Social networks in FS – Facebook remains the best option

Guest blog post by Stephen Dunnigan, Country Manager UK & Ireland, MicroStrategy

I can empathise with some of Scott’s recent FStech blog on the use of Twitter and Facebook in FS. We have all seen too many ‘amusing faces in the pub’ photos, but I just can’t agree with the idea that Twitter has replaced Facebook as the social network of choice in FS.

Of all the social networks, Facebook has by far the highest number of active users – around 900 million at the last estimate – and also the richest data on its users. Using that data, the potential for targeted and relevant marketing is huge. Users can be segmented based on their  interests, psychographics, demographics, preferences and likes. Segments can be targeted with personalised content, special offers, and recommendations based on who they are, where they come from, and what they like.

The best way of doing this is via closer integration of IT and marketing to forge social CRM strategies. At last year’s MicroStrategy Social Media Marketing and iCommerce Summit, Facebook’s Tim Campos spoke about how organisations can monetise their Facebook data by converting the site's social graph data structure into a relational data structure, enabling the use of existing Facebook data for enterprise applications. These apps enable personalised messaging based on the rich and constantly updating Facebook data – ideal for customer engagement and building brand loyalty.

The Corporate Insight research cited by Scott last week does reveal that 88 per cent of the FS companies surveyed were on Facebook and 92 per cent on Twitter. Yet so many Twitter accounts are inactive or spam and the user numbers do not come anywhere near to those on Facebook. And the nature of Twitter – 140 characters per update – means that the users it does have do not reveal much of substance that could be used by FS marketers. I do not mean spam, but relevant, targeted and personalised offers based on that user’s profile and interests.

While many of the status updates may seems trivial, only Facebook allows FS firms to engage with customers and prospects in a meaningful way, so the odd un-flattering picture of a friend in the pub is a price worth paying.

Twitter steals march on Facebook in FS sector

Has Facebook had its day? That was the question I put to my many (ahem) Twitter followers recently. "Timeline looks clunky and there are only so many pics you wanna see of friends pulling amusing faces in the pub," I tweeted.

It certainly seems to be on the slide in the financial services sector. According to analysis from Corporate Insight, Twitter has overtaken Facebook to be become the top social network for FS firms. It covered 90 companies in its report, 57 per cent of which used Facebook in 2010 and 51 per cent Twitter. But by the end of 2011, 88 per cent were on the former and 92 per cent on the latter.

At one point, Facebook could do no wrong, but it's no longer a media darling. Take, for example, the bemused response to the $1 billion purchase of Instagram, perhaps best summed up by a spoof news piece in the latest Private Eye. Sample quotes: "Instascam's business model was founded on the belief that if we had a trendy name and could show that we had no way of generating profit, Facebook would eventually buy us for some ridiculous price." And: "Mark Zuckerberg denied he'd overpaid for Instascam saying he'd been impressed by the way the company had generated huge amounts of hype in the past two years."

For more info on the Corporate Insight research, click here.

Ask not what Facebook can do for you...

Anyone else watch Mark Zuckerberg: Inside Facebook on BBC2 at the weekend? A hit and miss affair, the programme was presented by Emily Maitlis who charted the rise of Facebook, from humble beginnings to its current position of online behemoth which has worked its way into the lives of 800 million people.

Maitlis had secured a rare interview with Zuckerberg. So far, so good. But there were a couple of snags. Whilst the programme made some interesting points about the cultural impact of Facebook, it was less successful when tackling the man who created it. Over the course of an hour, we were given about five minutes of Zuck being interviewed by Maitlis and saying 'cool' and 'awesome' alot and waffling on about making society more open - the rest of the time she devoted to an origins story, visiting old haunts and interviewing college professors and friends. The origins thing has already been done, with considerable skill and style by The Social Network. The makers acknowledged as much, throwing in a few clips from the movie and trying to pick holes in it, citing various inaccuracies without really backing them up.

Still, it was worth sitting through for a couple of reasons. Firstly, Maitlis finally landed a blow (around the 50 minute mark) when she quizzed Elliot Schrage, Facebook's VP public policy, on the site's 'Like' button. If you click 'Like' on a brand or product, you could be unwittingly promoting it to your friends in their sidebars. Is it right that a person is used to promote a company when they have not agreed to it, she asked. "Let's pause," said Schrage, with a 'why is the nice, attractive lady from the Beeb ambushing me' look on his face. "You're asking a profound question. What's advertising?" He then attempted to fob her off with talk of  'affirmative linking' and 'ranking mechanisms'. Before excusing himself and jumping out the window...OK, I made that last bit up but watch it and you'll see what I mean.

Secondly, is Facebook really a force for good as Zuck would have us believe? Is it, to quote COO, Sheryl Sandberg, "better if we're all more open and connected" when the facilitator is a multi-billion dollar company dogged by criticism of its privacy policy? For all the talk of a revolution in the way we communicate, is the site essentially just a means of escape for people when they're bored and lonely? And, as such, has it become a master of disguise, mercilessly exploiting its users as it morphs from social to commercial network? As one wag put it: "Ask not what Facebook can do for you, ask what you can do for Facebook."

Sadly, the programme left it too late to really get to grips with these questions, but it did at least provide some interesting food for thought. If you missed it, you can watch it here.