Alert Blog Reviews

Quick: if I asked you “Do you use an Internet service or site to share updates about yourself?”, how would you answer? “Yes: Facebook,” “Yes: my blog,” “Yes: Twitter,” (yes, all of the above)? Okay, let’s say I took all of those yeses, no matter which site/service you use, and declared them all to be Tweets. Face it: someone with that little regard for the differences between the above types of sites probably shouldn’t consider himself/herself to be an Internet researcher. 19% of Internet users answered yes to the question “Do you use Twitter or another service to update your status about yourself, or to see others’ statuses?” in a Pew Internet & American Life study , up from 11% in April and last December. Naturally, Pew concludes that all 19% of them use Twitter. Brilliant. In fact, they’re so confused, I’m having a hard time figuring out these stats. They’ve mixed up the data so well that I can’t tell whether they mean “update their status” or “actually use Twitter” whenever they talk about Twitter use. I’m pretty sure they mean “update status” instead of “Twitter” here. On the other hand, I’m pretty sure they don’t know what they mean. Pew, of course, is a respected research firm and has never, ever run a sensationalized headline, or failed to think through their conclusions. Like, maybe, telling us that nobody on the Internet takes their product research to influence their purchase decisions and including non-Internet users in the stats , or defining a “purchase decision” as something other than deciding where and what to buy or something. Nope. However, they have discovered why I don’t tweet very often, and that might earn back all that lost respect. The study shows that wireless Internet access, and more and more wireless devices, are both positively correlated with updating one’s status. About 25% of Internet users with a wireless device—including, interestingly, a laptop—update their status, while only 8% of those with a tethered connection do. And, unsurprisingly, the more wireless devices you have, the more likely you are to update your status: “Fully 39% of internet users with four or more internet-connected devices (such as a laptop, cell phone, game console, or Kindle) use Twitter [they mean update their status], compared to 28% of internet users with three devices, 19% of internet users with two devices, and 10% of internet users with one device.” There isn’t any research on whether the increased access leads to diminished quality. (”I am sitting on the porch.” “I haven’t updated my status for two hours.” “Bored in line.”) Other stats in the study: women update more than men, and Internet users 18-44 update more than older users. I can’t decide whether it’s just laziness or ignorance (I’m loath to put stupidity on the list) that leads to conflating Twitter use with updating status (or even just reading others’ statuses). As TechCrunch notes, Facebook was among the first to coin the term “status update,” which isn’t used by Twitter. Facebook, meanwhile, told TechCrunch they see 45 million status updates every day. So why don’t I tweet enough? Apparently I need more wireless devices. What do you think? Is this a good indicator of Twitter use, or just superficial research that doesn’t tell us enough to draw conclusions about Twitter?

See the original post here:
19% of Internet Users Update their Statuses

While we all like our sites to have visitors, a loyal visitor—one who returns for later visits—is especially valuable. And while search engines do send a lot of visitors, a study issued by Chitika earlier this month shows that the most loyal site visitors come from social sites, as eMarketer reports today. Studying 33 million uniques across its publisher network last month, Chitika used the criterion of four or more visits over the course of a week to indicate a loyal visitor. They found that Facebook and Digg had the best loyalty rates: Facebook showed 20.69% of its referrals became loyal visitors. Digg had slightly over 16% of its referrals visit four or more times that week. Interestingly, Yahoo had a slightly better loyalty rate than Google.: Next came the search engines, Yahoo! leading the way with over 15% [15.89%] of referrals being loyal. Google and Bing were practically even at slightly below 12% [11.84% and 11.74%], and Twitter came in last place overall with barely over 11%. I’m a little surprised that one in eight Google visitors return four or more times in a week. Considering that Google sent 76% of the traffic in the study, even with the lower retention rate, it’s still numerically more loyal visitors. But, as Chitika puts it, if you had the option of sending 1000 visitors to your site from Google or Facebook, if you want loyalty, Facebook is a better bet. It’s also interesting that Twitter visitors were least loyal. You might argue that links in Twitter get pushed down in the feed so fast that it’s hard to dig them up again later to return, but the same is probably true for Facebook. (Note, too, that Twitter is falling rapidly in referral rates: eMarketer says, “In July, Twitter was No. 24 on Chitika’s list of top referrers, with 0.05%. By September, it had moved down to 44th place, with just a 0.02% share.”) But probably most interesting is that one-sixth of Digg visitors are loyal. The site has become notorious for one-off traffic spikes that don’t do a whole lot for long term gains—but maybe the dynamic has shifted as the site has aged. What do you think? Do you see more loyal visitors from Digg and Facebook? Have you seen a change in your visitors from Digg?

Go here to read the rest:
Social Sites Send Fewer, but More Loyal Visitors than Search