By Ed Keller The relationship between social media and TV is of considerable interest to media owners, agencies, and brands.  Twitter is investing heavily to buy social media monitoring companies, and Facebook too is seeking to bolster its claim on social engagement with TV.  There’s no doubt that ‘Social TV’ has become the subject of much speculation. But just how significant is the television viewer’s engagement with social media while they are watching prime time TV?   Are certain demographic groups more engaged socially than others when it comes to TV, and are they the ones we generally associated with social media?  What about genres – which capture the greatest degree of social engagement?  These and other questions are answered by a major new study that was recently released study by

By VINDU GOEL  April 10, 2014, 7:00 AM on the New York Times Social Blog at: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/04/10/twitter-and-facebook-wield-little-influence-on-tv-watching/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_php=true&_type=blogs&src=busln&_r=1& Listen to executives at Twitter and Facebook talk about how we watch television and you might walk away thinking that Americans are chattering nonstop on the social networks while watching their favorite shows. The reality is that most of us don’t tweet or post at all while we’re plopped in front of the tube. When we do, half the time we’re talking about something other than TV. And social media conversation is far weaker than traditional factors, like TV commercials for new shows or our sheer laziness in changing channels, in prompting us to tune into each season’s new offerings. Those are among the crucial findings of a new study released Thursday by the Council for Research

David Poltrack, Chief Research Officer at CBS, says that Facebook has significantly better Social TV data than Twitter and Nielsen, and Social TV and second screens open up billions of dollars in new revenue opportunities for broadcasters. Article on Futurescape.tv, Dec. 19, 2013 Speaking at the UBS 41st Annual Global Media and Communications Conference, he said: Facebook is developing its own Social TV metric, with encouragement from CBS It already provides better Social TV data than the Nielsen Twitter TV Ratings from Nielsen’s SocialGuide division Social TV and second screen initiatives can enable CBS and other US broadcasters to tap $88 billion of potential new revenue Why Facebook’s Social TV data is better than Twitter’s Poltrack revealed that Facebook is working on its own Social TV metric, with input from

For the third week in a row, Ad Age is taking a broad view of the “social buzz” surrounding the fall TV season’s new shows and listening in on “real world” conversations — not just what you see on Twitter and Facebook. We worked with the Keller Fay Group, a market-research firm that specializes in tracking word-of-mouth, to generate the chart you see here. (Last week’s chart is right over here.) The data is based on interviews with a cross-section of 1,452 Americans ages 13 to 69 years old who were interviewed from Oct. 7 to Oct. 13 regarding 29 new, high-profile TV shows that have premiered already or will premiere shortly. Because the fall TV premiere schedule stretches on for weeks and weeks through September and October, Keller Fay is conducting

By Ed Keller A recently released Pew study declared, “The reaction on Twitter to major political events and policy decisions often differs a great deal from public opinion as measured by surveys.”  Sometimes Twitter reaction is more liberal than public opinion, sometimes more conservative, said Pew.  But when it comes to Twitter reaction regarding the 2012 elections and President Obama’s inauguration, the tilt was decidedly pro-Obama. My firm tracked word of mouth throughout the 2012 election in partnership with the National Journal, picking up both the 90% of word of mouth about the election that took place offline, as well as what was being talked about online via social media, texting, and so forth. When the Pew results came to our attention we looked again at our research and found

The CEO of Zappos Tony Hsieh has 1.8 million followers on Twitter. In many marketing circles, he is something of a Twitter god, using the Twitter feed to promote Zappos and his way of thinking about business (as expressed in his book, Delivering Happiness: A Path to Profits, Passion, and Purpose) to his many followers. Imagine my surprise, then, when I saw a TV interview with Hsieh, in which he said he dislikes the term social media. In fact, he dislikes it so much that anyone who uses it around him at Zappos owes him a dollar. It’s not just the use of the term social media; it’s the whole idea of it. “We have never had a strategy for Twitter or Facebook. . . So many companies are chasing

With the meteoric rise of social networking, marketers can be forgiven for thinking that word of mouth equals social media. This is wrong on two counts. Firstly, the overwhelming majority of word of mouth still occurs offline, not online. This is not an indictment of social media, but rather a reflection of just how large the volume of face-to-face word of mouth is. Because offline WOM is harder to measure, it’s often discounted. But that’s a mistake. There are important planning and evaluation implications that stem from this, and we have discussed them previously. The second problem with thinking WOM equals social media is that the role of the internet in word of mouth extends far, far beyond social networking sites like Facebook, Twitter, and FourSquare. The things people see

How Social are Social Media, Really?

Wednesday, 20 April 2011 by

There have been some interesting studies recently about social media which raise some interesting questions for advertisers. In late March came a study from Yahoo, which reported that 50% of all tweets come from only 20,000 users, or 0.05% of the Twitter universe.  Far from a “flat” highly “democratic” means of communications, that connects everyone to everyone else, the Yahoo authors conclude that Twitter more closely resembles a traditional broadcast model in which a small number of “elite users” push out content, rather than a true two-way dialogue that many assume when they talk about Twitter.  “Information flows have not become egalitarian by any means,” say the authors.  In discussing the Yahoo research, econsultancy led with the headline, “Twitter isn’t very social: Study”. In early April came a report by

“For an ad to be effective, it must first be seen and read.”  This observation was made a century ago by the advertising research pioneer, Dr. Daniel Starch, in his 1906 book, Advertising:  It’s Principles, Practices and Techniques.  What was true then is just as true today when it comes to social media. As brands rush to develop a presence on Facebook, Twitter, and other social networking sites, and as these sites now begin to develop advertiser-related offerings, the fundamental question needs to be asked:  Just how sizable is their reach?  Yes, we know that Facebook has over 500 million members worldwide, and Twitter 160 million users.  But how many people post actively, how often are brands a part of the conversation, and when something is posted, how many of

Celebrity personalities like Ashton Kutcher, Lady Gaga, and Kim Kardashian are developing marketing partnerships with brands in hopes of driving word of mouth conversations.  As the “President of Pop Culture” at Popchips, Ashton is using his social media reach to promote Popchips to his Twitter followers and Facebook fans.  Polaroid is using Lady Gaga’s creative talent to make the Polaroid brand more talkable.  And, Kim Kardashian will tweet promotional message for brands on Twitter at a rate of per tweet $10,000. Given the rising prevalence of celebrity-driven conversation marketing strategies, should more brands hop on the celebrity-driven word of mouth bandwagon? Research from Keller Fay’s TalkTrack® study says don’t underestimate the influence talkative everyday people have in driving word of mouth conversations.  TalkTrack® uses the Conversation Catalysts™ segmentation system, developed

TOP