Corporate Eye

...compare, compete, excel

Brand

Google and Facebook Rule Digital in 2013

digital webNielsen released its Tops of 2013: Digital lists this week and Google and Facebook dominate the list of top web brands, top online video brands, and top smartphone apps. In other words, Google and Facebook ruled digital in 2013.

Top 2013 Web Brands

First, Nielsen ranked the top 10 U.S. web brands for 2013. With an average unique audience of 164.8 million per month, Google took the top spot followed by Facebook in second place with 135.0 million unique visitors per month.

Another Google property, YouTube ranked in fifth place with 119.2 million monthly unique visitors. Yahoo! and MSN/WindowsLive/Bing came in second and third place with 129.8 and 121.0 million monthly unique visitors, respectively.

Top 2013 Online Video Brands

When it came to online video in 2013, no other brand came close to matching Google’s YouTube with 128.4 million unique visitors per month. Trailing significantly behind in second place was VEVO with 37.2 million unique monthly visitors. The top five also included Yahoo! (35.4 million), AOL Media Network (26.4 million), and MSN/WindowsLive/Bing (19.8 million).

Top 2013 Smartphone Apps

The mobile app world was truly ruled by Google and Facebook in 2013. Together, these two companies accounted for seven of the top ten smartphone apps according to Nielsen. More specifically, Google accounts for five out of the top ten (actually, five out of the top six). The top 10 smartphone apps of 2013 based on average unique monthly viewers were:

  1. Facebook: 103.4 million unique visitors per month (owned by Facebook)
  2. Google Search: 76.0 million unique visitors per month (owned by Google)
  3. Google Play: 73.7 million unique visitors per month (owned by Google)
  4. YouTube: 72.0 million unique visitors per month (owned by Google)
  5. Google Maps: 68.6 million unique visitors per month (owned by Google)
  6. Gmail: 64.4 million unique visitors per month (owned by Google)
  7. Instagram: 32.0 million unique visitors per month (owned by Facebook)
  8. Maps (Apple): 31.9 million unique visitors per month
  9. Stocks: 30.8 million unique visitors per month
  10. Twitter: 30.8 million unique visitors per month

It’s interesting to note how young some of these web properties and smartphone apps are. Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, and many other brands and properties on these lists haven’t even been around for a decade. The growth rates are amazing. Looking at the fastest growing smartphone app in 2013, Nielsen’s data identifies Instagram in the number one spot with 66% growth year over year.

The question is whether or not Google and Facebook can hold onto their positions of power in the future. What do you think?

Image: Flavio Takemoto

Brand Engagement and Customer Care in Social Media

twitter iphoneThe Sprout Social Index: Engagement and Customer Care report analyzes brand responsiveness, industry responsiveness, channel growth, and consumer behavior to identify how well brands are meeting consumer expectations for social media engagement and customer service. Unfortunately, the report reveals that as more and more consumers turn to Twitter and Facebook to communicate with brands when they need answers to questions and solutions to problems, brand performance is declining both in terms of response rate and response time.

The problem for brands is volume. The Sprout Social Index reports that messages sent to brands on Twitter and Facebook that require a response or attention has increased by 175% in the past year. On a per message fan basis, the Sprout Social Index reports that Twitter users are more engaged with brands than Facebook users. On average, brands receive 60 messages per 1,000 followers each month on Twitter versus 39 messages per 1,000 fans per month on Facebook. This is most likely due to the more open nature of Twitter where users can share content without being friends with another user (or brand) or following another user (or brand).

Consumer Expectations for Brands Have Changed

Regardless of the tool, consumers are turning to social media for customer service, sales support, and more. As such, they’re expectations for acceptable brand response rates and times are changing, but brands are falling behind. According to the report, average social media response time across all industries dropped from 10.9 hours to 11.3 hours between the third quarter of 2012 and the third quarter of 2013. During the same time period, response rates on both Facebook and Twitter dropped below 20% overall. Justyn Howard, Sprout Social CEO, explains why this matters to brands:

“A 20% response rate to messages requiring attention means that four out of five consumer inquiries go unanswered. This would not be tolerated in traditional channels like phone and email and is not a sustainable practice.”

Brand Reputation Hinges on Effective Social Care

This isn’t just a customer service issue, because social media is public-facing. Today, it’s a strategic brand imperative to increase budgets, manpower, training, performance analyses, and investments in appropriate tools to ensure social media content and interactions represent your brand in a manner that consistently supports your brand promise.

The Sprout Social Index offers seven suggestions for brands to improve their social performance, including:

  • Staff for experience: Don’t put interns in charge of your most public and visible channel (behind in-person).
  • Build for responsiveness: Your social team should have the right skills, training, information and authority to respond quickly and appropriately.

Follow the link at the beginning of this article to view all of the data in the report as well as the full tips to provide better social customer care to support your brand. If you haven’t done it already, make 2014 the year where you prioritize brand engagement and customer care in social media.

Image: William Hook

Santa’s Brand Book 2013 – Time for a Brand Refresh

santa brandEven Santa could use a brand refresh from time to time, and the British agency Quietroom has taken the reindeer by the horns and created the 2013 Santa Brand Book. It’s a must-see for marketers and brand managers who need a laugh during the hectic holiday season.

The Santa Brand Book is filled with humor and over-the-top branding and marketing messaging. It begins with the following brand value proposition:

“*Santa* is a Concept, not an idea. It’s an Emotion, not a feeling. It’s both Yesterday and Today. And it’s Tomorrow as well. *Santa* winds infinite Possibilities around finite Limitations to evoke the essence of invention and the Odour of Nostalgia. It has the complexity of Simpleness and the Simplicity of complexiveness. It begins with the Hiss of Power and ends with the Ah of Surprise.”

How many brand statements have you read that are filled with buzz words but are completely meaningless, like brand *Santa*?

Next, the Santa Brand Book explains the brand promise:

  • X = excellence
  • M = measurability
  • A = accountability
  • S = snow

There is nothing like creating an acronym to state the obvious. How many times have you seen this in brand identity guides?

And the answer to the question, “Why *Santa*?” should not be missed:

* – the introductory asterisk reminds customers of a snowflake alighting on the eyelash of a fawn.

SAN – the first three letters represent South and North. We are headquartered in the North, but our reach is global.

N – the N also symbolizes nitrogen, the most abundant atmospheric element, calling to mind the abundance of gifts we distribute.

TA – the final two letters are the (abbreviated) thanks of the world’s children.

* – the terminating asterisk points customers to the polar star, and hence the birth of dreams.

Equally amusing is the description of how to live the brand- “Snap it. Clap it. Wrap it.”

Be sure to check out the “Mandatory Venn Diagrams”, the brand assets schematic, the “Curve of Credulity”, the external communications requirements, the brand color palette, and the meaning of Pantone 032C red. Each is filled with tongue-in-cheek humor that seasoned marketers will understand and love.

Of course, the 2013 Santa Brand Book is meant to be funny, but it actually delivers an important message. When you create a brand and brand identity guidelines, make sure they actually mean something to all stakeholders (e.g., consumers, employees, investors, and so on). Anyone can put together a jargon-filled document complete with charts and diagrams, but strip all of that fancy (and distracting) wrapping away and what’s left? It’s that remaining substance which truly matters to your brand, its identity, and its success.

 Image: Roby Mikic

B2B Technology Buyers Prefer Blogs and White Papers for Pre-Sales Decision-Making

download-buttonThe Eccolo Media B2B Technology Content Survey reveals that small business, mid-market, and enterprise technology decision makers prefer to read blogs and white papers during the pre-sales cycle. While the study reveals a number of nuances between small and large business decision makers, there are also noteworthy differences between the content consumption preferences and behaviors of technical purchase influencers versus decision makers.

For example, mid-market company technology buyers are more likely to receive vendor content via Facebook than LinkedIn while enterprise buyers are more likely to consume vendor content via LinkedIn. Furthermore, small business buyers don’t believe that post-sale vendor content is as important as large company buyers do. Overall, technology buyers who want to receive ongoing vendor content prefer white papers (98%), case studies (66%), and technology guides (37%).

However, content preferences (presented in 16 categories, including blogs, white papers, case studies, videos, brochures, data sheets, podcasts, infographics, email newsletters, and more) vary based not only on business size but also on roles (purchase influencer vs. decision-maker) and where the buy is in the sales cycle (pre-sales vs final sales process). For example, decision-makers consume more vendor content in 15 of 16 different types of content than influencers. Eccolo Media highlights the following findings from its survey:

  • Small Business: Influencers rely primarily on infographics and video during the pre-sales process while decision-makers rely mostly on blogs. During the final sales process, decision makers rely primarily on technology guides.
  • Mid-Market: Influencers consume all types of content equally and at greater rates than decision-makers during the pre-sales process. Decision-makers also consume all types of content equally during the pre-sales process. During the final sales process, influencers rely on technology guides.
  • Enterprise: Influencers and decision-makers rely mostly on blogs and white papers during the pre-sales process. During the final sales process, decision-makers rely on technology guides and infographics.

Not only does the individual’s role and the company’s place in the sales cycle effect how technology buyers use content but the level of interactivity of that content can also impact purchase decisions. Two-thirds of respondents to the survey indicated that they will interact with content to get more information from vendors and they very often click on links in content to get more information. However, mid-market and enterprise survey respondents were more likely to click on links in vendor content (63%) than small business respondents (43%). When asked why they don’t click on links in vendor content, respondents said it was because they weren’t sure where the links would take them (37%) or whether the link content would be relevant to them (36%).

Content marketing can play an important role in building relationships and trust before, during, and after a sale is made. Technology buyers want access to useful and relevant content in a variety of forms. With these research results in mind, create a B2B content marketing strategy that is highly targeted by segmenting your audiences by role and placement in the sales cycle to continue moving them through the cycle to making a purchase or repurchasing. The type of content you send and when you send it can make a significant difference to your sales success.

Image: Ariel da Silva Parreira

Online Advertising Traffic Fraud Best Practices Released by IAB

online advertising traffic fraud handcuffsOnline advertising has been plagued with bad press in recent years with traffic fraud and click fraud being some of the most talked about problems for online advertisers. This month, The Internet Advertising Bureau’s (IAB’s) Traffic of Good Intent Task Force released a new report titled “Traffic Fraud: Best Practices for Reducing Risk to Exposure.” The report explains the various types of traffic fraud as well as best practices to reduce traffic fraud for advertisers and ad buyers, for publishers, and for ad networks.

In a press release, the IAB Traffic of Good Intent Task Force is calling for all advertisers, ad buyers, networks, and publishers to work together to stop online advertising traffic fraud. Not only is it illegal, but it’s also costing advertisers a lot of money. Gavin O’Malley of MediaPost reports that Steve Sullivan, vice president of advertising technology at IAB, believes traffic fraud equates to a minimum to $6 billion to $7 billion wasted per year.

Fighting Online Advertising Traffic Fraud

To help brand advertisers fight traffic fraud, the IAB created the following questions to ask publishers. While it’s unlikely that small publishers will have all of the requested information, advertisers should speak up and demand that larger publishers provide it.

  • Do you have your audience measured by verifiable third party systems?
  • Do you have a clean record with third-party brand safety reports?
  • How do you determine which impressions are exposed to real humans?
  • How do you assure that ads are served as reported, and that URLS are visible to the advertiser?
  • How do you determine whether ads are auto-initiated or user-initiated?
  • Do you provide protection from malware?
  • Are impressions generated by malware redirecting to a site?

Far-Reaching Negative Effects of Online Advertising Traffic Fraud

Not only does online advertising traffic fraud mean wasted budget dollars for brand advertisers, but it also means skewed tracking data. Accurately analyzing the performance of online ads that have been compromised by click fraud is impossible, but most often, the advertiser doesn’t even know that the performance data should be questioned. Ultimately, future marketing strategies, tactics, and ad buys will be created based on this inaccurate data, which means the negative effects of online advertising traffic fraud are far-reaching and can last for a very long time.

You can visit the IAB website to view the complete traffic fraud report as well Digital Simplified, the IAB’s short overview of what online advertising traffic fraud is and why all stakeholders should take action to stop it.

Image: Foxumon

Video Ad Sharing Has Increased 50 Times in Eight Years

video spiral film stripGood news for brand marketers—a new “Viral Spiral” interactive infographic from Unruly Media reports that sharing of video ads via social media has grown nearly 50 times in the past eight years. This is a trend that shows no signs of slowing down. In fact, the top 10 ads in 2013 were shared 28.8 million times, which is an increase of over 52% since 2012, and Unruly Media is currently tracking 500,000 shares of brand video content each day.

Unruly Media recognizes the 2010 Old Spice “The Man Your Man Could Be” ad as “the game-changer.” Since that ad debuted, shares of the top three branded videos have grown seven-fold. However, that Old Spice ad is not the most shared branded video of all time. That honor goes to Volkswagen’s “The Force” ad with 5.58 million shares, which debuted during the 2011 Super Bowl.

The growth in brand video sharing has changed the way advertisers do their jobs. In 2006, the “Evolution” ad from Dove was the third most shared ad of the year with 60,954 shares during that year. In 2013, the Dove “Real Beauty Sketches” ad was the most shared brand video of the year with 4.24 million shares (it’s also the third most shared video of all time). Combine those shares with the second and third most shared video ads in 2013 (“Hump Day” from GEICO and “Baby & Me” from Evian), and those three ads have been shared nearly 50 times more than the top three ads shared in 2006 (from 244,035 shares in 2006 to 11.6 million shares in 2013). In total, eight out of the top 20 most shared video ads of all time debuted in 2013 (40%).

Advertisers have learned a lot about creating videos that people want to share via social media in the past eight years. For example, Unruly Media reports that the average length for the top three most shared brand videos has increased by 178% since 2006 (from 35 seconds to 96 seconds).

Unruly Media has tracked 365 billion brand videos since 2006 using a combination of its own proprietary technology and social media APIs and used that data as the basis for its infographic. You can view the Viral Spiral below. Not only can you filter the results by year, number of shares, sector, and more, but you can also watch all of the video ads without leaving the interactive infographic.


Are you creating brand videos that people want to share with family and friends across the social web?

Image: Malgorzata Gluchowska