Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
What is the value of having a social media feed displayed on your website?
-
This is something I asked myself this evening. You see a lot of sites with a Facebook or Twitter feed displayed, but I struggle to understand their value.
OK, it shows that you are active on this or that social media channel, but unless you are posting great content consistently on the social media displayed, the impact of your feed could detract from the web page it is displayed on. It could also cause a visitor to that page on your site to click away from your site into the noise and distraction of that social media channel.
I don't have an issue with using social media icons to link to your channels, but they are more discreet and the sort of thing people will look for if they are interested enough in your web pages to want to connect with you. Also, social sharing icons are good, but I do not see the value in social media feeds.
Do you agree or disagree? I am more than will to be persuaded otherwise.
Thanks in advance,
Peter -
Thanks everyone for your feedback. Much appreciated. Glad I am not the only one who doubts the value of this tactic,
Peter
-
As someone who helps a lot of clients with Social Media, Peter, I'm going to agree with you wholeheartedly.
Specifically as relates to a SM feed widget, they can be a disaster! Their coding and external API calls can slow down page rendering horrifically, they create significant clutter, and as you point out, they server to pull hard-won visitors away from your site where you had a chance to convert them. (And that's assuming you have consistently valuable feed content in the first place.)
The one time I've found them effective is if they are placed on specific pages the sole purpose of which is generating SM engagement i.e. NOT in the sidebar of every page.
Social media engagement can definitely be used to help build a reputation or to drive more effective customer service. But far too many folks are just "doing it because they can" without actually building a strategic plan for how the work will benefit them, and measuring and adjusting to know whether it's actually working.
Paul
-
lol... glad you like it.
I am still waiting for the social evangelists to tell me why I am wrong.
-
Love the whole "like spending money on jewelery" analogy! Especially the part about not spending on it when your roof's leakin' or your fridge is empty. So gonna steal that
Paul
-
You see a lot of sites with a Facebook or Twitter feed displayed, but I struggle to understand their value.
Same here.
OK, it shows that you are active on this or that social media channel, but unless you are posting great content consistently on the social media displayed, the impact of your feed could detract from the web page it is displayed on.
Yep.
And, instead of building value on Zuck's site you could have spent all of that time building value on your own site.
It could also cause a visitor to that page on your site to click away from your site into the noise and distraction of that social media channel.
Yep. I would rather give that space to a nice-size Adsense unit. Then if somebody leaves my site I am gonna be paid.
I don't have an issue with using social media icons to link to your channels, but they are more discreet and the sort of thing people will look for if they are interested enough in your web pages to want to connect with you.
I am not looking to "connect" with anybody.
Also, social sharing icons are good, but I do not see the value in social media feeds.
I agree. If somebody wants to share, I am fine with that. If you have great content and people who share it then that can be like tossing gasoline on a fire. I am trying to set my own site on fire and not try to build one on social media. One good fire is all I can handle.
Do you agree or disagree?
I agree. Completely.
But, lots of people enjoy "connecting" and "sharing" and interacting with people. If you enjoy it, do it.
I enjoy creating content for my websites... for a break I post on SEO forums. I am not posting about my niche on social sites because I don't enjoy it and I really don't want to interact with people. There is always someone there who is trying to use me.
On SEO forums I answer what I want, when I want, there's no obligation. People don't try to use me. I learn a few things and use what I learn to make money on my website. When I ask a question here, some awesome people help me. So, I get back what I put in.
I am more than will to be persuaded otherwise.
I think that it is a pretty safe bet that a social evangelist will try to persuade you.
Bottom line... I think that social sites are like spending money on jewelry. Buy it if you like it, spend an amount that buys what makes you happy.... but don't dare consider it as an investment and don't buy jewelry when your roof is leakin' or your fridge is empty. It's OK to make vanity purchases if that makes you happy... sometimes you can sell something back for a little less than what you paid for it but the market for "used jewelry" is never good.
Finally... I want to hear from anybody anywhere who is making a good return on social media posting. Tell the truth. I don't see the big important sites allowing their traffic to be siphoned off to social. Do you see bigass feeds on amazon, CNN, huffpost or NYT. I think that they are focused on makin' money, not on getting social.
So, I think that people who can make a lot of money posting on social rare, and if they have done good accounting and record keeping to prove their profits they should be held right up there with the Pope.
-
I've seen so many sites with blogs and social media accounts which are hardly ever updated e.g. blog posts that are more than 6 months old. It really makes you think they don't look like they could be bothered. I think seeing that a company is active on social media etc gives the impression that they are active and therefore makes your site look more up to date. I therefore don't think it's just the content quality that's relevant.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Google Indexed Images: Website Vs Social Media
I use Pinterest, Twitter and Instagram to post images that are already featured on my website. I have been following a routine of uploading the images to these social media platforms only after I can see Google has indexed the image from my original site. My website is ecommerce and the product images drive sales more than any other factor. The thinking behind my method was that when these images are posted on Pinterest, Twitter and the various Instagram crawler sites (I realise Instagram images aren’t indexed directly), Google would recognise that the image was already attributed to my website. The ‘duplicate’ image would not therefore be indexed and the originally uploaded website image would remain in ‘Google Images’. After completing various searches and reviewing other Q&A’s on Moz, it seems as though this is in no way guaranteed and images reposted on social media platforms may still replace the already indexed image from the website. I am assuming this is because Google views these platforms as more authoritative than mine. I usually change the image by adding logos, text, backgrounds, borders etc before posting on Pinterest and this seems to have worked most of the time (both the original and ‘amended for Pinterest’ versions are often indexed) but images posted on other platforms are usually identical. Does it make sense to continue with my method or am I shooting myself in the foot by reposting these images on social media at all? I obviously want customers searching for products, who then click on an image, to be directed to my site rather than one of my social media pages or worse, an image reposting site. Additionally, If I post images on social media before they are uploaded to my website (for example to tease a product launch), would Google likely class these images as the ‘original’ and therefore be less likely to index the website version of the image once it is uploaded? Any thoughts are appreciated.
Social Media | | g3mmab2 -
Top tweet and top media tweet
Hi, Twitter says: Top Tweet: Tweet that received the highest number of impressions Top media Tweet: Tweet with photo, video, or Vine that received the highest number of impressions It's impressions that count and the only difference is whether or not media is attached. If my top tweet for a month has the most impressions but no media it is the top tweet. Another tweet that has media is then the top media tweet. That makes sense and I've seen it in my Twitter analytics. I'm confused when my top tweet is one with media but it is somehow not also showing as the top media tweet. Surely it should be? how can another tweet with media and a lower impressions count be the top media tweet when the top tweet is one with media and a higher impressions count. Thanks
Social Media | | Houses0 -
Links to Social Media accounts, rel=nofollow/follow and rel=me
Hi guys, I just saw this rel="me" attribute and I can't find any reputable recent (within last year) information. I never heard of this and wonder if it's any beneficial in any way. At the same time, should I use nofollow or follow on links from website to social accounts? I've heard different opinions but, again, no recent relevant and trustworthy information. Please, kick me into right direction. However, when kicking, please give me some proof, rather than thoughts 🙂 Thanks!
Social Media | | DmitriiK0 -
How relevant is social bookmarking for SEO today?
I've been doing SEO for a little over 4 years. I've never used sites like Digg, Stumbleupon, Reddit, etc. either personally or on behalf of my clients. This past week I had a discussion with another SEO who asked what I'm doing for my clients with regard to social bookmarking. I responded that I'm really not doing anything and they were shocked. I took a pretty good verbal beating over it. She was borderline offended. I have always been able to deliver solid results for my clients without any type of social bookmarking, so I struggle to see the need, but am surprised at how shocked this other SEO was that I don't do it. How beneficial is it and am I really missing out?
Social Media | | garrettkite0 -
Hootsuite Vs Sprout Social for social media management
Can you please tell me if hoot suite or sprout social is a better option when it comes ot managing social media? Corn
Social Media | | netlover0 -
Social media marketing strategy for an ERP company?
Hello Everybody, We are an ERP company and want to get into social media marketing. We have decided to use Google+ over Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and LinkedIn. Any ideas what we can do besides regular updates and getting our clients link to us? Regards
Social Media | | IM_Learner0 -
Does social bookmarking still work? If so can anyone recommend a tool
Hello everything, I'm trying to find a tool I can use for my domain : www.van-plus.com to get it socially bookmarked? Can anyone recommend anything? Thanks in advance!
Social Media | | vanplus0 -
How effective is RSS feeds submission, links from Blog Directories?
I am wondering how effective rss feed submission (to RSS aggregators) is in terms of getting traffic and backlinks? Also, how about getting listed in blog directories? Do these tactics work anymore post Panda update ? Thanks, Supriya.
Social Media | | Amjath0