomes an annual event, and next time make it a week long PLEASE! Because it is AWESOME going around and reading all these posts on a subject so dear to my heart. I love marketing, and I hate it LOL. It's the best blogfest I've seen in some time, so glad I signed up!ReplyDelete