社群英翻中(03)-〈FB未解之謎,「參與互動」跟「消費量」(ENGAGEMENT VS. CONSUMPTION: THE FACEBOOK DILEMMA)〉

毫無期待感的第三篇來惹(眼神死)

這次我們繼續努力鑽研這幾個莫名其妙神似的數字。

希望臉書大神能夠讓田木子頓悟(祈禱)

不過嚴格來說這篇都在針對數據做細部的分析,

是很重要的段落。

Looking at the Data

Let’s look back at how Facebook defines Consumptions in the data exports:

The number of clicks anywhere in your post. Clicks generating stories are included in “Other Clicks.”

The latter part is what we’re going to focus on for now:

Clicks generating stories are included in “Other Clicks”“.

Here’s what we find in the Consumptions tab:

↑↑ 表1.FB數據中的「其他點擊」

Now, let’s add the number of stories generated for each of those posts as a separate column and let’s make things visually clearer.

↑↑ 表2.作者把各數據上色圖表化
↑↑ 圖一.圖表化田木子還真的沒想過…..看來是文組的侷限呢

Here are a few observations that we can safely make:

  • Other stories‘ does not equate to post stories.
  • Post stories are just a percentage of Other Clicks (using the sample in the table and the graph above, post stories only constitute to between 10% and 30%).
  • Most Other Clicks are not interactions that generate stories (so no likes, comments and shares) or photo views or video views or click-throughs.

檢視數據

讓我們回頭看看FB在輸出數據中對於消費量的定義。

“點擊貼文任何地方所產生story的數量,包含「其他點擊」”

而「其他點擊」相關部分也是我們即將要聚焦之處。

以下是「文章消費量」的標籤

現在,我們把各數據加入不同的顏色做成圖表,讓他更好觀察
(參考表2、圖一)

這邊有幾處顯而易見的線索我們可以大膽的下結論:

  • 其他story(其他點擊)並不等同「post stories」
  • 「Post stories」只是「其他點擊」的比例部分(參照上面圖表,Post stories只有其他點擊的10%~30%)
  • 最多的「其他點擊」”不是”產生story的互動(所以沒有按讚、評論、分享)或是照片點擊或影片瀏覽、點擊率

※田木子補充:從這邊開始進入圖表的世界。

不過story不是單純的數值,而是一個比例的部分….

確實相當微妙。

第三項老實說田木子翻到有點狐疑,

「其他點擊不是產生story的互動」。

田木子是理解成「沒有顯現出來的行為(不會有story)都算在其他點擊,

所以數值特別高。」

So, the question is: now that we know that some of the Other Clicks are interactions that generate stories, what are the remaining ‘Other Clicks’?

The answer is not in the data export but in the new Facebook Insights (again).

When you open up a page post in the new Facebook Insights, you get this post view, with a breakdown of people reached and how people consumed your content:

↑↑ 表3.經營粉絲團的朋友,應該對這系統很熟吧?

You may have noticed an “i” after Other Clicks. Hovering over it you get this pop-up:

↑↑ 表4.有一個灰色的i區塊可以按

所以…問題是,

現在我們知道「其他點擊」中的某些部份是產生story的互動。

但是那些維持在「其他點擊」?

答案依舊不是在數據輸出,而是在新FB的洞察報告中(再次提醒)

當你打開FB的新洞察報告,你將看到資料頁面(參閱表3),

多少瀏覽者來、以及多少瀏覽者點閱你的內容。

你也許注意到「其他點擊」後面有個”i”,

滑鼠移過去後會有視窗彈出。(參閱表4)

So, besides clicks that generate stories, what makes up the Other Clicks are clicks not on the content of the post, such as page title clicks, or clicks to “see more”.

What does that mean?

These are the Other Clicks that are not on the actual post content but on the post layout. Look at the following Facebook post:

所以,除了產生story的點擊外,

所謂的「其他點擊」是指「並不是來自貼文內容的點擊,

如專業標題的點擊,或是點擊以「查看更多」。」

這代表甚麼意思呢?

這裡有著「其他點擊」,

以下內容並非真正的貼文內容,但是卻依照PO文的格式,

我們不妨看看。

※田木子補充:作者講得其實就是新版洞察報告

有在經營的應該會很熟悉吧?

接下來作者會用一篇實際PO文格式來分析

While you’re the one who controls the content that goes in the post layout, the actual framework/layout  is controlled by Facebook. Any clickable link within this framework makes up the rest of the Other Clicks. So, with the example above in mind, that includes (working our way from the bottom to the top):

當你手邊有一篇文章準備發出,最後決定者還是操之在FB,

任何框架中可點擊的連結通通被歸類於「其他點擊」。

所以,記住上述例子。並繼續徹底的探尋。

  • clicking on the date link (‘last Wednesday’ under the link preview), which takes you to the unique URL of the post
  • clicking on the number of likes, which gives you a list of people who have liked the post
  • clicking the number of comments, which gives you a list of people who have commented the post
  • clicking on the number of shares, which gives you a list of people who have shared the post
  • clicking on ‘see more’, which opens up the remaining texts (unless you’re on mobile, where tapping on ‘see more’ takes you to the actual post)
  • hovering over the top right corner you’ll see a ‘v‘ – clicking that gives you the options to hide the post, mark/report the post as spam, embed the post or follow the post
  • clicking in the comment box without actually commenting (commenting will turn that click into a story)
  • clicking on a user profile’s link
  • clicking on a link that’s part of a comment
  • clicking on the page title (clicking on ‘Treehouse’)
    • Bear in mind that when you hover over ‘Treehouse’ and you get the hovercard, clicking on any items on the hovercard is not part of consumption as it’s not a click on the original post.
↑↑作者的範例
  • 點擊日期連結(“上星期三”在連結預覽處) 會帶你到該PO文的專屬URL連結
  • 點擊按讚數字,這會跳出一個視窗,上面列舉了按讚者
  • 點擊評論,會跳出一個視窗,上面是評論的用戶跟內容
  • 點擊分享,會跳出一個視窗,上面列舉了分享者
  • 點擊「更多」,並打開該篇文章的下半部分(除非你用手機看,系統會帶你到真正的文章頁面)
  • 在文章頂端的右邊角落,你可以看到一個像V的箭頭,點擊後他會彈出視窗,上面有幾個選項…包含隱藏貼文、隱藏所有貼文、回報此篇文章為垃圾內容、標籤這篇文章或追蹤這篇文章
  • 點擊”沒有人回應”的留言區塊(如果有會生一個story)
  • 點擊使用者的資料連結
  • 點擊回應中的連結
  • 點擊文章中的頁面標題(像是圖中的Treehouse)
    記住,當游標停在Treehouse時,你會看到一張名片,點擊名片上面的任何項目,都不計入原始頁面的「文章消費量」。
↑↑點擊名片不算在該篇文章的消費量中(這點很重要呢)

Still, that doesn’t answer our last question:

If Consumers do much more than Engaged Users, why are there more Engaged Users than Consumers?

Let’s look at another post, this time from Simply Measured.

然而,這並沒有回答到我們的最大問題。

如果,如果「消費者(Consumers)

的數值確實多於「已互動用戶(Engaged Users)」,

為什麼「已互動用戶(Engaged Users)」比

消費者(Consumers)」多?

讓我們看看另一篇PO文,是從Simply Measured粉絲團來的。

↑↑作者舉粉絲團Simply Measured為例

Now, if I asked you “how many comments did this post get?”, what would you reply?

If you answered 5 then I take it you added Dorrit’s comment, Hotelsireland.com’s comment, and since there are 3 hidden replies, perhaps you added those 3.

Let’s take a look at another post, and this time let’s look at how Facebook answers that question too:

現在,如果我問你「這篇文章得到多少回應?」

你會怎麼回答呢?

如果你回答「5則」,我打賭你加入了Dorrit的回應、

Hotelsireland.com的回應,

加上有三則沒打開的回應,也許你加入了三則。

讓我們看看另一則PO文,

這次我們也要看看FB如何回答這個問題。

↑↑回應總共幾則,牽涉到FB的計算機制,是很有趣的問題

You can see 2 comments and since at the bottom you read “view 38 more comments” you’ll choose to add 38 to 2. But then you also see “3 replies” and “2 replies”. So is the answer 45?

Yet, if you look at the top, Facebook says this particular post received 38 likes and 40 comments. Facebook Insight confirms this:

你能看到2則評論,

以及在底端你能看到38位以上的評論。

你將會選擇38+2,但是你還看到3則回應以及2則回應,

所以答案是45?

然而,如果你看到回應最上方,

FB會說這則貼文收到38個讚以及40回應。

FB的洞察報告這樣定義:

↑↑上述例子,答案是”40″則評論

So, why are those replies not counted? Simple – because those are not comments. Those are not even ‘threaded comments’, though they’ve been unofficially labelled that way by most websites and marketers alike. Those are replies.

So, Facebook only counts comments, not the replies that they get. And it also looks like (dare I say) Facebook has forgotten to include replies as part of engagement in Facebook Insights. That’s a more obvious omission, but you may also notice that likes of comments and likes of replies are NOT included as part of engagement either.

所以,為什麼有些回應沒被計入?簡單來說-因為這些並不算評論,

這些並不算是「動態線中的評論」。

儘管許多網站、營銷者都標註了這種非官方的方式。這些是「回覆」。

所以,FB只計算了評論的數值。而非這些評論本身的回覆。

這看起來似乎是FB忘了在洞察數據

中列入「回覆」作為「參與互動」中的參數。

這裡有著更明顯的省略,不過你也許注意到…評論的讚、

以及回覆的讚都沒有被計入參與互動的數值中。

※田木子補充:

評論(comment)跟回覆(reply)的不同,

田木子以前都沒注意到。

所以如果只針對FB的計算方式而言,

用評論留言會比回覆更好,不過FB有沒有甚麼隱藏計算方式…

這就不得而知了,

很多粉絲團一天一篇根本不到五則留言的,那也不用擔心

到底是回覆還是評論好,乖乖衝人氣吧!!

This brings us to our conclusion – what we call engagement is not what Facebook calls engagement, and while consumers seem to do more than engaged users, engaged users actually do a LOT more, though unfortunately Facebook doesn’t currently provide that data.

I’ll explain:

Facebook looks at what you post and looks at two aspects of it: the consumption of the post and engagement of the content:

這帶給我們一個結論,我們稱之的「參與互動」

跟FB的「參與互動」並不一樣。

以及看起來「消費者」比「已互動用戶」多。

「已互動用戶」實際做得比想像更多,

雖然很不幸的FB並沒有提供相關數據。

我自己是這樣看…FB重視兩層面:

「你PO了甚麼、跟你看了甚麼」。

PO文的消費量跟內容的參與互動。

  • Consumption: how was the content you posted consumed?
    • Consumers consume the content that you publish, by clicking on any items on the actual post; these clicks, Consumption, may result in Stories, depending on what is clicked (video play versus post comment).
  • Engagement: how did users engage with your post?
    • Engaged Users engage with your content – some of them engage on your content, by clicking on items on the post (passive engagement) or  while others go within, performing actions such as posting a reply to spark conversations, while others just like a reply or a comment, or click to see more replies.

文章消費量:你PO出文章的內容被多少人「消費」,

消費者「消費」了你PO出的內容,

藉由點擊實際內容中任何選項,至於這些點擊(消費量),

是否會產生Story,取決於他們的點擊。
(視訊播放或是發表評論)

參與互動:用戶如何跟你的內容互動?

已參與用戶與你的內容互動-一些是跟你的內容產生共鳴

藉由點擊PO文章內的正向(負面互動),

或是點進其他選項,像是回應來延續對話,

或是按讚回覆、回應,點擊看更多回覆。

By adding another layer, Facebook is telling us how it looks at what you publish – it’s a post if you want to take a look at the quantitative side of things, and it’s content if you want to take a look at the qualitative side of things.

Perhaps this is why Facebook doesn’t give us the full number of all the engagement that goes on around your content, while giving us a full picture of how that post is being consumed. (More on breaking down your posts and content in another article…)

進一步而言,FB告訴我們…他們是如何看待你的貼文。

這是「貼文」,如果你想從數值方面來分析;

以及這是「內容」,如果你想從數值方面來分析。

或許這也是FB給我們文章如何被消費,但是不給參與互動

的詳細數字的原因。

(想要進一步分析你的PO文跟內容,那又是另一個主題了…)

※田木子補充:

這篇內容量比較多(因為大概把兩篇的份量加在一起)

從作者的分析來看,似乎是「參與互動」的數值

沒有完整列入….

總之,這整篇剩一個段落,明天就可以完成。

延伸閱讀:

社群英翻中(01)-〈FB未解之謎,「參與互動」跟「消費量」(ENGAGEMENT VS. CONSUMPTION: THE FACEBOOK DILEMMA)〉

社群英翻中(02)-〈FB未解之謎,「參與互動」跟「消費量」(ENGAGEMENT VS. CONSUMPTION: THE FACEBOOK DILEMMA)〉

作者

田木子

田木子-本是學界的小宅宅,就這樣踏入徵信社這一行,徵信社的悲歡離合,無一不讓田木子覺得新奇。目前不斷磨練自己的文案能力。希望未來能精準地用筆鋒拿捏人性中的微妙變化

發表迴響

你的電子郵件位址並不會被公開。