Have you ever wondered what compels people to share content on their social networks? Two social accounts cross in the night, and a re-tweet or Like is born – why is that?
Facebook insists it has the answer: write better content. Be succinct, use photos, on and on down the list of cliched suggestions that have peppered many a blog post. But if I ask my audience a question and hear crickets, why didn’t anyone engage or share my post?
It’s complicated.
A Harvard marketing professor named Thales Texeira has done some recent studies of content virality and sharing. His findings are pretty illuminating.
In his research on viral advertising videos, he found that a very small percentage of advertising videos (0.1%) actually go “viral.”
What this means is that professional advertisers have a one in one thousand chance of going viral and that percentage is static. In other words, the bandwidth for content consumption is fixed.
Universal McCann’s Wave 6 social media study seems to substantiate that claim for written digital content as well, showing that blog creation and consumption may have peaked in 2010.
When it comes to what compels us to share video ads, Texeira asserts that the best ads begin with an element of humor, then takes it away, and reintroduces it near the end. While drawing a conclusion about blog content sharing based upon video sharing would be a stretch, it does substantiate that consumers of digital content need variety in order to stay engaged with a piece of content. Sufficed to say that as dry as I write, I probably won’t be going viral anytime soon.
Why we share.
Texeira concludes that the vast majority of sharing is done with selfish motives. That sounds worse than it is. Sharing makes people feel a sense of prestige that they’re associated with something funny or informative.
What they won’t share is something shocking. Take the GoDaddy commercial from the Super Bowl where supermodel Bar Rafaeli passionately kisses a homely looking fellow. Texeira would argue that shocking humor like that under normal circumstances would not go viral. Incidentally, it was the worst reviewed ad of the Super Bowl.
They also won’t share anything religious, political, racial, or gender-specific. In doing a postmortem of sharing and traffic on my site for the last half of 2012, posts that referred to the U.S. Presidential campaign had 30% less shares than posts on other topics. This was despite the fact that my critiques were apolitical.
A recent study by the University of Edinburgh determined that users with high numbers of “friends” were distressed about Facebook for fear of offending one of their social groups by appeasing another. That distress probably keeps users risk-averse when it comes to provocative content.
Texeira’s work confirms that there isn’t a silver bullet for content virality. But if you can find a way to make your content reflect well on other people, they’d probably share your stuff more often.
Image: Joseph Swan via Flickr, CC 2.0
[…] about content virality seems to have increased lately. There are some good points in it, although the research of Thales Texeira is more precise about the bandwidth for viral content (it appears to be fixed) as well as the […]
[…] What Compels People to Share Your Content? (waxingunlyrical.com) […]
[…] The image went viral. […]
[…] from Harvard Professor Thales Texiera’s research on viral videos: we share content with selfish motivations. This isn’t sinister by any means, we just publish things that will keep us in the best […]
[…] don’t share things that reflect their specific circumstances. People share things that reflect well upon them in their social circles. It’s why someone with an enlarged prostrate is going to be far […]
[…] Facebook Likes, Foursquare Check-Ins, and +1s are probably more representative of how we want to be perceived by others. Finding predictive patterns in social content is likely an emerging study. While social […]
@leaderswest great stuff here. I always have wondered what makes some things more readily shared
@mssackstein Thanks. As you saw this weekend – distribution is key so long as the content is strong.
@leaderswest distribution seems to be everything. I’m learning how to work that aspect. Confident in my content :-)
@mssackstein As well you should be. You know USA Today has an education section, HuffPo, I would imagine even Mashable have opportunities.
@mssackstein .. just remember me when you’re famous.
@leaderswest I had no idea. Lol my head is usually trapped under a pile of essay and articles from students of varying talents. It has been
@leaderswest amazing how I have carved so much time to write recently.Helps me teach better. Practice what I preach. won’t forget. Never do
@opedmarketing @jenniferherndon @denisewakeman @martinamcgowan Many thanks for sharing @leaderswest #WUL post
You are welcome @shonali, very useful article.
@denisewakeman Thanks so much Denise!
That article are so good and informative like that are increase the rank of your site They also won’t reveal whatever religious, political, racial, or maybe
gender-specific. Within carrying out a postmortem connected with giving in
addition to targeted traffic about my website for any continue fifty percent
connected with 2012, threads which referred to that Oughout. Azines.
Presidential campaign experienced 30% a reduced amount of stocks compared to
threads about additional matters. I thought this was although my opinions were
being apolitical.
Thanks…………………………….///
<br><a href=”http://www.superioreducationz.com/”>Education Information</a>
[…] has about thirty times more user affinity than self-centered content. This confirms some of the data that researchers have already found about sharing. They also said that the size of a network […]
@bwjewelrysupply @mmangen @shonali kittens and sacharin cute?
@kmueller62 @shashib @profkrg @mjgottlieb @mmangen Many thanks for sharing @leaderswest terrific guest #WUL post!
@profkrg @shonali I wonder all the time first how to get traffic to my site then how to get it out there http://t.co/3LGpMeegh1
@mssackstein What do you mean, get it out there? @profkrg
@shonali @profkrg how to get readers to share my material
@mssackstein Well, do you have a community built up around the blog? That’s a large part of it. @profkrg
@shonali @profkrg I’m working on it. That’s what I’ve been using Twitter for, to drive traffic to it, and develop a community. FB page too
@mssackstein @shonali We’ve followed each other for awhile. I’m sad to say that I missed your blog. It looks fabulous. Don’t be subtle!
@mssackstein @shonali I get a lot more traffic from Twitter than Facebook, but you have to know your audience. Are you on @Triberr?
@profkrg @shonali Thanks Kenna. I’m working on being more comfortable with self promotion. I’m also becoming more comfortable with blogging
@mssackstein @shonali aren’t we all? But, if you don’t do it, who will?
@profkrg @shonali @Triberr a little green.Don’t even know what that is. Will check it out. I started with FB, but fell in love with Twitter
@profkrg @shonali I think that is what has shaken my reticence. I think I can help people, so I’ve become more vocal. I’m an eager learner
@profkrg True. There is an art to it, though. Not everyone is a good community builder and/or manager. @mssackstein
@shonali @profkrg yes, I know it takes practice. I’ve been watching people who seem to be good at it and trying new things.Listening
@mssackstein It does. Can you follow me, please, btw? I was trying to DM you and couldn’t. @profkrg
@shonali @profkrg done and done! just followed you.
@profkrg “Don’t be subtle” is my new mantra…. @mssackstein @shonali
@mssackstein Thanks. Just DMd you. :)
@mssackstein @shonali @profkrg you need to follow me too, now, cause it wouldn’t let me DM you back
@mssackstein I did!
@shonali thanks
@leaderswest Another great article Jim
@LaceyLuxx Thanks Oly! Loved your piece on the Harlem Shake. It does seem everyone’s gone a bit mad…
Great article! Thank you! “@leaderswest: Why People Share Your Content. http://t.co/0383MMk1EE”
@LaurelJMintz Thanks Laurel. I sent you an email…
RT @Frank_Strong: What Compels People to Share Your Content? http://t.co/FT0WU2hHWX via @leaderswest
@JasMollica a never ending question, no?
@Frank_Strong it sure is. I’m often asking myself the same thing.
I just shared this, so you’re one stranger closer to going viral.
Kristen Hicks Well now we know each other and I appreciate your note!
Interesting post. We have all heard, “we don’t see things as they are, we see them as we are. ” I think @Shonali has made a great point. Everything is ego driven whether that is considered negative or positive.
ariana fernandez I have heard that 96.5% of the time you can’t go wrong agreeing with @Shonali, but I don’t recall the source of that research… :D Thanks for reading and for your comment!
Someone forwarded around your post at work. I disagree. Your conclusions are in contrast to Chris Anderson and Seth Godin’s work (Long Tail, Tribes etc etc).
The internet is the death knoll for mass marketing, which is really what your talking about. When you communicate with the masses it’s got be shallow cause you’re bound to offend someone and when you’re doing it on behalf of a coroporation you afraid someone will take a negative slant on your message. But that’s really a function that mass marketing is dead.
Now it’s all about building community amongst tribes. If you want to market your product / message whatever you need to tailor it to the tribes you’re interacting with. Within tribes virility changes based on the values and behaviours of the tribe. In the tribes I’m part of religious, gender, politics is discussed all the time.
Join a vibrant community and you’ll come to different conclusions.
@waterloobikes I’ve read all of Chris Anderson and Seth Godin’s books and I don’t think the conclusions of this research are incongruent. What I’m discussing is virility in a general sense. Sure, if you’re an active part of a community with similar interests you may share more within the community at the expense of sharing somewhere else – but you also won’t share content that isn’t acceptable within that community. And you may be able to talk politics and religion within a certain group but the likelihood that your conversation will significantly grow from your tribe is low. I don’t mean this disrespectfully at all, but “The internet is the death knoll for mass marketing” is a platitude with no basis in reality. There’s good evidence that Dunbar’s number is valid for social ties as well, so common interest in a “tribe” is much different than your capability to influence that tribe. Just because you are one of thousands doesn’t mean that you have the capability to influence them. What social networks have given mass marketers a capability to do is to segment better, but saying that mass marketing is dead is like saying that an Etsy store and a mass-manufactured jeweler have an equal playing field. They do not. When Chris Anderson described the long tail of the internet, his point was that it made niche things accessible and not that it was going to make niche products mainstream. Some people like to share anecdotal stories of individual success to controvert evidence-based findings and to tell people to “join a vibrant community,” and from my point of view that is fine so long as it isn’t intended to advise others on a course of action. For me, research and data are important, but I respect your experience and appreciate your comment!
@waterloobikes I’ve read all of Chris Anderson and Seth Godin’s books and I don’t think the conclusions of this research are incongruent. What I’m discussing is virality in a general sense. Sure, if you’re an active part of a community with similar interests you may share more within the community at the expense of sharing somewhere else – but you also won’t share content that isn’t acceptable within that community. And you may be able to talk politics and religion within a certain group but the likelihood that your conversation will significantly grow from your tribe is low. I don’t mean this disrespectfully at all, but “The internet is the death knoll for mass marketing” is a platitude with no basis in reality. There’s good evidence that Dunbar’s number is valid for social ties as well, so common interest in a “tribe” is much different than your capability to influence that tribe. Just because you are one of thousands doesn’t mean that you have the capability to influence them. What social networks have given mass marketers a capability to do is to segment better, but saying that mass marketing is dead is like saying that an Etsy store and a mass-manufactured jeweler have an equal playing field. They do not. When Chris Anderson described the long tail of the internet, his point was that it made niche things accessible and not that it was going to make niche products mainstream. Some people like to share anecdotal stories of individual success to controvert evidence-based findings and to tell people to “join a vibrant community,” and from my point of view that is fine so long as it isn’t intended to advise others on a course of action. For me, research and data are important, but I respect your experience and appreciate your comment! (post-script, I reposted this comment after noticing I wrote virility instead of virality, which of course is an entirely different post)
leaderswest Any reasons you didn’t include these points of view within your original post? What I read above is much more involved that the platitudes in your post above.
http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2008/10/watching-market.html
http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2004/04/the_end_of_mass.html
http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2011/09/we-are-all-weird.html
http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2010/01/what-every-marketer-needs-to-learn-from-groucho-marx.html
http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2010/04/the-coming-meltdown-in-higher-education-as-seen-by-a-marketer.html
…… how much of seth have you read?
leaderswest
Ok my previous posts were a little snarky. When I saw this title here’s what I was expecting.
* How to build community
* Steps to reducing barriers to sharing within the community
* Tips on how to spot those barriers
* Strategies on how to nuture the 99-9-1 rule. 99 lurkers, 9 commenters, 1 content creator, progressing the community through the various stages of engagement
* Tips on identifying community values
etc, etc
@waterloobikes No worries about snark and I appreciate you taking the time to share find and post those articles. There are many different opinions and I respect yours, but I’ll also point out to that I run a site that had 100K visitors last year and will likely have a quarter of a million this year, so while my observations are limited to that (relatively small) audience I don’t consider them platitudes (A platitude is a trite, meaningless, biased, or prosaic statement often presented as if it were significant and original). Again, no hard feelings here and hope you don’t feel that I diminished your point of view.
@waterloobikes Chris, about your expectations for this post: My opinion (influenced by different research) is that you have to pay to build a community, pay to reduce barriers, you must understand Facebook’s EdgeRank and Twitter filtering as the standard for social monetization, build an email list as fast as you possibly can to diminish those costs, understand that 99-9-1 is probably more like 85% of the community didn’t see a post because the social network didn’t show it to them, 14% may have seen it and taken no action, and less that 1% took some action. I don’t really know off the top of my head of any research on community values. The biggest takeaway that I can offer for a business of your size would be the importance of an email list – it is opened more often, and is the most effective digital means of getting repeat business (incidentally AdWords is one of the most effective means to get new business). If any of that is helpful or if I can provide you more detail about any of that, contact me off site and I’m happy to share what I can.
I think human beings are by nature selfish beings. However – I don’t know if this is necessarily a bad thing, because the word “selfish” has such a negative connotation. I started thinking about it as I got to know some people who volunteer like crazy. They will either volunteer with a gazillion charities, or serve on the boards of several professional development organizations – and all this entails real, physical, time. I would look at them and wonder why they did this, because after a point, the law of diminishing returns has to come into play.
I think people who behave like this do so because it makes them feel good. Not because they have an overwhelming desire to support their local cancer charity AND dog rescue AND heart charity AND women’s shelter AND… (I’m using examples here), but because in doing so, others are likely to commend them on their generosity of spirit and, therefore, they feel good. So ultimately, they’re doing it to make themselves feel good. Along the way, they are probably helping these charities out a great deal as well. But the primary motivation is not altruistic.
I think it’s a similar story in socnets. Depending on what you share, the kinds of accolades you get make you feel like a “rock star” or “super star” or whatever kind of star you want to call it. And that funnels more of the same.
Great post, Jim!
Shonali I think altruistic and selfish don’t have to be mutually exclusive in this sense, although they sound like opposites.
I don’t think doing something good for someone else counts for less if it feels good. Long term friendships, professional networking and online communities all depend on the back and forth of getting and giving (e.g. selfishness and generosity).
Kristen Hicks I completely agree. That’s why I feel bad for the word “selfish,” because so often, what is called “selfish” really isn’t.
Shonali Agreed. There should be a better word for this kind of selfishness. If I spent more time studying for the fifth grade spelling bee I might be able to suggest one!
leaderswest Hah!
@howiegoldfarb @sandrasays @contentsthlm @brennermichael @theprverdict @neicolec TY for sharing @leaderswest guest #WUL post!
@istratbuzz @jamiecrager @kathikruse @amymcctobin @kdillabough @jennimacdonald @patmrhoads @wittlake TY for sharing @leaderswest #WUL post!
@shonali good stuff. Sorry I didn’t realize it was from @leaderswest in my comment!
@wittlake No worries! Any comparison to the great @shonali is quite flattering!
@leaderswest Yea, right – your writing is SO good, it gives me a complex. @wittlake No worries!
@leaderswest Btw, how do you adjust the Triberr links so that they include the handle of the guest blogger (when it’s their post)?
@shonali in “My Posts” in the right hand corner of each post there is an edit button for the title.
@shonali Aw shucks! @wittlake
@leaderswest Oh!! Thank you, I always feel terrible when my GPs don’t get credit & now I know how to fix it. You’re awesome!
@shonali You’re welcome!
@seocopy @seanmcginnis @jamesongbrown @prosperitygal @arkarthick @janemckaycomms TY for sharing @leaderswest guest #WUL post!
@shonali You’re very welcome! @leaderswest
@shonali @SEOcopy @seanmcginnis @prosperitygal @arkarthick @janemckaycomms @leaderswest Nice! Solid piece.
@SEOcopy No less than $10
A good look into virality RT @AmyMccTobin: What Compels People to Share Your Content? http://t.co/QsBhy8ln3e via @shonali
@AmyMccTobin @shonali great read! Very helpful actually. Thanks for sharing.
@spinsucks Thanks Yvette! I love that picture of you – it makes me happy whenever I see it!
@patmrhoads thanks for the RT! Was a great article on @shonali’s blog, had to share!
@jennimacdonald Thanks Jenni – appreciate the support from one former Seattleite to another!
This is great leaderswest I blogged that no one watches advertising on You Tube. Every week I forget if Adweek or Ad Age does the top 10 viral ads. Well think of how many ads are showing each week. And Number 1 will have 1-2mil views. Number 10 like 250,000. Which means no one watches ads on You Tube.
Also very little content gets shared. If I post 0.01% of my day. And I share 0.01% of the content I see. That means zero. Topics go viral. It is the very rare and unique and unrepeatable item that goes viral.
2 summers ago my friend who do the Adverve podcast had the guy who’s firm did the levi’s men walking video. He said on 124 videos they did for clients all met the goal that they said they could get for views. But only 7 went viral.
I even question Youtube. If I go to the home page and see what is trending….and watch a video does that really mean it is viral or that it is the platform vs the content? Because then I can say a TV show with 10 million viewers tonight is viral?
So glad you blog here Jim!
Thanks HowieG – this is one of those social media topics where people have very different expectations than capabilities. A social media lottery of sorts! :D Thanks for the great comment and for your nice words.
HowieG I am really glad Jim blogs here too! leaderswest
Shonali, definitely an interesting view (and a refreshing departure from all of the “add an image!” recommendations out there).
I wonder, on the 0.1% comment, if the % is fixed, or if the amount of content that can really go viral, in terms of the attention it get and requires from each person, is what is fixed? ie If 10 times as much content is created, will that actually drop to 0.01%?
I suspect the chance of “going viral” drops each and every year. Would love to hear what others think of that.
Wittlake Thanks Eric, I tried to follow the same line of thought as you did. My expectation is that in aggregate behavior would scale more or less. Bear in mind that the research I pointed out was of advertising content only. However, I assume sharing behavior is agnostic of message and would remain static as well. I suspect YouTube is probably mature enough as a platform that something seismic would have to happen to increase time on site or sharing behavior – so my best guess is that the percentage of content that goes viral. But my best guess and five bucks might get you a bacon topped maple bar at Voodoo Donuts….
Excellent question. Part of the answer lies in ‘influence’ but I’ll skip that for now. Sometimes it’s a favor for friends, sometimes it’s calculated – part of that wanting to look good by sharing good content. Funny is big – that was mentioned at last week’s Solo PR Summit, that humor goes a long way in making things make the rounds on the social web. To that I’ll add uniqueness – once your content is found by the ‘right’ people w/ enough reach – if it’s a fresh take, a different bit of humor or impact, that’ll certainly go further than the ho hum ‘yet another list’ post. FWIW.
3HatsComm Thanks Davina, I think that viewpoint is worth a lot. Everyone may not be able to go “viral” but they can at least maximize the impact of their message for their audience. Great comment – thank you!
“@SandraSays: What Compels People to Share Your Content? http://t.co/k49qGVwKSg
@lyndelleg @SandraSays gd Question! if it’s funny, thoughtprovoking, challenging, comforting or a great pic, I share the tweet; like this!
@bdorman264 Definitely, when it comes to yours. ;) Thanks for sharing, pal!
@erinmfeldman @margieclayman @tressalynne @oschmouker @cmicontent @andreamyoung @lisapetrilli Thanks for sharing @leaderswest#WUL post!
Key takeaway: trigger selfish motives. “@StoryWorldwide: What Compels People to Share Your Content? http://t.co/CpFd2XlFpL via @leaderswest”