Proof that Social Networks and Blogs Are the Worst Places to Find Readers

[NathanWrann]

Saw this study on Dean Wesley Smith's site today: http://www.versoadvertising.com/DBWsurvey2012/

Slide 10 shows that less people find out about books from Blogs and Social networks than by any other means.

It also shows that personal recommendations are the #1 way that people find out about books which proves the number one rule: Write a d*mn good book.

for those of you that don't frequent DWSs site: http://www.deanwesleysmith.com/

[NathanWrann]

Oh, and the study is an overall eye-opener

[JRTomlin]

According to that survey (which I don't know enough about to judge as to its validity) 23.9% find new titles on blogs and social networks. I call that hardly an insubstantial number, especially since we have some control over those and have no control over most the other means. I also did wonder how they separate out reviews from blogs since many reviews appear on blogs.

In fact, in my opinion the survey does not by any means support your contention.

Edit: I rather suspect it isn't a matter than they are "the worst places to find readers" and hence should not use them, but that we have to use them intelligently.

[jtw78]

It's important to generate the reviews and recommendations. The people who are committed enough to follow you through blogs and social networking are a good place to start. But, you're right that it's not a good place to find new readers. It's more likely that you'll get your first round of people to buy the book because they like you personally. Then you can move out from there to the other outlets to hawk your wares.

[JRTomlin]

It's important to generate the reviews and recommendations. The people who are committed enough to follow you through blogs and social networking are a good place to start. But, you're right that it's not a good place to find new readers. It's more likely that you'll get your first round of people to buy the book because they like you personally. Then you can move out from there to the other outlets to hawk your wares.

It's not that simple. Do you STOP with the people who were "commited enough to follow you" at the start?

Or do you join in discussions on blogs where there are readers who are then curious about you and look at your own blog where they see links to your books? Do you re-tweet when a review blogger tweets about a review of your book and that is then re-tweeted to people who are NOT your followers, but may become followers? Are there links to your blog and your tweet handle in your books so people who read them can become followers? Does your book and your blog have an email address so people can request an email when you have a new book out?

If not, why not?

Edit: And, by the way, on your blog is there a button to follow you on twitter? Is there a button to tweet a link to your blog for people who read it?

i can hardly count the number of times every week that I WANT to tweet about an interesting blog and can't because they don't bother to put a button there. And most of the time, there's no "follow on twitter" button.  Why?

[Mike McIntyre]

30.8% from bookstore staff recommendations? Did B&N commission this study?

[Gretchen Galway]

30.8% from bookstore staff recommendations? Did B&N commission this study?

Some might include Amazon's "recommended for you" nudges in this figure.

[JRTomlin]

Some might include Amazon's "recommended for you" nudges in this figure.

I *think* those are counted under "algorithms". I find that very hard to believe. But we are also asked to believe that people mostly recall and know why bought particular books, and most likely it is a combination of factors. There is no "it had an interesting cover" or "I liked the blurb" you will notice. No, "I'd heard of the author and just thought I"d try them out".

I'm frankly skeptical that you can read much into the results except that there are a lot of factors that may influence people, blogs and social media amongst them.

[Gretchen Galway]

I have heard this figure before about how influential bookstore staff are. I question if it is still accurate, or people answering the survey might be speaking in general terms about their (past) habits, habits that are no longer applicable.

For instance, in the past year, in a metro area of California, both stores where I bought numerous romance paperbacks have gone out of business: Borders and the local used store. If I had been relying on the nice people there for recs, I wouldn't be able to do so anymore...

[NathanWrann]

In fact, in my opinion the survey does not by any means support your contention.

Yes, actually the study does support the contention that "social networks and blogs are the worst places to find readers" I didn't say that the number of readers that find books in those two places was "insubstantial." Of all the different ways that readers find books, blogs and social networking are the two lowest. As evidenced by the study.

30.8% from bookstore staff recommendations? Did B&N commission this study?

On page 11 and 12 in the study it shows that "independent bookstores" are only a few percentage points below chain bookstores.

Some might include Amazon's "recommended for you" nudges in this figure.

I think that would fall under "on-line algorithm" in the study.

I think the takeaway from page 10 of this study is
A) You can get a few readers from your blog and social network.
B) If you wrote a d*mn good book those few readers that you got from your blog (or algorithm, or search engine etc) might give personal recommendations to people who will then give more personal recommendations. And that's where your sales will come from.

[MrPLD]

i can hardly count the number of times every week that I WANT to tweet about an interesting blog and can't because they don't bother to put a button there. And most of the time, there's no "follow on twitter" button.  Why?

Oh yes, this is one feature I'm always wanting - along with the FB-announce one. 

[NathanWrann]

I have heard this figure before about how influential bookstore staff are. I question if it is still accurate, or people answering the survey might be speaking in general terms about their (past) habits, habits that are no longer applicable.

No longer applicable because people don't buy books in stores anymore? Am I interpreting your skepticism correctly? Believe it or not more people still buy books in stores than buy them on-line.

[CoraBuhlert]

Edit: And, by the way, on your blog is there a button to follow you on twitter? Is there a button to tweet a link to your blog for people who read it?

i can hardly count the number of times every week that I WANT to tweet about an interesting blog and can't because they don't bother to put a button there. And most of the time, there's no "follow on twitter" button.  Why?

I suspect that some blogs may not have a "follow on Twitter" button, because the blogger doesn't tweet. I don't do Twitter or Facebook for example. But I still have share buttons for Twitter, Facebook and all sorts of other social networks under my blog posts. Even if I don't personally use Twitter or Facebook, it's stupid not to give those who do the opportunity to share my posts via their preferred social network.

[JRTomlin]

Yes, actually the study does support the contention that "social networks and are the worst places to find readers" I didn't say that the number of readers that find books in those two places was "insubstantial." Of all the different ways that readers find books, blogs and social networking are the two lowest. As evidenced by the study.

On page 11 and 12 in the study it shows that "independent bookstores" are only a few percentage points below chain bookstores.

I think that would fall under "on-line algorithm" in the study.

I think the takeaway from page 10 of this study is
A) You can get a few readers from your blog and social network.
B) If you wrote a d*mn good book those few readers that you got from your blog (or algorithm, or search engine etc) might give personal recommendations to people who will then give more personal recommendations. And that's where your sales will come from.

Combined (which you did in your referring to them) they are not the smallest.

You can get a lot of readers from your blog and social network if you use them correctly. And considering the thousands of readers I get from algorithms, well, let's say the result made me chuckle.

[Victorine]

There are far worse ways to find readers than in social networks.

Sky writing. Now THAT is a thing of the past. (What a waste of $1,000.)

[Gretchen Galway]

No longer applicable because people don't buy books in stores anymore? Am I interpreting your skepticism correctly? Believe it or not more people still buy books in stores than buy them on-line.

I actually find the survey pretty convincing. It confirms what I've seen elsewhere. I'm just questioning its accuracy in a world that is changing so rapidly.

I myself buy all the huge majority of my fiction in brick and mortar stores. Or I did; it's getting harder and harder. That's what I was getting at.

[JRTomlin]

There are far worse ways to find readers than in social networks.

Sky writing. Now THAT is a thing of the past. (What a waste of $1,000.)

Probably right along side the money I wasted hiring a guy to wear a sandwich board outside a local Starbucks but I paid him in MacDonald's coupons.

Actually, I think the survey isn't being interpreted correctly. That someone would dismiss social networks including blogs that weight more than 20% of the buys is rather bizarre. But I also think the surveying was overly simplistic. I don't see an "Don't know" percentage, for example. This in itself makes me feel the survey is flawed.

[MrPLD]

Even at only ~20%, that's a massive number of people in absolute terms.  It's a bit like me not marketing my software because Linux only represents about 2% of the desktop market (but it's still in the millions in absolute terms).

[JRTomlin]

Even at only ~20%, that's a massive number of people in absolute terms.  It's a bit like me not marketing my software because Linux only represents about 2% of the desktop market (but it's still in the millions in absolute terms).

Quite true, but I also know how often surveys are flawed.

I'm a bit of an anorak about political surveys and you can't analyze one for reliability without knowing EXACTLY what the questions were, what order they were asked in and how they were asked. Internet surveys can be particularly bad for double voting, etc.

Someone saying they did a survey and even posting a big sample pool doesn't convince me that it's a reliable survey. I don't find their results totally improbable but some bits make me question. For example did they use the word "algorithm" in the survey? If not, what did they ask that produced that result? And if they didn't they are showing their own analysis and not just the survey results. But I might question their analysis.

Edit: Heh. I'd love to get 20% of twitter users to buy one of my novels. Ain't happening.

[Mike McIntyre]

Isn't there an overlap between social networks/blogs and personal recommendations?

[JRTomlin]

Isn't there an overlap between social networks/blogs and personal recommendations?

Well, many people consider blogs a form of social networking. There is certainly an overlap between social network and personal recommendation and between blog and reviews, since a huge portion of the eBook reviews are on blogs. You don't have to start digging around in those results much to raise some serious questions.

As I said, I'd love to see the questions they asked and the raw percentages.

[Terrence OBrien]

I'd like to know more about the sampling technique used. It says the pool is 130 million internet users, and 2200 respondents. How were respondents contacted? Is this a self-selected sample?

[JRTomlin]

I'd like to know more about the sampling technique used. It says the pool is 130 million internet users, and 2200 respondents. How were respondents contacted? Is this a self-selected sample?

*nods* Amongst the questions you'd have to know answers to in order to analyze the survey such as if they were contacted rather than self-selected (which automatically makes the results very questionable), how were they chosen and were they balanced for age, earnings and social status.

[B. Justin Shier]

"Anyone can count the seeds in an apple, but only God can count the number of apples in a seed."

-Robert H. Schuller

B.

[ETS PRESS]

30.8% from bookstore staff recommendations? Did B&N commission this study?

B&N staff recommends books? News to me. Not once. Ever. I've been going to B&N for years. Now the little children's bookstore that used to be down the street before they closed their doors...Sally could sell ANYONE a book. You would walk out with an armful and the feeling you just opened up a treasure box and found a fortune.