Related Posts
Please add “spuddle” task code to IntApp thx
Some Sunday truth!!!
Additional Posts in Social Media Strategy
Where's the lie?
Hi guys I’m an experienced web3 community moderator and a manager with 3 years of experience.
I handle all management and moderation need.
MESSAGE ME HERE 👇👇 I WILL HANDLE YOUR PROJECT FOR FREE ( first 2 people) AND TAKE IT TO THE MOON🚀🚀🔥🚀
Check out my GIG
https://www.fiverr.com/share/wqovYD
New to Fishbowl?
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
You’re a director and doing this? You should be having a conversation with your clients how that metric is not correlated with anything.
That's great because I wasn't answering you.
Facebook, Twitter etc can’t monetize engagement as easily as they can impressions so they do everything in their power to convince agencies (and brands) that there’s no ROI on engagement.
Media agencies do the same thing.
Doesn’t mean they’re right. Just means they’re doing what’s best for their bottom line.
It depends on the objective of your campaign. For instance, if it’s brand awareness which creatives are driving the highest ad recall at the lowest cost per ad recall? how long is your video and in which frame do you first see the brand name? (Hopefully first frame or within first 3s at a min.) vs. Is there clear branding in the static? If it’s traffic, what creative is driving the highest CTR at the lowest CPC? Does the headline tie back to the objective/CTA?
I think looking at these metrics are more important than general engagements.
Depends on what you classify as engagements. Typically FB/IG uses reactions, comments, saves, shares, link clicks and page likes as engagement.
Right, (likes + saves + comments + shares) / nb followers x100 is how we’re calculating the engagement rate. This is what matters the most for us. CTR is a different goal/team.
I’ve seen this done both ways, but the video ends up having an unfair slant either way. I try not to compare er from static vs video but compare videos against videos and statics against statics over time. Hope this helps!
I’d also look at reach for the video vs. image. Reach (brand awareness/lift) more correlated to business results than engagement rates, and IG has been preferring videos for reach in the algorithm recently. If you’re get 5 times the reach with video, keep doing it even if the engagement rate isn’t as good. If you don’t have any hard metrics like conversions or lift studies, this is at least something to go off of.
Higher engagement though usually comes with more reach.
Also, maybe look at it more holistically instead of one post vs the other because there’s so many variations and things that can happen with posts.
Views aren’t a key indicator. As others mentioned, engagement rate is an equalizer. (Likes, shares, comments, link clicks/ audience size). If you enable IG shopping, you can track one level deeper.
If you're really trying to compare the pure engagement rates between similar-ish static and video posts (say the text is the same and the static image is from the vid content) yes, keep the video views separate in your comparison.
If you're trying to decide which one is "better" that's a separate conversation.
Ohhh got it. Yeah classic question. More engagement but more work. You're definitely going to want to prioritize Reels and video this year despite the additional effort.
By Q4 you'll see and feel the ROI.
What information is available on the static image?
What were the user's eyes doing?
How many times did the user erase a comment and rewrite it?
What piece of content did they settle into, on or off platform, or connection did they engage to resolve/process.
We LOVES META and IG. If you are interested enough in accuracy to post here. We feel we should be honest enough to share. Maybe there isn't enough information being shared to answer certain things. And maybe that is a good thing.
If you can’t match it back to directional business results (on-site engagement, conversion) or brand lift it’s a bit useless.
How are you doing these comparisons?