ADVERTISING ON SOCIAL NETWORKS

By
John Kwag

GLA 612 Research and Writing for Masters Thesis

Alexandra Rollo
December 9, 2013

Autobiography
My life is one which has been about crossing borders from the beginning. I was born in
Korea in 1977 and moved to the United States at the tender age of one. This ping pong journey
between Korea and the US continued with elementary school in California and Massachusetts
and high school at Seoul International School in Korea. Even my higher education was not
exempt from a trip across the oceans. I started my undergraduate studies at Bates College in
Maine and finished by graduating with a BA in English Literature from Sogang University in
Korea after a stint in the Korean military.
My life is also one that has always been surrounded by the IT industry. My father was a
VAX mainframe engineer with Digital Equipment Corporation and later Director of R&D at
Samsung Electronics. Through him, I had my first exposure to Infocom text adventure games
and online MUDs (early text-only virtual communities) on ARPANET, the earliest incarnation
of the Internet. Through the years as I went back and forth across the planet, games and online
community were my two strongest constants.
My love for games and understanding of the logic and frameworks that underlie them
led to a career in the games industry. In 2005, I started as a Game Manager on the game Silkroad
Online at Joymax. From 2007 to 2009, I worked as a Publishing Producer on the games, APB
and Firefall, at Webzen. I became Project/Sourcing Lead at OGPlanet in 2009 and finally cofounded a social games startup Second Wave Games in 2010 as project manager on the game,
Princess Academy. Throughout this time, I learned how games worked as a business and how
game businesses worked with each other.
In between these game positions, I followed my passion for online communities with a
Global Team Lead position at Freechal ( a Korean social network) in 2007 and Touchring (a

social Skype-like service) from 2010 to 2011. I was, from 2012 to 2013, a founding team
member at a Silicon Valley startup: KarFarm (LendingTree for cars), and have been a Business
Development and Growth consultant since 2011 at a Korean startup: ChannelBreeze (they
provide the service, Jikbang, a Korean online rental apartment marketplace). In this part of my
career, I gained a perspective of how social communities work online and how businesses arise
from them.
My life and career has been about bridging gaps; whether they are geographical,
cultural, technological, or industry-based. After having only been on the business and production
side of the tech and games industry, I am working on a Game Design MFA at Academy of Art
University in order to bridge the gap that I found in myself between the technical and the
creative. I am now spurred on by the need to understand how to be creative and to actually make,
design and imagine games and online communities instead of simply oversee the production and
the business of them.
In the same ways that my life has been an exercise in the closing of the gaps in culture,
business and technology; I hope to learn the skills to converge all my passions and experience in
games, e-commerce and social networks into cohesive works that function with the best elements
of each industry.

Abstract
This purpose of this paper was to evaluate both the perception of social advertising in
relation to privacy concerns and its effectiveness in engaging social network users in terms of
raising brand or product awareness and its ability to convert these users to consumers. Is social
advertising too invasive and passive in its current state?
In order to establish a baseline for the primary research needed for this project, research
data regarding social network-related demographics, common usage behavior, and attitudes was
utilized. An interview with an expert, a Facebook executive, and a survey of 30 random
individuals from both online and offline sources in San Francisco was then implemented to
explore the potential perception of invasiveness and measure the margin of activity that social
advertising invokes.

Table of Contents
Autobiography.................................................................................................................................2
Abstract............................................................................................................................................4
Table of Contents.............................................................................................................................5
Table of Figures...............................................................................................................................8
Introduction......................................................................................................................................9
Background..................................................................................................................................9
Statement of the Problem...........................................................................................................10
Purpose of the Project................................................................................................................11
Hypotheses.............................................................................................................................11
Specific Outcomes..................................................................................................................12
Audience.................................................................................................................................12
Assumptions...............................................................................................................................13
Limitations.................................................................................................................................14
Operational Definitions of Terms...............................................................................................15
Methodology Overview..............................................................................................................15
Literature Review..........................................................................................................................17
Article One: Classifying and Profiling Social Networking Site Users: A Latent Segmentation
Approach..................................................................................................................................18
Purpose and Methodology......................................................................................................18
Results....................................................................................................................................18
Article Two: Sustainable Marketing and Social Media.........................................................18
Purpose and Methodology......................................................................................................18

Results....................................................................................................................................19
Article Three: Like It or Not: issue of Credibility in Facebook Advertising...........................19
Purpose and Methodology......................................................................................................19
Results....................................................................................................................................19
Article Four: User Experience in Social Commerce: In Friends We Trust...........................20
Purpose and Methodology......................................................................................................20
Results....................................................................................................................................20
Interview........................................................................................................................................21
Purpose......................................................................................................................................21
Methodology...............................................................................................................................21
Results........................................................................................................................................21
Survey............................................................................................................................................23
Survey Purpose..........................................................................................................................23
Survey Methodology...................................................................................................................23
Survey Results............................................................................................................................24
Analysis of Findings......................................................................................................................33
Conclusion.....................................................................................................................................36
Works Cited...................................................................................................................................39
Appendices....................................................................................................................................41
Appendix A - Interview..................................................................................................................42
Appendix B Pilot Survey.............................................................................................................47
Appendix C - Survey......................................................................................................................49
Appendix D Research Topic Proposals.......................................................................................52

Appendix E Research Source Summaries...................................................................................55

Table of Figures
Figure 1: Demographics 1.............................................................................................................21
Figure 2: Demographics 2.............................................................................................................22
Figure 3: Demographics 3.............................................................................................................22
Figure 4: General Social Network Usage......................................................................................23
Figure 5: General Social Network Usage 2...................................................................................23
Figure 6: Social Network Activity 1..............................................................................................24
Figure 7: Social Network Activity 2..............................................................................................24
Figure 8: Social Commercial Activity 1........................................................................................25
Figure 9: Social Advertising 1.......................................................................................................26
Figure 10: Social Advertising 2.....................................................................................................26
Figure 11: Social Advertising 3.....................................................................................................27
Figure 12: Social Commerce.........................................................................................................27
Figure 13: Social Network Priorities.............................................................................................28
Figure 14: Social Network Priorities 2..........................................................................................29

Kwag 9

I.

Introduction

Background

Around the world, one in four people use social networks in 2013 (Elkin, 2013). A
population of 1.73 billion (Elkin, 2013) is using social networks to communicate, share stories,
advance their career, and other social activities that were once fixed solidly in the offline world.
Services like Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and Google+, have seamlessly become the focal
points of the social lives of most of the population in the United States. Social networks are the
new channel of attention supplanting print, TV, older web media like blogs, and even online
search. Its no longer about which search term gets the most hits but what get the most
recommendations, Shares, Likes or Follows.

It would then be an easy decision for many advertisers to follow the center of attention
and shift their campaigns and funds towards engaging the people where they were paying the
most attention: on social networks. Advertisers have spent $2.2 billion on Facebook advertising
alone in 2013 (Sasseen, 2013). Advertisers have spent this money on social network advertising
not only because of the population numbers but because of the promise of having advertisements
that are more relevant and engaging to each particular person because lives and activities are
being captured and categorized as they happen in these services (Yaakop, 2013). If an individual
was having a baby and it was announced on Facebook or Twitter; the advertisements would
reflect this life change with discounts for diapers and strollers. The promise of advertising on
social networks was these new opportunities for advertisers to connect with consumers.

Kwag 10

The current reality is, however, that advertisers have simply brought an old model of
advertising to this new channel of attention. Display advertising or ads with text, images, and
logos that you simply view; is still the primary mode of advertisement on social networks
(Carolyn, 2011). These display ads rely on a user to first notice the advertisement and then make
the conscious decision to click on the advertisement or to simply remember it. In contrast with
services that have introduced new ways of interaction between people, similar shifts in
interaction with advertising on social networks have not followed pace. The content of the
advertising may reflect the dynamic nature of the lives of social network users but the
relationship of the interaction remains solidly in the broadcast nature of past media like TV, print,
and radio.
Statement of the Problem

It can be argued then that advertising on social networks like Facebook are passive in the
interaction but also invasive in their content. The passivity of the interaction may affect the
ability of the advertisement to engage with social network users when their interactions
everywhere else in social networks are more active (Terlutter, 2013). On TV it is harder to ignore
advertisements because both the main content and advertisements share the same passive
viewing process. On social networks, parts of the main mode of interaction are requiring more
active interaction than simple viewing. Users actively interact with the content by sharing,
liking, categorizing, commenting, and sometimes playing with it. Advertisers are paying
money for increased attention but may be receiving less direct return on their investment because
the user may be less likely to be converted into a potential consumer due to this interactivity gap.

Kwag 11

Social advertisements attempts at displaying relevant content may, when noticed by the
user, inspire the idea that a third party has access to personal details of ones life. This could
prove to be a problem for brands and companies especially in the heightened climate of concern
in regards to privacy prevalent today. When users share with other individuals in a social
network, it is assumed that there is an existent personal relationship with these connections
especially when they have been chosen by the users (Alarcn-del-Amo, 2011). There is an
implied understanding and often explicit agreement, covered by legal disclosure forms that
accompany these services, that these other people can be privy to the details of the users life
(Andresen, 2011). This agreement does not extend however to third parties who have
commercial interests whose access is not controlled by the users. The lack of control and the
implicit commercial nature of advertisements may lead users to feel a violation of their privacy
for someone elses gain.
Purpose of the Project

The project approached the issue of social advertisements being passive but also invasive
by gathering data from users to see if this was actually a reality. The project also explored if this
passivity and invasiveness had any effect on the effectiveness of advertising in regards to user
response and perception to not only the advertisement but to the brand and product itself. More
importantly, research was done to see if the advertisements had an actual influence on purchases.

Extrapolated from the data and the conclusions reached, a series of criteria was
formulated that any new form of advertising on social networks should satisfy in order to avoid
being passive and invasive. These criteria were used in proposing and evaluating a new social

Kwag 12

advertising product. The proposal for this product focused on the mode and frequency of
interaction as well as the nature of the source and target of its content.
Hypotheses
This project tested the argument that current social advertising is too invasive and too
passive. The project proposed that users felt that their privacy was being violated by
advertisements that in some way relate to content that they have posted in a space that they
consider to be under their control. At best, these advertisements did not prompt or incite any
other action from the user except observation. In many cases, the passive nature of the
advertisements allowed users to easily ignore these social advertisements
Specific Outcomes

This project explored the thesis that current social advertising is too invasive and passive.
The outcomes that could arise from the research that tested this hypothesis were mostly
dependent on how users perceive advertising on social networks and the actual influence these
advertisements have on users in regards to their purchasing decisions.

The first potential outcome mirrored the hypotheses that was presented above in that
users did find social advertising invasive to their perception of their privacy and that the
advertising fails to convince the user to participate in the intended commercial activity like
purchasing a product or utilizing a service. The second potential outcome was similar to the first
in that users did find advertisements invasive but resulted instead in successfully influencing the
user to participate in the intended commercial activity. The third potential outcome was that the
user did not feel that the social advertisements were invasive and the advertisements were

Kwag 13

successful in converting users into consumers, participants in the commercial activity. The
fourth potential outcome was that the users did not feel that the social advertisements were
invasive but that, unlike the third potential outcome, the advertising failed at converting the users
into consumers.
Audience

Despite the variance of potential outcomes, the data and report that resulted from this
research was aimed at entrepreneurs, advertisers, social network companies, and academics
involved with the intersection of technology, advertising, and social.

Most of the potential outcomes outlined previously in this paper would provide
opportunities for startups to exploit what is not working as intended by introducing new methods
and technologies. Advertisers would be given more comprehensive feedback in regards to their
social advertising that is more nuanced than pure metric data that only counts numbers and not
perceptions. Social network companies could use this data to not only get a sense of how their
frameworks, key technologies, and methods are perceived but also if they are effective in what
they are promising to their partner companies and advertisers. Finally, the projects data on
privacy issues, the differences in attention and perception of social advertising, and finally the
interplay between the private experience and the public commercial experience would provide
additional insights for academic researchers involved with media, privacy, and technologys
impact on society.

Kwag 14

Assumptions

Several assumptions were made by the researcher prior to work on this project. These
assumptions underpinned both the thesis, actual research, and conclusions of this project

The first assumption was that the social networks utilized by participants in the research
were those of a technological nature and were services that resided on the internet. It was
assumed that those who used these social networks had access to internet services and
understood how to utilize these services.

The second assumption was that the social advertisements that were the target of this
study were those of the display variety and clearly delineated as advertisements and not
promoted content that appears as part of most social networks main content. This was done as
promoted content is still a nascent marketing model and not available on all platforms and
services.

The third assumption was that the aim of these social advertisements were those of a
commercial or transactional variety. These would include advertisements that promoted brand
awareness without explicit mention of a product or service because the final aim would still be
one of trying to convert the user to pay or use a product or service.

Kwag 15

Limitations

During the duration of the project to see if social advertisements were invasive and
passive, there were several limitations on this project that were encountered during the course of
the research.
As discussed before in the section covering assumptions, the research was only focused
on social advertising that was of the display variety and clearly delineated as such. Display
advertising is still the most prevalent mode of advertising on most social networks and it was
believed that participants in the study would be the most experienced with this kind of
advertising.

The pool of survey participants and the time available for these participants to take the
survey was limited. A larger pool and longer timeframe may have led to variant data but it is
believed that the trends and perspectives uncovered by the existent data would have remained
evident. Some elements of demographic data were also excluded especially in regards to
socioeconomic factors.

The researcher was also limited in his ability to quantify the relative values of certain
questions and results from the survey. The conclusions reached from the data involved may have
been different if certain data derived from the survey was given more weight in the results.

The final limitation was encountered in the interview section of the project. Both
interview subjects and questions with Paul Jeffries and another individual, who was ultimately
not interviewed, were limited by legal and corporate concerns over disclosure. Questions had to

Kwag 16

be submitted to the companies they worked for prior to the interview and the final transcript had
to be edited and cleared after the interview as well.
Operational Definitions of Terms

Content. Any media based expression that is communicated through a platform. This

media may include text, images, video, and games.

Display Advertising. This was advertising that contains text or images and was primary

experienced by viewing the advertisement.

Metric Data. Measurement of a quantifiable component of perfomance.

Promoted Content. Advertising that provides content in the context of the surrounding

experience.

Social Advertising. This was advertising on social networks and clearly delineated as

such. The content and types of advertising would be customized to fit the content being shown to
the individual user of the social network.

Social Graph. The mapping of individuals and how they are related to each other.

Kwag 17

Social Networks. A internet based platform through which users can share content,

build relationships or participate in activities with other people.

User. An individual who is a member of or utilizes a social network

Userbase. The collective group and number of people who use a particular product or

service, especially one situated on the internet.

Methodology Overview
The project accomplished its research in three primary ways. The first approach was to
gather background information through previously published research and articles. This led
to the thesis argument upon which the paper was based. The second approach was to
interview an expert and experienced executive of a social network. Finally, a survey of
social network users was done in both online and offline channels.

Kwag 18

Literature Review

This project evaluated whether social advertising was invasive in nature and passive in
function to users of social networks. The project required a survey of 30 random offline and
online social network users to answer questions regarding their demographic identity, social
network usage, and their attitudes towards social networks and social advertising.

There has been a great amount of research done in regards to demographic data, usage
factors and attitudes towards social networks and to a smaller extent, social advertising.
However, this research has usually focused on only singular parts of the users experience. The
research would focus only on the factors behind certain types of usage of social networks or the
factors behind certain perceptions held by users in regards to social advertising. This project
attempted to gather data that encompassed the motivational part of the social advertising
experience and the functional part of the social advertising experience.

In order to proceed with this project, baseline categories of data and the data itself had to
be formulated ahead of time. In addition to researching general demographic social network data,
research was also consulted in how to classify this demographic data in a way that was useful in
categorizing the userbase of social network. Activities by this userbase were also researched in
order to establish what the most relevant activities were in regards to social networks. Research
into functional motives of users in regards to social advertising was also consulted to better
craft questions in the survey that prompted reactions one way or another. The primary issue of
trust or credibility between the user and the social advertising was also examined in research
that was consulted by this project. Research involving successful economic transactions and

Kwag 19

commercial relationships online in social networks was utilized to set a standard of what was
required to be successful in first engaging the user through the content provided and then
converting them in to consumers.
Article One: Classifying and Profiling Social Networking Site Users: A Latent Segmentation
Approach.
Purpose and Methodology

This study had basic demographic data as well as segmented usage data of social
networks. There was a focus on marketing oriented data in this study. Through the data gathered
through surveys and interviews, the study segments the userbase into multiple classes. The usage
data was focused on marketing related activities such as commenting on ads or gathering
information about products and brands. The article was found through the online database,
Academic Search Premier, provided by the Academy of Art University library using the
keywords: social networking and users.
Results

This study was required for this project for the baseline demographic data it had as well
as usage data that was oriented towards the part of social network activity that was focused on:
social advertising. The classification structure that was generated from this research also made
any further discussion easier in regards to the principles of classification of users and their
activities.

Kwag 20

Article Two: Sustainable Marketing and Social Media.

Purpose and Methodology

This study was based on a survey of 1,018 people from the US, Germany , and Korea in
regards to their usage of Facebook and Twitter, The study was structured to explore functional
motives for sustainable marketing behaviors. It is a psychological research into the mechanics of
social marketing involvement. The article was found through the online database, OmniFile Full
Text Select (H.W.Wilson), provided by the Academy of Art University library using the
keywords: social media, marketing, and Facebook.
Results

The data in this study was used to explore what made social advertising, even in its
current state, appealing to businesses in regards to how it affects consumers. Although the thesis
of this project is critical of the current state of social marketing; there must be some data given to
why it is still better than other more traditional forms of marketing.
Article Three: Like It or Not: issue of Credibility in Facebook Advertising
Purpose and Methodology

This study explored the issues of credibility and privacy trust in advertising on social
networks. A total of 350 respondents participated in the study of attitudes towards advertising on
social networks. The data was used to assess the most important factors that contribute to the
attitude of most users to advertising on Facebook. The article was found through the online
database, Academic Search Premier, provided by the Academy of Art University library using the
keywords: Facebook, advertising and like.

Kwag 21

Results

The data in this study was utilized to explore whether the projects central argument holds
in regards to user reaction to social advertising. Because the study was very focused on attitudes;
inferential conclusions were drawn from the data in regards to the effectiveness of these
particular models of advertising. The data also provided some insight into what is effective in the
current model and this can be compared and contrasted with a proposed solution.
Article Four: User Experience in Social Commerce: In Friends We Trust.
Purpose and Methodology

This study examined consumer behaviors in social commerce. Utilizing survey and
interview research methods to examine trust and other factors that influence attitudes towards
social commerce, the study then applied scale and factor analysis and probability theory to
examine the results. The article was found through the online database, Academic Search
Premier, provided by the Academy of Art University library using the keywords: social,
commerce, and user.
Results

The data involved in this study was directed at the transactional part of social commerce
and the analysis that it offered assisted in giving some support to the solution that will be
proposed in a later section in regards to social advertising. The solution involves an element of
transactional functions. The study of the behavior involved in the transactional part of social
commerce was also useful in contrasting the behavior that is generated by more display oriented
methods of social advertising with actual business results.

Kwag 22

Kwag 23

Interview

The project required an interview in order to gain an in-depth exploration of social

advertising and the perception of its invasiveness and passivity. The interview would provide a
perspective from the company that was behind the social network and its advertising services.
The interview also provided information from which the later survey could base its focuses for
the types of questions that were needed.
Purpose

Paul Jeffries was needed for this interview to contribute an expert viewpoint on the
concepts behind what social networking based marketing is. The interview was also a way to see
if the concern regarding the invasiveness and passivity of social advertising which was central to
the project thesis was really relevant. An overview was also needed to address how Facebook
wanted to differentiate their marketing tools and experience from other big destinations on the
web.
Methodology

The researcher, while consulting with a company from 2012 to 2013, has worked with
Paul Jeffries in his capacity as an executive at Facebook. The interview questions were peer
reviewed by the researchers colleagues at Academy of Art University prior to submission to the
interview subject and his company, Facebook. Paul Jeffries was interviewed on the premises of
Facebook in Palo Alto, CA.

Kwag 24

Results

In the interview there was a focus on the relevancy of the advertising and the unique and
effective targeting that the social graph affords advertisers on Facebook. However, the method
of presentation, display ads was essentially the same. The consensus seems to be that there are
not too many other advertising methods being attempted on social networks at the moment. Paul
seemed to be implying that the technology and infrastructure exists for something that is more
interactive but that the advertisers have not yet been utilizing the social properties of the
technology for anything but targeting of relevant consumers

Kwag 25

Survey

The survey was formulated to provide data that would support or counter the thesis that
social advertising was invasive and passive. The survey was an essential tool to collect data
regarding the perception of not only social advertising but to also get a profile of the users who
be experiencing the advertising.
Survey Purpose

This survey was conducted in order to gather data that would support or counter the
thesis argument that current social advertising is passive and invasive. This was done by
gathering general data in regards to how most people used social networks and specifically how
they react to or if they participate in commercial or commerce-related activities on these social
networks. This data would generate a baseline standard for how active or passive most people are
on social networks and thus what would constitute active or passive social network activity.
Social advertising was also contrasted with another form of marketing activity, the social
recommendation. Finally, this survey explored the relevancy of, actual participation in, and
concerns that the respondents had in regards to advertisements on social networks.
Survey Methodology

This survey was conducted both offline and online. Both the online and offline surveys
had identical questions and answers. The offline respondents were selected randomly and
surveyed by the researcher in Union Square, Yerba Buena Gardens, and on New Montgomery
Street in San Francisco, California from Saturday, November 16, 2013 to Sunday, November 17,
2013.

Kwag 26

The online respondents were invited to participate by posts on various online game, car,
and basketball enthusiast forums and through Facebook, LinkedIn, Google + and Twitter. Neither
location based or cultural demographic data is available for the online survey participants.
Surveymonkey (http://www.surveymonkey.com) was utilized to both present the survey and
collect data online. The online participants were surveyed from Thursday, November 14, 2013 to
Tuesday, November 19, 2013.

Survey Results

The results from the survey begin with an overall demographic breakdown of the
respondents so the parameters of the sample population surveyed can be seen.

Kwag 27

Gender and Age Breakdown

18
16
14
12

45-54 yrs
35-44 yrs

10

25-34 yrs
18-24 yrs
11 and under

8
6
4
2
0
Male

Female

Figure 1: Demographics 1

From a total of 31 respondents (15 offline, 16 online); approximately 55% were female and 45%
were male (see figure 1). The largest age group across both genders was in the 25 to 34 age
group at 41% of the total and second was the 35 to 44 age group at 35% (see figure 1).

Kwag 28

Education
Elementary

11 2

High School
College

Graduate
Post Graduate
18

Figure 2: Demographics 2

The respondents were mostly college graduates at 58% of the total with some having achieved a
graduate degree (like a Masters degree) at 29% (see Figure 2).

Employment
5

Employed
Self-Employed

Student
22

Figure 3: Demographics 3

Homemaker

Kwag 29

Finally, most of the participants or 71% in this study were employed with students being the next
biggest group at 16% (see figure 3).

Which social network have you used in the past three years?
None
Foursquare
Yelp
Pinterest
Google+
LinkedIn
Facebook
0

10

15

20

25

30

Figure 4: General Social Network Usage

The most widely used social network was Facebook with about 87% of the respondents
having used it. No one was not on a social network. Everyone who was surveyed utilized at least
one social network in the last three years. (see figure 4).

Kwag 30

How often do you use a social network?

Never
Few times a year
Few times a month
Few times a week
Few times a day
0

10

15

20

25

Figure 5: General Social Network Usage 2

61% of the people surveyed use social networks very frequently or at least few times a day (see
figure 5).

If you use a social network, what do you most actively do?

Don't use at all
Read posts/status
Share posts/status
Post your own things
0

10

15

20

25

Figure 6: Social Network Activity 1

Most people however use social networks in a passive manner with 74% choosing to read
content rather than post their own content or share content (see figure 6).

Kwag 31

How social are you?

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%

Yes
No
I don't know

Figure 7: Social Network Activity 2

When one drills down deeper into the activity of the respondents on the survey; a clear
70% do however comment on other peoples content and 30% update their friends on their status
and location (see figure 7).

Kwag 32

Do social recommendations influence you?

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%

Yes

30%

No

20%

I don't know

10%
0%

Figure 8: Social Commercial Activity 1

Recommendations on social networks seem to have varying degrees of influence on our
commercial activities. The percentage of people actually submitting recommendations for
products or services is about 48% of the survey population and it is an equal percentage who
have made purchases based on recommendations. Recommendations were a stronger influence
on decisions to attend an event with 61% being influenced to attend events by recommendations
on social networks (see figure 8).

Kwag 33

Advertising on Social Networks

100%
90%
80%
70%

Frequently

60%

Sometimes
Almost never

50%

Never

40%
30%
20%
10%
0%

Pay attention to ads

Clicked an ad

Is the ad relevant?

Figure 9: Social Advertising 1

Advertising on social network seems to not be effective at gaining attention or clicks with
the majority of respondents (see figure 9). It is however slightly better at being relevant to the
user but that does not seem to translate into more engagement with the user.

Kwag 34

How do social ads make you feel about the product or brand?
Very Unfavorable
Unfavorable
Neutral
Favorable
Very Favorable
0

10

15

20

25

Figure 10: Social Advertising 2

The social ads do not seem to arouse any negative feeling for 68% of the people but the
remaining people are more likely to have negative impressions of the product or the brand than
positive ones (see figure 10).

I have made a purchase or used a service that was advertised on a social network.
Yes

No

I don't know
0

10

15

20

Figure 11: Social Advertising 3

25

Kwag 35

It is surprising however, that despite the negative impression that ads may incur, 19% (see figure
11) do purchase a product or service that has been advertised on a social network.

On social networks, what has more influence on your purchase?

Recommendation

Advertisement

Neither
0

10

15

20

25

Figure 12: Social Commerce

Finally, over 67% of the respondents believe that recommendations have more influence in their
purchasing decision and 25% feel that neither has any influence (see figure 12).

Kwag 36

What is the most important function that a social network needs to fulfill?
Communication

Fun

Relationships

Career

Services

Shopping

10

12

14

16

Figure 13: Social Network Priorities

Approximately 48% of the respondents believe that social networks should focus on
communication as their primary function (see figure 13). The next two priorities, fun and
relationships, all tie into that function and are the next important to people at 19% each.

Kwag 37

What concerns you the most about social networks?

Privacy

Bullying

Career impact

Relationship issues

Time use

Social isolation

10

12

14

16

18

20

Figure 14: Social Network Priorities 2

Finally, the most overwhelming concern, at 58% of all the six concerns, that the respondents had
about social networks was regarding privacy (see figure 14).

Kwag 38

Analysis of Findings

During this project to explore whether social advertising was too invasive and passive,
the data that has been gathered from the interview and surveys has been surprising in some ways
and in line with the hypotheses generated before this project began.

The initial research into advertising on social networks uncovered the need to first
explore the nature of the activities of users of the social networks (Alarcn-del-Amo, 2011). The
survey data shows that in 2013 social networks are used by a majority of people (see figure 4)
and on a frequent basis (see figure 5). However, a majority of these users do not create original
content but rather consume it or share their viewpoints on it (see figure 6 and 7). One can thus
surmise that the majority of users are passive users in types of activity but heavy users in regards
to frequency of usage.

The interview with Paul Jeffries, Vice President at Facebook, revealed that Facebook had
an evolving ability to go beyond traditional advertising but that there had not be any motivation
or momentum to implement these innovations during the current time frame (Appendix A). This
would seem to support the notion that the current system of display advertising on social
networks work satisfactorily enough that both Facebook and its partners do not feel pressure to
utilize a new system.

According to the survey data however, users are not as satisfied. Most users do seem to
perceive social advertisements as passive and ineffective (see figure 11, figure 12). It is

Kwag 39

surprising that people however do not find social advertising invasive or even negative (see
figure 10) even if their top concern is their privacy (see figure 14). This may simply be that the
relevance of many of the advertisements was nowhere near the threshold of being too invasive
for most people (see figure 9). The data provided here supports the functional part of the thesis
argument but not the part concerned with perception. Though there is a general concern with
privacy (see figure 14) it is not localized to advertising as of yet.

In order for the users to feel as if their privacy was being invaded there has to be a degree
of accuracy in subject and topic matching between the social content that these users experience
and the commercial advertising content. This is not to say that the majority was not receiving
relevant advertising but that for a large portion of people involved, the accuracy of the
advertisements in anticipating or matching their current topics of interest just did not exist (see
figure 9). There is no perceived privacy risk due to the greater prevalence of inaccuracy of the
advertisements and thus no concern for the invasiveness (Seounmi, 2009). The purported
advantage of targeting that exists for social advertising does not seem to exist yet or is too subtle
to be noticed by consumers.

The situation becomes worse for social advertising when placed in the context of their
ability to spur revenue generation by converting users into consumers. There is indifference
when it comes to the impact of social advertisements on peoples purchases (see figure 11). The
data seems to be implying that most social advertising is ignored because it is usually easily
situated or categorized as such. In fact, people are so indifferent to social advertisements that it
has neither a positive or negative effect on perception of the brand or product (see figure 10).

Kwag 40

The data also shows that the potential solution to the problem that the thesis argument
had posed, recommendations, may need to go through some revisions in the root conception of
its purpose. Recommendations on social networks have shown some positive influence in
converting users into consumers (see figure 8 and 12). The problem with recommendations lies
in the lack of overall numbers of people willing to engage in any commercial activity based on
any content on social networks (see figure 11). Though the data within the subset that do buy
based on social content is overwhelmingly influenced by recommendations, this weakness of
support overall for purchases being influence by any social content may necessitate a different
set of implications than originally considered.

Kwag 41

Conclusion

The central thesis argument that social advertising was both invasive and passive turned
out to not be entirely correct according to analysis of the data. The interview with Paul Jeffries
(appendix A) implied that there was satisfaction with the current system and seemingly
contradicted one of the central notions of this project that social advertising was not working at
all to both be a positive ambassador and facilitator to consumers. On the other hand, the
conclusions that one can derive from the data that this survey has generated do seem to support
the thesis argument that current social advertising is not satisfactorily perceived by the users of
social networks.

The result of the data from the project however were not perceptions of invasive and
passive social advertisements but rather the view that social advertisements that were passive and
caused indifference. What is being shown here is that the researcher overestimated the
technology of subject and topic relevance that many of these social networks purport to have.
The ability of social advertising to be perceived as invasive simply is not supported by the ability
of many advertisements to be relevant.

A solution to this issue of indifference and passivity to social advertising then requires an
active engagement with the user that also enhances its relevance. The accuracy of this relevance
however must be one that is predicated on the user being in control of the advertising experience
so that users do not feel that their privacy is being exploited. This control needs to exist without
endangering the ability for this advertisement to be distributed and in fact this control should
enhance the distribution of the advertising.

Kwag 42

Future social advertising then needs to satisfy several conditions. It needs to be native to
the context in which it is situated. It needs to be relevant to the users needs without the
perception of their privacy being violated by a unconnected third party. It must be active in
converting users to consumers. It has to have active engagement which the user can control.
Finally, distribution of the advertisement needs to be enhanced.

As the survey data has shown, many users have not spent money as a result of social
network content (see figure 11). However, overall social network data from 2013 (Hulkower,
2013) shows a part of the social network ecology where money has been spent and less
resistance is available: in social games.

Social games are considered native experiences in the context of many social networks as
they have been recognized by both users and the social network companies as being integral to
the social network experience. The companies behind social games have also mastered the ability
to utilize viral strategies to enhance their distribution among the social network userbase. Games,
in general, are very good at giving users a perception of control and freedom within a system of
rules. Games also have mechanics that encourage continued participation over longer periods of
time than most other media content.

Another feature that has shown to be positively perceived by social network users are
recommendations. Recommendations do not feel invasive because the content is coming from
either social connections that are trusted by the user or from sources that are perceived as being
non-commercial. If recommendations, as part of a social advertising product, are generated and

Kwag 43

utilized at the right time based on data derived from the social graph, the accuracy and relevancy
issues that plague current social advertising will be solved.

The future of social advertising then lies in advertisements which are social games with
recommendation features that are integral to the experience. This strategy would lead to social
advertising products which would immerse and enhance the social network experience of users
instead of being disruptive or ignored. If media has changed to center around the user, it is time
for advertising to do the same.

Kwag 44

Works Cited

Alarcn-del-Amo, Mara-del-Carmen, Carlota Lorenzo-Romero, and Miguel-ngel GmezBorja. "Classifying and Profiling Social Networking Site Users: A Latent Segmentation
Approach." Cyberpsychology, Behavior & Social Networking (2011): 547-543. Web. 16
October 2013.

Andresen, Katheryn A. "Marketing Through Social Networks: Business Considerations - From

Brand to Privacy." William Mitchell Law Review 38.1 (2011): 290-327. Web. 16 October
2013.

Brajnik, Giogio and Silvia Gabrielli. "A Review of Online Advertising Effects on the User
Experience." International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction (2010): 971-997.
Web. 23 October 2013.

Carolyn, Heller Baird and Parasnis Gautam. "From Social Media to Social Customer
Relationship Management." Strategy & Leadership 39.5 (2011): 30-37. Web. 23 October
2013.

Elkin, Noah. "Social Networking Reaches Nearly One in Four Around the World." 18 June 2013.
eMarketer. eMarketer Inc. Web. 22 November 2013.

Kwag 45

Gansky, Lisa. The Mesh: Why the Future of Business Is Sharing. New York: Portfolio, 2010.
Print.

Hulkower, Billy. "Social Networking - US- Jun 2013." June 2013. Mintel. Web. 15 October
2013.

McGonigal, Jane. Reality Is Broken: Why Games Make Us Better and How They Can Change
the World. New York: Penguin Group, 2011. Print.

Minton, Elizabeth 1,2, et al. "Sustainable Marketing and Social Media." Journal of Advertising
41.4 (2012): 69-84. Web. 16 October 2013.

O'Donnell, Fiona. "Living Online - US - July 2012." July 2012. Mintel. Web. 15 October 2013.

Sasseen, Jane, Kenny Olmstead and Amy Mitchell. "Digital: By The Numbers." 18 March 2013.
The State of the News Media 2013. The Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in
Journalism. Web. 22 November 2013.

Seounmi, Youn. "Determinants of Online Privacy Concern and Its Influence on Privacy
Protection Behaviours among Young Adolescents." Journal of Consumer Affairs (2009):
389-418. Web. 23 October 2013.

Shin, Dong-Hee. "User Experince in Social Commerce: In Friends We Trust." Behavious &
Information Technology (2013): 52-67. Web. 16 October 2013.

Kwag 46

Terlutter, Ralf and Michael L. Capella. "The Gamification of Advertising: Analysis and Research
Directions of In-Game Advertising, Advergames, and Advertising in Social Network
Games." Journal of Advertising 42.2.3 (2013): 95-112. Web. 27 October 2013.

Yaakop, Azizul. "Like It or Not: Issue of Credibility in Facebook Advertising." Asian Social
Science (2013): 154-163. Web. 16 October 2013.

Appendices

Appendix A - Interview
Paul C. Jeffries, Head of Legal Operations, Policy Strategy, Facebook:
Interviewed by John Kwag on 11.05.13
John

Hi Paul. Thank you. Its been awhile since we met because of KarFarm.

Paul

I really enjoyed working with you all then

John

Like I told you before; this interview is going to not only help me with preparing my
thesis but also is being used for a Writing and Research for Masters class as well. Thank
you for helping me out.

Paul

No problem. I took a look at the questions that you sent in advance and its all ok.

[Facebook had to approve the questions before the interview could proceed]
John

Im glad there wasnt any big issues with the questions.

Paul

Noand the questions have made me very curious to what will result from not just the
paper you are writing but your thesis project itself. I assume its the crowdfund game
youve talked about before?

John

Yes. But I have to get this research done so I can dot all the Is and cross the Ts. I am
planning to do an actual academic paper to go along with the product prototype.

Paul

I would love to check in with you as you work on both.

John Thank you. SoYou joined Facebook in 2007?

Paul

Yeah. I had been dabbling as a VC and with some startups before then.

John

From 2007 until now, how has advertising and marketing on Facebook changed?

Paul

Well when it (Facebook) started, a lot of the advertising was event oriented. This was
before I was here, but it was a lot like party or club ads that you would see posted around
campuses. There was one set price which later changed to a range based on how specific
they wanted to get. The more specific an audience, the more expensive it got.

John

So the format was essentially the same though? Display advertising?

Paul

Yes. But it was how they were being targeted which was different. First it was the
display ads, then we had brand groups. These were companies who would have a special
branded group on Facebook. This was actually more popular with marketers and the
users. We also made more money of it.

John

Any other big changes?

Paul

Well the way we sell the marketing products changes from a sales model to a
marketplace model. But to the consumer how close we are getting with the tools gets
better.

John

You mention better; what was the standard for progress with social marketing on
Facebook?

Paul

That not only would we be able to be able to give the user something that mattered to
them but also to where they were. Local in every sense and something that you would
want in the moment.

John

In the moment?

Paul

Thats what the Like is. Its a way to get at what is it that you are wanting or feeling in
something close to real-time. And it was simple enough that people could just do it and
forget. Something you didnt have to think too hard about. That was when marketing on
Facebook became not a product but an experience. And we couldnt just keep it in. It was
something that was Facebook but didnt have to stay there. I think thats what we wanted.
To not just be somewhere you go but something you do

John

What were some of the concerns?

Paul

Well we had a rough time with some of the products and tools. Some of it was from users
and some of it was from advertisers. How much, often, how detailed. But nothing is
exactly right when it comes out so I think we have been able to get them right.

John

How?

Paul

Having devs, advertisers and users all be part of the process of what makes sense for
Facebook. We also made a decision though to keep the user experience as streamlined as
possible while also allowing businesses to be an organic and active as possible in the use
of Facebook.

John

So did platform policy shape this?

Paul

Its very chicken and the egg. Some of it was led by developers and we would listen very
carefully as well as watch what happened and some of it we led.

John

So more interaction was encouraged

Paul

Yeah, from the groups to the likes at the front and the Social Graph API at the back. We
encouraged a lot of back and forth between the user and our partners.

John

Has that been the majority of the case with social marketing?

Paul

At first no; but I think now a lot of companies have gotten the hang of it and are but
theres still a lot of display advertising because its not as easy to predict what the results
will be from a Page or Like count but display ads are more predictable and easier to tune
for many companies. But I think we do help a lot of companies try to be proactive in the
way they interact with the users.

John

So Facebook wants more companies to play with their users instead of broadcast to
them?

Paul

Wellno and yes. Some things dont require a Group or a Like when just a normal ad
will do but I think weve made the distribution so easy and the return easier to see that I
think weve done a good job of not hurting our user experience but at the same time
deliver value to our partners.

John

Forecast a decade ahead. What do you want to happen in the way that companies interact
with consumers online

Paul

Well mobile and social is going to be something different than what is social on the
desktop. Weve already seen the diffrerences in many things with mobile. But what do I
want besides a robot? But reallyits going to be how involved will people get with their
customers that it makes everything more fluid in the way we market and sell things but
at the same time shareable and cozy circle of friends.

John

Quantum theory deals with phenomena at microscopic scales which have follow-on
effects on macroscopic scales; what kind of scale would your theory of social
marketing progress from and to?

Paul

There are usually binary stars in most galaxies; we are unusual. If you look at the user as
the sun that we revolve around; we want to make sure that we reflect the light in a way

that doesnt overwhelm or not shine on anything at all.

Appendix B Pilot Survey

Please circle the answer(s) that best fits you or your experience.
Sex:

Male

Female

Age:

Under 18

18-24

25-34

35-44

Over 45

Education (Highest academic degree) :

No Schooling Elementary

High School

Bachelor

Master

Doctorate

Employment:
Unemployed Student

Retired

Homemaker

Employed

Self-Employed

1.

Which social network have you used (circle more than one if you use multiple) ?
Facebook
Twitter
Other__________
None

2.

How often do you use a social network?

Few times a year
Few times a month
Never

Few times a week

Few times a day

3.

In a typical week, how many hours do you spend on social networks?

I spend_______________ hours
/
minutes

4.

If you use a social network, what do you most frequently do?

Game
Post
Read

Share

5.

The type of content I normally have experience with on a social network is:
Pictures or videos
News
Stories
Messages
Games

6.

I let my friends know what I am doing or where I am. Do you do this on social
networks?:
Yes
No
I dont know

7.

I have played a game, shared recommendations or attended an event based on a post

from a friend on a social network
Yes
No
I dont know

8.

I have spent money in a social game or made a purchase or paid to use a service
based on a recommendation from a friend on a social network.
Yes
No
I dont know

9.

Are you worried about your privacy on social networks?

Yes
No
I dont know

10.

Why are you worried or not worried about privacy on social networks?
________________________________________________________

11.

Do you ever pay attention to the advertisements or sponsored posts on the social
network?
Frequently
Sometimes
Almost never Never

12.

What are the reasons you have paid attention or not paid attention to the
advertisements on social networks?
Relevance
Cost
Need
Brand
Ad Content

13.

How do you feel about these advertisements on social networks and their relevance
to you?
Very Favorable
Favorable
Neither favorable nor unfavorable
Unfavorable
Very unfavorable

14.

I have clicked on an advertisement or sponsored post on a social network.

Frequently Sometimes
Almost never Never

15.

I have made a purchase or used a service that was advertised on a social network.
Yes
No
I dont know

16.

Does the advertisement influence your perception of the social network positively or
negatively?
Positively
Negatively
No influence

17.

Does the advertisement influence your perception of the company or brand

positively or negatively?
Positively
Negatively
No influence

Appendix C - Survey

My name is John Kwag and I am a Graduate Student at Academy of Art University. This survey
is focused on online social network usage.
This survey will take on average less than 3 minutes to complete. Thank you for your time and
participation.
Are you male or female?
How old are you?
Over 55

Male

11 and under

Female
12-17

18-24

25-34

35-44

45-54

What is the level of school completed?

No Schooling Elementary
Graduate

High School

College

Graduate

Post-

Employed

Self-Employed

I am currently:
Unemployed Student

Retired

Homemaker

18.

Which social network have you used in the past three years? (Circle more than one
if you use multiple.)
Facebook
Twitter
Yelp
Google+
Foursquare LinkedIn
Pinterest
Other__________
None

19.

How often do you use a social network?

Few times a year
Few times a month
Never

Few times a week

Few times a day

20.

If you use a social network, what do you most actively do?

Post your own things
Share posts/status
Read posts/status
Other______
Dont use

21.

On a social network, do you spend most of your time looking at and commenting on
what others have posted?
Yes
No
I dont know

22.

Do you spend most of your time posting things about yourself ?

Yes
No
I dont know

23.

Using a social network, do you update your friends on what you are doing or where
you are?
Yes
No
I dont know

24.

I have played a game on a social network

Yes
No
I dont know

25.

I have spent money in a game on a social network.

Yes
No
I dont know

26.

On a social network , I have shared recommendations for products or services.

Yes
No
I dont know

27.

On a social network, I made a purchase or paid to use a service based on a

recommendation from a friend
Yes
No
I dont know

28.

I have attended an event based on a friends post on a social network

Yes
No
I dont know

29.

Do you ever pay attention to the advertisements or sponsored posts on social

networks?
Frequently
Sometimes
Almost never Never

30.

I have clicked through an advertisement or sponsored post on a social network.

Frequently Sometimes
Almost never Never

31.

How often is the advertising or sponsored posts on social networks relevant to you?
Frequently
Sometimes
Almost never
Never

32.

How do advertisements on social networks make you feel about the product or
brand?
Very Favorable
Favorable Neutral
Unfavorable
Very unfavorable

33.

I have made a purchase or used a service that was advertised on a social network.
Yes
No
I dont know

34.

On social networks, which has more influence on your purchase of a product or a

service: an advertisement OR a recommendation?
Advertisement
Recommendation
Neither

35.

What is the most important function that a social network needs to fulfill? (Choose
one.)
Communication
Fun
Relationships
Career
Education
Shopping
Common interests
Services
Other___________

36.

What concerns you the most about social networks? (Choose one.)

Privacy
Time use
Social isolation

Bullying

Career impact

False information

Relationship issues
Other_____________

Appendix D Research Topic Proposals

[Topic 1:]
(TOPIC & PURPOSE):
-

Exploration of crowdfunding and gamification mechanics

The purpose is to show the issues and benefits with both games and crowdfunding.
Focus on the elements of participation and return on participation
To set the basis for why my thesis and focus is necessary to solve a problem ro contribute
something new

(FORM): Essay, White Paper

(AUDIENCE):
-

People already involved in the tech and games industry

AAU assessment faculty
Venture Capitalists and/or other project finance sources

(RESEARCH QUESTIONS):
-

Does crowdfunding really need to expand to individual consumer purchases?

IS there an issue with engagement in crowdfunding?
Does gamification solve these issues?

(RESEARCH DESCRIPTION):
-

More examples of crowdfunding models

More examples of gamification mechanics used outside of games
Metrics from both crowdfunding and gamification models
o Engagement and traffic
o Financial and transactional
o Increase from previous models

[Topic 2:]
(TOPIC & PURPOSE):
-

Motivation behind working on something that is not just a game

Exploration of what working on games meant to me
Exploration of how I perceive crowdfunding
Why I want to cover the thesis topic I am going to cover

(FORM): Conversational, Persuasive argument

(AUDIENCE): General audience with little or no familiarity with games

(RESEARCH QUESTIONS):
-

What do games do for people?

What does crowdfunding do for people?
Why do I want to work on something that covers both?

(RESEARCH DESCRIPTION):
-

Survey people and their feelings about games and crowdfunding

What is my story and how does it intersect with the larger industry models I am
exploring?

[Topic 3:]
(TOPIC & PURPOSE):
-

How social advertising is currently intrusive and passive

Solutions to this current state of social advertising
Can crowdfunding a consumer purchase be a solution to this problem?

(FORM):
-

Opinion editorial

(AUDIENCE):
-

General audience
People with some experience with advertising on social networks

(RESEARCH QUESTIONS):
-

What are the current content and methods used in social advertising?
Do people find it intrusive and passive?
Would utilizing friends and colleagues in an advertising model be less intrusive and more
participatory?
Would people participate?

(RESEARCH DESCRIPTION):
-

Gather metric data on current effectiveness of social advertising

Gather metric data on social shopping
Survey peoples current attitudes towards ads on social networks
Survey on social shopping
Survey proposed model

Consult with social network and other relevant professionals and experts

Appendix E Research Source Summaries

[Primary Sources]
(1) Alarcn-del-Amo, Mara-del-Carmen, Carlota Lorenzo-Romero, and Miguel-ngel
Gmez-Borja. "Classifying And Profiling Social Networking Site Users: A Latent
Segmentation Approach."Cyberpsychology, Behavior & Social Networking 14.9 (2011):
547-553. Academic Search Premier. Web. 16 Oct. 2013.
(SUMMARY)
This study has basic demographic data as well as segmented usage data of social networks.
There is a focus on marketing oriented data in this study. Through the data gathered through
surveys and interviews, the study segments the userbase into multiple classes. The usage data
is focused on marketing related activities such as commenting on ads or gathering
information about products and brands.
(RELEVANCE)
This study is required for my paper for the baseline demographic data it has as well as usage
data that is oriented towards the part of social network activity that I will be focused on:
social marketing. The classification structure that they have generated from this data will also
make any further discussion easier in regards to the terminology that can be used.

(2) Minton, Elizabeth 1,2, et al.. "Sustainable Marketing And Social Media."Journal Of
Advertising 41.4 (2012): 69-84. OmniFile Full Text Select (H.W. Wilson). Web. 16 Oct.
2013.
(SUMMARY)
This study was based on a survey of 1,018 people from the US, Germany , and Korea in
regards to their usage of Facebook and Twitter, The study is structured to explore functional
motives for sustainable marketing behaviors. It is a psychological research into the
mechanics of social marketing involvement.
(RELEVANCE)
The data in this study will be used to explore what makes social marketing appealing to
businesses in regards to how it affects consumers. Although I do criticize the current state of
social marketing; there must be some data given to why it is still better than other more
traditional forms of marketing.

(3) Yaakop, Azizul. "Like It Or Not: Issue Of Credibility In Facebook Advertising." Asian
Social Science 9.3 (2013): 154-163.Academic Search Premier. Web. 16 Oct. 2013.
(SUMMARY)
This study explores the issues of credibility and privacy trust in advertising on social
networks. A total of 350 respondents participated in the study of attitudes towards advertising
on social networks. The data will be used to assess the most important factors that contribute
to the attitude of most users to advertising on Facebook.
(Relevance)
The data in this study will be utilized to explore whether my central argument holds in
regards to user reaction to social advertising. Because the study is very focused on attitudes;
inferential conclusions will be able to be drawn from the data in regards to the effectiveness
of these particular models of advertising. The data will also point out what is effective in the
current model and I can compare and contrast with my proposed solution.

(4) Shin, Dong-Hee. "User Experience In Social Commerce: In Friends We

Trust." Behaviour & Information Technology 32.1 (2013): 52-67. Academic Search
Premier. Web. 16 Oct. 2013
(SUMMARY)
This study examines consumer behaviors in social commerce. Utilizing survey and interview
research methods to examine trust and other factors that influence attitudes towards social
commerce, the study then applies scale and factor analysis and probability theory to examine
the results.
(RELEVANCE)
The data involved in this study is directed at the transactional part of social commerce and
the analysis that it offers will be of some assistance in giving some support to the solution
that I propose in regards to social advertising because my solution involves an element of
transactional functions. The study of the behavior involved in the transactional part of social
commerce will also be useful in contrasting the behavior that is generated by more display
oriented methods of social marketing.

(5) Hulkower, Billy. Social Networking - US June 2013. June 2013. Mintel. Web. 15
October, 2013.
(SUMMARY)
Demographic, usage data of social networks and activities, behaviors, and attitudes towards
advertising on social networks as of June 2013 are in this report. This report also has the
market size, forecast, trends, and list of companies in the space. This is a market report.
(RELEVANCE)
The data contained in this report is useful for hard support or evidence contrary to my
arguments in regards to social advertising. The list of companies and trends will also spur
further research that may bring up more focused and even more relevant research.
(6) ODonnell, Fiona. Living Online US July 2012. July 2012. Mintel. Web 15
October, 2013.
(SUMMARY)
This is general data regarding what drives internet activity and what activity is being done
online. The focus is on attitudes towards online usage and the demographic data behind those
attitudes.
(RELEVANCE)
The data regarding what drives certain types of behavior that is in this report will provide
background for much of my further research into drivers of particular social network activity.
The attitudes inferred by the data will also shape the background to how my research is
structured.

[Secondary Source]
(1) McGonigal, Jane. Reality Is Broken: Why Games Make Us Better and How They Can
Change the World. New York: Penguin Group, 2011, Print.
(SUMMARY)
Reality Is Broken shows how games can be leveraged to fix, change, and affect the real
word. From fixing social problems like depression and obesity to having an effect on global
issues like poverty and climate change; Jane McGonigal shows examples of games, design
concepts and experiences that have progressed beyond the mediums entertainment
beginnings.

(RELEVANCE)
I will be utilizing some of the concepts and examples contained within to illustrate and
support some of the major ideas contained in my argument. The basic tenet of the effect that
games can have on the real world will be one of the themes that I continue to use throughout
my paper.
(2) Andresen, Katheryn A.1. "Marketing Through Social Networks: Business
Considerations--From Brand To Privacy." William Mitchell Law Review 38.1 (2011): 290327. OmniFile Full Text Select (H.W. Wilson). Web. 16 Oct. 2013.
(SUMMARY)
This article examines the commercial aspects of social networks like marketing and
expansion of services. The article looks at the business and legal risks associated with
these commercial activities on social networks. Privacy implications are also explored in
this article.
(RELEVANCE)
This article will provide more detailed legal and business considerations into the issues
involved with social marketing. Because the issue of invasiveness is a part of my
argument; this article will be invaluable in regards to the issue of privacy; particularly
from a legal standpoint.
(3) Gansky, Lisa. The Mesh: Why the Future of Business Is Sharing. New York: Portfolio,
2010, Print.
(Summary)
This book looks at the concept of crowdsharing, funding, and consumption. Examples
and case studies of these models are detailed and the logic behind these models are
explained.
(RELEVANCE)
I am going to point out how crowdsourcing, crowdfunding will solve the issue of
passivity and invasiveness that social marketing is currently plagued with. The examples
and logic will be complementary to support the argument I will make.