{{ searchResult.published_at | date:'d MMMM yyyy' }}

Loading ...
Loading ...

Enter a search term such as “mobile analytics” or browse our content using the filters above.

No_results

That’s not only a poor Scrabble score but we also couldn’t find any results matching “”.
Check your spelling or try broadening your search.

Logo_distressed

Sorry about this, there is a problem with our search at the moment.
Please try again later.

New research from Wisemetrics shows that while on average many pages have seen a drop in organic reach, the top 1% of pages still reached 82% of their fans, more than five times the average. 

Marketers around the globe have been making dissatisfied rumblings about Facebook organic reach for a while now. The general consensus being: You’ve got to pay to play.  

That doesn’t mean that we’ve got to pay Facebook though... 

Wisemetrics' study showed that larger pages have been hit hardest: Pages with more than 1m fans saw reach reduce by 40% on average, while pages with less than 1,000 fans saw a decrease of around 20%.

https://assets.econsultancy.com/images/resized/0004/7369/wisemetrics_facebook_reach-blog-full.png

The Econsultancy Facebook page is one of our fastest growing social channels. At time of writing we have around 28,000 fans, and our organic post reach regularly exceeds 25%. 

We do put money behind some posts, but this is something we manually control.

Posts are boosted when they are already seeing strong organic engagement, and for the most part these promotions are targeted at users who don’t already follow us, in specific territories (primarily the US, where our brand isn’t as well known as some of our competitors).  

On average each unpromoted post reaches between four and five thousand people, with promotions pushing this up to around 25,000.

Promoted vs. Organic reach for Econsultancy

https://assets.econsultancy.com/images/resized/0004/7366/promoted_posts-blog-full.png

So why are we seeing increasing reach, while many brands are seeing diminishing returns? 

Facebook ‘Likes’ content that ‘Likes’ Facebook

As usual, the answer comes back to content. 

Over time, Facebook’s design has evolved to focus more user attention on the newsfeed.

https://assets.econsultancy.com/images/resized/0004/7371/facebook-news-feed-redesign-2013-blog-full.jpg

This is where engagement happens, and Facebook is keen to increase this as it promotes platform loyalty. Facebook only makes money if users keep coming back to Facebook

This is the main reason why marketers struggle to see strong ROI from sidebar ads. Those ads are billboards. They are not designed or formatted to engage the user, but to raise peripheral brand awareness. The newsfeed however, is specifically designed to encourage a variety of actions. 

A lot of noise is made about ‘the Algorithm’, a notorious, loosely-defined entity that stalks Facebook, deliberately hiding our posts from our fans.

This is, of course, absolute claptrap. Anyone who tells you this is why you aren’t being seen is a bad marketer.

Facebook’s algorithm does indeed promote some posts ahead of others, but this is because Facebook is constantly trying to show individual users content that they are most likely to engage with on an ongoing basis. 

What is ‘good’ content?

This brings up an interesting problem. It’s easy to make sweeping comments about the types of posts we see on Facebook. We all assume that posts like this represent poor quality content:

Like-baiting

This isn’t necessarily true though. 

Of course these posts aren’t deep. They are fluff, but that doesn’t mean people don’t enjoy them.

When judging content, it’s best to take a leaf from legendary film critic Roger Ebert’s book: Judgement should be relative, not absolute. If this post works, then it’s succeeding on its own terms, but is it succeeding for you?

It’s unlikely that people will enjoy this type of post all the time. We all have a slightly annoying friend on Facebook who posts motivational quotes all the time, and after a while you get sick of them and move on. So posts like this are useful for creating a spree of activity on your page, but it isn’t the kind of activity that you can build on. It doesn’t last. 

Focus on long-term goals

https://assets.econsultancy.com/images/resized/0004/7364/cat_eating_cornflakes-blog-half.jpg

This means that Facebook is pushing posts that ‘should’ contain deeper content. Videos are a good example, as even if you are making a stupid video, it requires a degree more time and effort than just putting up a picture of a cat with “1 ‘Like’ = 1 dollar 4 poorly kits” written underneath.  

In the past I’ve also written about the importance of formatting, and it seems clear that this also has an effect.

Posts that have been embedded using the power editor do seem to have more interaction and higher CTRs.

https://assets.econsultancy.com/images/resized/0004/7365/clickable-blog-half.png

Partly this is because they contain more clickable elements, so have an increased likelihood of driving more traffic, but when it gets right down to it, it’s also because they ‘look more legit’.

I’m aware of how that glib that sounds, but I’m completely serious. This is why people assume that a newspaper contains better/more reliable content than a website, regardless of the actual level of journalism on display. 

Sounds legit, yo. 

Almost 'too' legit

Embedded posts implicitly (but not always explicitly, as the Buzzfeed Quiz proves) link to deeper articles, so long-tail engagement is likely to be higher

This is all well and good, particularly if you are a publisher like Econsultancy. For brands however, it’s quite hard to write an intriguing 4,000 word article about cornflakes every day. 

Time and again, the spectre of ROI has haunted Facebook.

A lot of marketers aren’t confident in their ability to measure returns from social media, so by pushing content that drives traffic or creates longer engagements, Facebook is offering us metrics which are easier to account for.

Having a million fans is fine, but it’s hard to prove the business value. Driving X amount of traffic, or having X amount of shares is easier to measure. It’s still not a direct transaction, but these metrics matter to publishers, who are well placed to tout the value of Facebook. 

I’m not saying that there’s no place or value for Cornflakes on Facebook, but marketers need to refocus their investments. Advertising on Facebook does pay off if it’s handled correctly (and the recently released profit figures seem to back this up. Net profits jumped to $642m. Frankly, no one invests that kind of money if there’s really no payoff), but there’s far more value to be had from investing in content with a longer tail.

For FMCGs, video may well be the key, as they have long-standing experience in this kind of creative.

For the rest of us, pictures and images that connect with the customer are useful, but we need to go beyond simple memes. Everything we do should be tied to our core brand values.

Why does the brand exist? What emotions should it inspire in people? Are you useful? Do you make people happy? Are you a bowl of golden sun each morning?

Forget the cats (even if they are eating Cornflakes) and concentrate on posts that are tied to your brand. Here’s a quick example from Chocolate brand Milka, which currently has more than 8m fans on Facebook: 

https://assets.econsultancy.com/images/resized/0004/7368/milka_facebook-blog-full.png

None of these posts sell. Some of them are silly, but they all underline the brand ideal.

Milka is something you share with people you love. It’s a part of your social life. The Facebook page may not be making money directly, but it is helping Milka weave into the fabric of the customer’s life. 

Once again, there are no absolute rules or best practices for Facebook, but many of us are still getting caught up in the micro measurements offered by networks.

Simply moaning about diminishing reach or trying to buy our way out isn’t the best approach.

Instead, take a step back and ask yourself what Facebook would gain from limiting reach? Yes, it may add a few ad dollars, but long term, would Facebook really want brands to be less successful on the network?

Matt Owen

Published 24 April, 2014 by Matt Owen

Matt Owen was formerly Head of Social at Econsultancy. You can follow him on Twitter or hook up on LinkedIn.

203 more posts from this author

Comments (10)

Comment
No-profile-pic
Save or Cancel
Avatar-blank-50x50

Stephane Allard, CEO at Vianova Spheeris

Waow, great analysis on top of our Research Matt.
I totally agree. Bar is higher for FMCG brands which,usually, don't have much content. Or low interest one.

Automotive, Sports, Entertainment or Luxury brands with their natural horde of fans and their quality content are better served.

eConsultancy also proves that B2B can still generate lots of engagement and traffic.

As you said, everything comes down to quality content anyway.

over 2 years ago

Avatar-blank-50x50

Hermes Ma

Can anyone define Top 1% for me?

over 2 years ago

Matt Owen

Matt Owen, Head of Social at Econsultancy

Hi @Hermes - sorry if it isn't clear, in this case I'm talking about the top 1% by reach performance, so: those pages that reach the most of their fans organically.

over 2 years ago

Avatar-blank-50x50

GPandey

Facebook advertising fails because of number of fake likes from fake profile from South Asia Countries. I am also one of the people who is suffering from fb advert.

over 2 years ago

Avatar-blank-50x50

Amar LAKEL

I'm agree with all parts of this paper.

All the studies i drive confirm your analysis.

In one way, it's the ground of a good marketing plan :

Think about your Targets roi about your post not about YOUR ROI on the reach of your post !

over 2 years ago

Avatar-blank-50x50

Sant

Really facebook ruined my business now many are showing uninteresting of fb we have to push some other social media to bring facebook back down

over 2 years ago

Avatar-blank-50x50

Patrick Clarke

Great analysis. Very refreshing to come across an assessment which goes deeper than the usual sound bites about Facebook and actually gives some easy to follow constructive tips on how to move things forward.

over 2 years ago

Avatar-blank-50x50

Samseo

Many says Facebook helps to make business grow may i know how can i get a likes on my page and how do i make people visit my site

over 2 years ago

Avatar-blank-50x50

Marie Page

Hi Matt
Are you definitely seeing such high reach numbers within your fan base or are you simply reporting the organic reach numbers reported on the Insights dashboard? I ask because where I've recently had superb reach recently, on digging through the downloadable insights data it becomes apparent that the spike is due to viral reach rather than organic fan reach.

Even on posts where I'm seeing a 300% reach (yep - lots of sharing) FB has still only surfaced this to about 25% of fans.

Strikes me that a blog like Econsultancy's would result in a lot of viral reach and I'm interested to see if FB is ever really rewarding this. My hunch is that it isn't and so we are wise to promote posts (likely to fans only) when the content is clearly popular

over 2 years ago

Avatar-blank-50x50

Shahnawaz Sadique, Digital head at 495001

The algo of facebook is decreasing the reach of page but I found one things that if your write some things which haven't written before on facebook then your post reach will be very high.This is tried and tested things ..Kindly try to apply it .

over 2 years ago

Comment
No-profile-pic
Save or Cancel
Daily_pulse_signup_wide

Enjoying this article?

Get more just like this, delivered to your inbox.

Keep up to date with the latest analysis, inspiration and learning from the Econsultancy blog with our free Daily Pulse newsletter. Each weekday, you ll receive a hand-picked digest of the latest and greatest articles, as well as snippets of new market data, best practice guides and trends research.