Now I would like to say a word about Facebook.
A very interesting thing happened to me this week, and I don’t mean Hurricane Sandy (although that happened to me, too, but this is about another kind of s#!tstorm).
My bangin’ novel Dead Spot has a Facebook page. And according to Facebook’s metrics, Dead Spot‘s page enjoyed 205 views over two days — a 6733.33% increase! (According to Facebook.) Increase over what, Facebook doesn’t say. But even if it’s an increase over, say, 1, on what planet does that math result in 6733% ?
Could Facebook be … exaggerating?
As you probably know by now, Facebook is clawing everyone’s eyes out to buy more product exposure from them. Ads. Likes. Blogs. Greater “reach.” Fake storefronts where you can’t actually sell anything. If there’s an angle to exploit, Facebook is all over it, in the most exasperating ways possible. 6733.33%, my ass.
Don’t get me wrong. I’ve got something to sell, and I’d be thrilled to give Facebook some of my money for broader exposure — if Facebook would actually give me some that worked.
Here’s the thing. I was shocked when I got those 205 hits (I usually get 10-15, because Facebook only broadcasts my Dead Spot posts to a fraction of the people who subscribe to it, because Facebook is holding the rest hostage for money. My most recent post was broadcast to — wait for it — 4 people). But I was even more shocked that 205 hits resulted in 0 sales. They didn’t even result in new Likes.
Which brings us back to Facebook wanting to charge fees for delivering more of this sort of traffic. On account of it’s so awesome and all.
According to one report from a marketing company, most users don’t revisit Facebook pages after “Liking” them. The report examined 4,000 Facebook fan pages, and claims the average post reaches only 17 percent of its page’s Likers.
If you want more reach than that, there’s Facebook’s new and completely arbitrary “Promote” scam. It costs up to $100 for a lousy three days of one post appearing in the news feeds of a few more people who actually signed up to receive it, plus a bunch of strangers who could give a crap.
One Facebook page owner who field tested two $5 Promote investments reported some sad results. One post (about a free club meeting) was transmitted to 806 of 2,300 Likers’ news feeds. That’s 35 percent coverage, or twice the unpaid average. The other post (about an event with a cover charge) reached only 484 Liker news feeds, or 21 percent. The page owner doesn’t say whether the promotions enhanced his events’ attendance (wasn’t that the point?). However, he did collect 2 extra page Likes for his trouble. Wow.
When you pay to “promote” your Facebook post, it’s transmitted to (among others who could care less) friends of friends of your friends. Also strangers with whom you share an interest in, say, breathing. And, infuriatingly, never to everyone who clicked Like on your page. The fee is charged upfront to your credit card, and then Facebook proceeds to not tell you how many users will receive your “sponsored” post in their news feeds. Reliable reports claim likes resulting from paid promotion are generated by click farms.
In other words, Facebook paid “promotion” is utterly random and illogical. And useless. Or putting it in marketing terms, a pig in lipstick. It’s why your news feed is skunked up with “sponsored posts” selling diet soap (JUST SHOWER AND LOSE WEIGHT!) and junk that stops ringing in your ears. The only winner is Facebook, who makes $1 million per day doing this to you.
Before Facebook jumped the shark, I looked into their other advertising “opportunities.” They wanted 75¢ per poke for pay-per-click ads. The clicks would result in Facebook Likes (or not, and either way a huge bill for me), but clickmeisters would then have to take the initiative to find my website or Amazon listing to buy the book I’m selling, and historically they don’t even click the handy links in my Facebook posts, much less the ones on my info page nobody can find thanks to Facebook’s brain-damaged site designers. Many clicks and much searching are required just to drive visitors to another website to buy my book, because Facebook won’t let anyone actually sell anything on Facebook. [Earth to Facebook: IT’S CALLED A BUY NOW BUTTON! Jeez.] It wears me out just thinking about it. What’s the point in paying for that?
Got something to sell? Don’t fall for Facebook’s smarmy pitches. “Likes” aren’t worth paying for if they don’t result in sales. Real targeted marketing is a science, not a slogan. It gets you sales, not taillights. Spend your ad dollars where they’ll count.
By the way, Facebook didn’t invent rolling service blackouts. Enron did. (Remember those granny-killing d-bags?)
eBay perpetrates this trick, too, using it to give preferential treatment to favored sellers and manage its inadequate infrastructure instead of improving it (translation: eBay physically TURNS OFF listings), and rake in millions at the same time.
eBay sellers, like Facebook users, have seen catastrophic drop-offs in page views this year, while eBay and Facebook stole scads of their dough. So don’t bother selling your book on eBay. And rest in pieces, Enron. You sick bastards.
As for my sudden deluge of Facebook page views — well, they didn’t even come from Facebook trying to woo me into pay-to-play. The real answer is way creepier.
They came from Twitter. On the day of my 6733% Facebook spike, I posted a link to Dead Spot‘s Amazon product page on Twitter. There is a link to Dead Spot‘s Facebook page on Amazon, but it’s on my author page (not my product page), which I doubt 205 people suddenly felt compelled to find and click. My Twitter and Facebook pages are not linked at all. Not by me, anyway.
Is stalking what Facebook means when they promise “greater reach”? Like I said. Creepy.
Facebook Fraud — A Wake-Up Call from Veritasium
Copyright © 2014 SYDNEY SCHUSTER – All Rights Reserved
Sydney Schuster and Dead Spot neither approved nor endorse any third-party advertising that may appear below, nor do we derive any income from it. Feel free to ignore it.