Week 3 blog topic #2: Comparing apples to oranges -- what’s your favorite fruit?

(Kim, 2012)

In a sense, comparing Google AdWords to Facebook Ads is a bit like comparing apples to oranges; yet, both platforms seem to have a similar goal of becoming some sort of hybrid apple-orange that is everyone’s favorite choice of fruit.

Both AdWords and Facebook Ads offer fairly simple and straightforward platforms to create an advertising campaign for one’s business, website, or blog. AdWords does not require a minimum budget but a $5.00 activation fee is charged. Facebook Ads’ minimum requirement is $1.00 but does not charge an activation fee. The search results will both contain information like title, two lines of description, web address, and key words relevant to one’s campaign. Furthermore, Facebook’s ad placement of Sponsored Results relating to organic search queries is similar to Google’s approach (Constine, 2012).

The useful infographic (left) “grades” AdWords and Facebook on various features:

In my eyes, Google is primarily a search engine with social tools like “Google +, Gmail, Google chat, Picasa Web albums, etc.” (PI Reed, 2013) with 96 per cent of its revenue coming from advertising (Kim, 2012). Similarly, I consider Facebook primarily a social channel with advertising and integrated search tool options. However, Facebook does receive 86 per cent of its revenue from advertising, which shows its Sponsored Ad results are working well for the organization (Kim, 2012). While both platforms offer advantageous advertising options, elements of segmentation, reach and Click-Through Rates (CTR) are discussed below.

While Google has a highly sophisticated, highly refined ecosystem (PI Reed, 2013) that allows for extensive segmenting and targeting, the search engine will only display ads relevant to a user’s organic search terms. Facebook, on the other hand, allows advertisers to segment and target users with a number of filters like age, sex, likes/interests (religion, hobbies, jobs), relationships, language, education, companies, connections, friends of connections, application authorizations, and even targeting users on their birthdays. This filtering option is “one of the most powerful parts of Facebook advertising” (Facebooktutorial, 2010) that is not currently offered by AdWords.

This element of control allows advertisers to communicate with relevant segments and also towards segments that may be relevant in the future – all without an algorithm’s input. While having control over whom see what is powerful, Facebook’s search results will only direct users to pages on-site vs. off-site to the advertiser’s own domain (Constine, 2012), which may not be as beneficial for an advertiser seeking such traffic.

According to Kim (2012), the average CTR of an ad on the Google Display Network is .4%, almost ten times as high as a Facebook ad. The CTR for Facebook ads in 2010 was 0.051%, dropping from 0.064% in 2010, pointing to a downward trend. With 180 billion ad impressions served up by Google each month, advertisers can expect a 90 per cent reach of all Internet users compared to one trillion page views per month on Facebook, resulting in a 51 per cent reach of all Internet users (Kim, 2012).

Shifting focus, one option Facebook offers users is the choice to 'hide the ad', which pops up a question about whether someone hid it because it was ‘Uninteresting, Misleading, Offensive, Repetitive’ or one of a few more options” (Constine, 2012). This information could be beneficial for advertisers in tailoring messages for future campaigns.

Despite the differences and advantages of both platforms, Facebook Sponsored Results may still be a lot less helpful to advertisers than those that show up on Google Search due to the specificity of user searches on either platform.

Constine (2012) states, “when people search for an entity on Facebook, they’re typically looking for something very specific, such as a particular game or business, and might be more likely to bypass ads. People don’t usually search for ‘camera’ on Facebook and certainly not ‘where to buy a camera?’ Meanwhile on Google those are common queries from budding photographers looking to purchase new equipment. That means ads that could persuade them to choose a certain camera brand can command a high price for Google and sweet, sweet ROI for businesses” (Constine, 2012).

When comparing Google AdWords to Facebook advertising options, the clear winner in terms of reach, at least for now, is Google AdWords. It seems that to Internet advertisers at large, Google provides more opportunities for advertisement visibility and Click-Through Rates; however, Facebook offers greater tailoring capabilities to reach segments that Google algorithmically filters out.

References

Constine, J. (2012, August 22). Facebook officially launches “sponsored results” search ads. Tech Crunch. Retrieved February 3, 2013 from http://techcrunch.com/2012/08/22/facebook-search-ads/

Facebooktutorial. (2010, April 5). Facebook tutorial: How to advertise of Facebook [video file]. Retrieved February 2, 2013 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jOBDIql4y

GoogleBusiness. (2009, June 15). Getting started with Google AdWords [video file]. Retrieved February 3, 2013 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tx2L6EGa9DY

PI Reed School of Journalism. (2013). Lesson 3: Social media analytics and advertising channels. Retrieved February 2, 2013 from ecampus.wvu.edu