When the social networks became a household name, and organizations began to use them for marketing, communications, and customer service, many business leaders thought this was the answer to their sales prayers.
"We need a Facebook page!"
"Let's make a viral video!"
"I want a million Twitter followers!"
What everyone failed to remember, though, is there is no such thing as overnight success. There isn't a silver bullet. Yes, we have new tools, but we still have to build relationships with human beings who need to trust us enough to buy our products or services.
No amount of social media fans or followers will change that.
But, because we love big numbers, we all began to focus on the wrong things.
Surely if we have more than 2,500 social shares, our cashflow woes will be over.
If we have one million Facebook fans, we'll crush our competition.
All of those Twitter followers equal best sales year ever!
Vanity Metrics, Schanity Metrics
Unfortunately, that's just not the case.
Let's look at an example of the differences between vanity metrics and real analytics.
Last August, I wrote a blog post on Spin Sucks called, "How to Capture Blog Post Ideas."
With the help of a mention by Buffer—a social media management app—the article went a little out-of-control.
There are more than 2,500 social mentions. The average for a Spin Sucks blog post is typically less than 1,000. So it more than doubled on this particular article.
It sure does feel good to see those numbers sitting there. It provides really great social proof to new visitors that the article is good, therefore the rest of the blog must have amazing content.
But does it mean the business goals outlined are closer to being met because more than 2,500 shared this post?
What Extra Content Distribution Means
Before Buffer highlighted the blog post, we had 908 visitors to that page and people spent an average of six minutes reading it.
After they highlighted it, we had an additional 1,019 visitors. This is great! But the average time spent dropped by a minute. The bounce rate also increased (not good).
Between the two, we had nearly 2,000 visitors in five days, with an average time spent of more than five minutes. We also gained 12 new subscribers, but considering we had more than one thousand new visitors, it's not a great conversion rate.
What is also interesting is several of the comments were from people who sell software that helps you capture blog post ideas and develop your content (asking our readers to buy their product). Not our typical community members.
Content Distribution Data
Here is what that data says:
- Content distribution through Buffer is an amazing gift because it provides social proof that people like your stuff. And, like it or not, people see those big numbers and think, "Wow. They must really know what they're doing."
- It didn't bring the right audience to the blog. Sure, some may have come because blogging is interesting to them, but they didn't stay because they're not communicators, which is the focus.
- More than 2,500 social shares does not equate the same in visitors. People share because they like the title and think it'll make them look smart, but 25 percent don't actually click on the link.
- All of those unqualified leads hurt your averages. Yes, averages are lies, but just by comparing the top two analytics screen grabs, you can see it was harmful.
- If you do a test with Buffer or Outbrain or another site that is meant to drive traffic, do it on a blog post that is focused on your niche.
There are lots of ways for interesting content distribution to find new audiences, increase your subscribers, and generate new leads. But they must bring the right people in because, well, those big numbers are lies.
A modified version of this content distribution article first appeared on Spin Sucks.
