A lesson about social tracing

Thomas Baekdal

Baekdal Plus can track sharing without the need for ad variables or social buttons (which are often unreliable). When a user shares an article, the URL identifies itself as being shared. In other words, through the URL itself, you can subdivide the traffic just by sharing the arrival. This can give people a better insight into what it's like to mix real social sharing. The following is the 3721.html ">2014 of the first two quarters of the year. What you can see here is just those who enter Baekdal plus through a user's share link. No natural flow, no search traffic. Flows that are shared only by others. Perhaps the first thing you'll notice is that "social media" is the sputter of the overall ratio. Given that all of this is shared, the results are surprising. So that's the whole social media. The result is that a shared link is usually started by sharing on the Twitter/facebook, but it is captured and shared by other sources. But because the Baekdal plus analysis system does not span people to track the source, the results eventually show that sputter from social media, 96% from other sources. This is one of the main reasons why we see "social media" sharing so low. The biggest source is a variety of forms of recommendation, from one months to another month of change is obvious. Sites like ' Pocket ' and Reddit usually score high, but most of the sharing flow comes from hundreds of individual sites, each with few, but a huge amount.

Mail is another big source. But it's not my news (it's not from my channel, it's from someone else's), in other words, it's a link to a plus article that people share in their news.

When we encounter the "uncertain" flow of this major obstacle or most analysis Services are positioned as "direct". As you can see, this is when you analyze, you can't be sure where people come from.

But that's the way it is. A shared plus article like this: http://www.baekdal.com/insights/the-future-of-news-and-the-replicators/ F436152DDC174B1A8CCA64C9835B77E491A2E70AB498099CA88ECB3991FCC9CB obviously no way, this is direct. No one will enter this instruction, and no one can generate traffic via bookmarks (because I am tracking people rather than opinions) so, essentially, this is what I call "dark social", which is the part of sharing traffic that we have no way of knowing.

Finally, there is a part of "other", which is classified as odd or not identified in my analysis system. You'll notice that "other" traffic is sometimes more than "social media".

So, did you see the problem? All of this shared traffic was initially shared by my users and then shared by others. All this is social media, but only sputter is confirmed. This is the key element of understanding sharing. If you look at your source, you can only learn the last time you share it. Here's a simple example: following my Twitter subscriber, I can see what happens when a connection is shared. In other words, the first time to share 100% is social media and through Twitter. Then some of his Twitter followers clicked on the link, and some of the followers forwarded it back to share. Some go through Twitter, some via Facebook or Google +, but the spread of links outside of social media is growing and entering blogs and media sites. As a result, a link from someone's push begins, to be shared by different sources. Since your analysis can only record the last share, you will not know that the first 100% links to this link are caused by social interaction. In the end, it was noted that only 3% were recorded from social media, but if the subscriber had not pushed the link at first, nothing would have happened. Obviously, this is just an example. Other people may share links in another way, and there will be another result. But the problem is that, just as E-commerce doesn't want to see "Last Click," You don't want to see "last share" in social media. Compare the Twitter analysis to see the problem from another perspective, sharing the actual amount. When you use Twitter Cards, you can get a clear breakdown of how people share your content and the personal tweets they share. Look at the first one, this one triggered 196 clicks from a tweet, which is great. But because I can track personal connections through Baekdal Plus, I can compare him and my own analysis, my records under 669 clicks.

In other words, from this tweet, there are 196 clicks directly from Twitter (initial tweets and tweets), and another 473 clicks from other sources that share through other forms. For this Tu, the real impact of social media has been underestimated by 341%.

Is that surprising?

This raises a very important question: how important is your personal social media channel as a whole versus sharing?

Obviously, because it is affected by many factors, it is impossible to be a single answer. Your reason for socializing with people is to build momentum.

And the effect of your social media channel depends on whether the motivation is what you need, or you can get it by other means.

Take this website for example, I never really spend money on this website to advertise. I started from 2004, and from the beginning it just grew slowly to the present. So, in this sense, all my traffic is, in a sense, influenced by me. If it's not because I've contacted people from other sources (starting with forums and community sites, now mostly through social networking sites), what I'm doing is impossible.

Today, the site is well known. If I look at the cause of new traffic and new subscribers for six months, most of them are not because of me. It was caused by sharing and sharing my articles with others.

So, on the growth side, what I do on Twitter, Google + or Facebook is basically no different to me. Instead, my own social channels focus on nurturing my existing readers. If most of my growth comes from someone else, it's important for me to nurture you, my readers, so we are intimately connected. This is especially true for Twitter and Google +, where my most loyal readers spend most of their time.

To make a comparison: last month I posted a link on Twitter (so I can track it) and then compared all my shared traffic (each link). The result was a high level of access to the links I posted, but sharing accounted for only 2% of the total.

So your strategy should be different from every brand and publisher. You need to look at where you are today, how much less motivated you are, and how good your existing relationship circle is.

For some brands, your own channel may actually be more important. For example: Where do you end up with customers finding new content? In order for others to start sharing your stuff, they first need to know what you're doing.

It all depends on the nature of your customer and your market. For example, I've been watching some brands on YouTube, and without these channels, I hardly know what new content they're doing, it's my only source of contact.

Generally speaking, your most important channel is not your social channel. It's your product that your customers or readers will share. The second important channel is the channel that allows people to pay attention in the most reasonable way.

My conclusions are two: first, by looking at the last point of sharing, you usually get a picture that almost completely distorts the real value of your social media interactions. Second, these social interactions do not usually start with your posting them on Facebook or Twitter.

Instead of focusing on what you're doing with your social network, you have to focus on sharing your social strategy.

199IT compiled from https://www.baekdal.com/analysis/a-lesson-in-social-tracking/, reprint please specify

Translator Jane