via Social Bakers
According to a July 2012 survey from MyLife (USA), conducted by Harris Interactive, LinkedIn users don’t tend to share, they are just there to observe:
eMarketer explains these positions:
Facebook’s position on both lists is interesting, but makes sense in context of the study. MyLife asked users if they used the sites for observing or sharing—one or the other—while many Facebook users are typically on the site for both purposes. Additionally, the sheer number of people on Facebook means many are probably less interested in frequent sharing: Not everyone is a content creator.
The intended purposes of LinkedIn and foursquare also explain their top positions on the list. Most users go on LinkedIn to look at other users’ profiles and learn about their job experiences—observation. Some users do update their pages or post links, but the main purpose of the site is to be able to read and consume professional information about other people.
foursquare, on the other hand, is all about sharing users’ current location. Users rarely log on to simply browse where other people have checked in. More often, they are checking in themselves first, and then perhaps posting photos, looking around at what others are doing, or using the Explore tab to find new places to visit.
Facebook still holds a prominent place when it comes to how users share and consume content, but the MyLife data also shows that sites which fulfill a niche role may be more popular for specific social activities.
This slideshare pres came from a handy article from Econsultancy, which gives some stats on sharing in social media from a recent Facebook conference:
Brands & Sharing
Mork-Ulnes highlighted three stats around sharing branded content on Facebook:
Deals & Discounts
However the deal/discount statistic may be a bit of a red herring as Nokia’s Thomas Messett said at the same conference that giving away cheap products or discounts has no long-term benefit to the brand as people simply click ‘like’ to get something for free, therefore the engagement doesn’t actually mean anything.
That said, Mork-Ulnes provided data which indicates that fans exposed to brand content on Facebook buy more.
In tests, 2.12% of consumers that were exposed to ‘organic’ Starbucks branded content on Facebook made a purchase online or in-store compared to 1.54% who were no exposed to the content – a 38% difference.
A similar experiment using content from retailer Target found an 18% difference in favour of those who saw the content.
But not all products are necessarily impacted by social sharing – impulse buys that come at a lower cost and with minimum effort are apparently more suited to social recommendations.