Facebook Now Drives More Traffic to Key Sites Than Google

UPDATE: A couple of notes to clarify this post. First, the chart above, which I pulled from compete.com, shows the top sites that Facebook drives traffic to. Also the headline has been updated to reflect that Facebook is driving more traffic to portals than Google. The San Francisco Chronicle story, linked below, notes that Facebook is only starting to encroach on Google for other sites. The trend, however, still holds.

We're at the beginning of a major shift in how we find, consume and interact with information. If the 2000s was the Google decade, then the 2010s will be the Facebook decade. Already, you can see the writing on the wall - pun intended. Case in point: a search for "google decade danny sullivan" pulls up his Facebook note higher than a blog post (an item I wanted to include here for context). But that's nothing. Look at the data.

According to new stats from compete.com Facebook is becoming the web's top source of traffic (link via Jeremiah Owyang on where else, Facebook). The image above is a snapshot I pulled from compete.com. It shows where Facebook is sending traffic...

"According to Web measurement firm Compete Inc., Facebook has passed search-engine giant Google to become the top source for traffic to major portals like Yahoo and MSN, and is among the leaders for other types of sites.

This trend is shifting the way Web site operators approach online marketing, even as Google takes steps to move into the social-media world.

Some experts say social media could become the Internet's next search engine."

That last line is key. I see Facebook starting to look more like Google while Google tries and stumbles at becoming more social. Bing will start to play a central supporting role here. I see Facebook and Bing becoming an "Axis of FTW" that will disrupt Google on every front. (Microsoft is an Edelman client.)

You can already see it coming...

• Titan/Facebook Chat will challenge Gmail in communications


• Facebook pages will disrupt Google - especially if they were to integrate Bing Maps and location technology a la Foursquare. This can quickly position Facebook as the Web's Yellow Pages, an area that Google and Yelp currently dominate


• Facebook will make search more social, allowing it to become annotated and curated. This up-ends Google's core business. It also makes the Facebook self-serve advertising model smarter and more effective as it collects more data about where it sends traffic. This threatens Adwords

Social networking is here to stay. It's where attention spirals are flowing and no one looms larger than Facebook. (Link sharing on Facebook rose 500% in six months.) And while Facebook has plenty of critics and they run into the occasional privacy concerns, I believe that they will dominate the landscape the next few years. In fact, I see them becoming the number one web site in the world in under three years. It could eat the web.

Now a lot could go wrong. It is possible that Facebook will become AOL the sequel. But I don't see it. There's no alternative and the more we put into Facebook the more value we gain from it. This is a different era where vertical integration (e.g. owning and controlling the whole experience) is a major plus, especially if it's elegant and simple. There's too much information and things vying for our attention today. This turns vertical integration and simplicity into a competitive advantage.

So what does this mean? I believe business web sites will become less important over time. They will be primarily transactional and/or for utility. Brands will shift more of their dollars and resources to creating robust presence where people already are and figure out how to activate employees en masse in a way that builds relationships and drives traffic back to their sites to complete transactions. Media companies will do the same - they will be "headless."

Google and search will remain important for years to come. However, what we're seeing is the beginning of big changes where social networking and Facebook will further disrupt advertising, media, one-to-one and one-to-many communications, not to mention search.

Comments

[Sue Anne Reed]

Bert - I would agree with you. In fact, with the proliferation and the popularity of social media sites, having a "hub" that you control as a business is more important than ever. It doesn't have to be fancy or flashy or compete with Facebook and its plugins, but it does have to have accurate information about your company and be a place where even if the spokes change, people can rely on.

[Jeff Reckseidler]

Sue Ann Read - well said. "...be a place where even if the spokes change, people can rely on."

[Tedel]

You know? I'm going to disagree with you.Facebook, first of all, is not a business site. Facebook is an entertainment site. That said, it is not logical to think that Facebook will replace search engines neither in the short nor the long term. Facebook is popular because people like to have fun. When you need to research, study or work, you don't ask your friends about it. You do your own research.Now, there might be a few things that I would ask my friends over Facebook rather than "researching" myself, but they will not be serious things, definitely. I may ask how good or lousy a bar might be on Facebook, for example; but I wouldn't ask what's the best place to have my teeth fixed because they will decidedly not have the answer.You believe business sites will become less important over time? Great, then I should start saving money to buy my goods on Farmville right? Sorry but I'll pass. That is not going to happen.Facebook will not eat the web either. Facebook is a fashion, just like MySpace was years ago, or Geocities, or Dmoz, or Altavista. Sooner or later, it will fall like all the rest.From Peru,Tedel

[Steve Rubel]

@Anthony I already syndicate all the content into Facebook. However, I am rethinking this site - it's more of a blog lately that syndicates everywhere than a lifestream per se. Agree?

[Anthony Mendez]

Does that mean that your Lifestreaming hub will have to move from Posterous to Facebook? Or, perhaps, not have a hub at all? It will work more like ball-bearings where all the "balls" work together to move forward an object (the message.)

[Clayton]

This metric drastically over rates Facebook as a traffic driver. Facebook's main goal is to keep people on it's site not drive traffic to other sites. The smart people at Facebook might try and integrate social discussions to become the new online directory, but media fragmentation is the name of the online game. If AOL, Yahoo, MSN, & Google can't figure out how to integrate social, local, search, maps, news, entertainment all together, what makes anyone think that Facebook will be able to and become the first stop for information online? Social conversations can only take information collection so far. Yeah, it's great to know what my friends likes for restaurants in Boston. But that's information snacking. To me social search misses out on so much information that could be new and exciting because results are "tailored" to me, or to my friends.

[Fernando Salazar]

Steve, thank you for sharing this interesting approach but it does sound very premature to say the least. I couldn't help listening to some kind of bell the five times that you mentioned Bing. And I believe you did the right thing in giving us this honest piece of information within parenthesis: "Microsoft is an Edelman client". A little biased maybe?

[E Patrick Heeney]

Being the Farmer running against an Attorney and a Banker, among a variety of other concerned Florida citizens that want to see the Great State flourish without the Government Sprawl and financial / legal problems. It appears that the future of politiics will be who can "Get off the Dirt Road and on to the SuperHighway of the Internet" fastest to get their message out before the smearers parade begins.

[Montreux Real Estate]

I think you are correct in your thinking. I am never one to count Google out... but it is amazing to see the power and growth of Facebook!

[sunshine]

Around an year ago - nah! But yeah Steve, now it does seems so! so I agree to your point!

[Rebecca MB. Pearson]

There's a downside to this that marketers are not seeing. Much in the way that consumers have learned to hate too many commercials interrupting their show, pop-up ads blocking content, and spam cluttering email, if Facebook becomes more market oriented than social, the site as a social network will lose appeal. Here's why: One, people will soon catch on to the fact that if they become a fan of a particular product or service, they've just allowed that company to see not just their personal information, but also their friends' information. They will know birthdates, zipcodes, gender, marital status, professions, hobbies and whatever else they choose to share on their profile page. They'll, get to see pictures of friends and family. With all this rich information, they can target their products not just to fans, but also their unsuspecting friends and family.Two, marketers have a habit of abusing a medium. I see them eventually cluttering everybody's wall with useless information far too many times. I'm already seeing this on Twitter and Retweets. The message becomes less and less subtle: "I'm a consultant. I have a blog - read my story. Aren't I so insightful? I'm really good at what I do and maybe you'll contact me and hire me for your next project." (Insert eye-roll emoticon here.)Three, marketers tend to jump on the hot bandwagon before fully understanding the medium. Let's get on Facebook. Oh look, we've got fans. Let's send them useless messages. Yes, send the grandmother the ad too and invite them to be a fan. Oh lookie here, we have our fans' email addresses... Marketers don't get that social networking or social media is about "social" and not media. Social media has existed long before the Internet was born and was truly a means of sharing knowledge with like-minded people you've never met. That has NOT changed. Marketers would do well to understand social media's purpose: to engage in conversations with the consumer on a personal level. Example: I'm a fan of JetBlue on Facebook. When they post on my wall that they're offering special fares to Mexico, I honestly couldn't give a crap so I deleted it. And if they do this any more often, I'm either going to hide their posts or un-friend them. But if a real employee from JetBlue wrote "Hey, Rebecca, you just got back from DR. Great pics! How was the flight?" My response would have been "You guys rock!" And that's a priceless message for all their fans to see.

[Alex Avery - SEO, PPC and Anal]

PS. Steve, you appear even to be at odds with your own company's research. According to Edelmans research, no one trusts their friends on Facebook: http://bit.ly/b6o776

[Joel P. The New Income System]

I like the comments here but! will Facebook replace what Google can do?...I don't think so!.. both of them are good tools and can have their positive and negative sides.Very Good coments to read here!Regards

[Amrutha Krishnan]

Hey Steve thanks a lot for your post. I agree with what you have to say about 'Facebook'. Information sharing is something really important. And though google is rules that area, yet 'Facebook' too offers the same function but in a very different manner. The approach is slightly more human. According to me information sharing is something that needs to be informative and social meaning there should be a human aspect to it. I should be able to find the right data and the right amount and I strongly believe it can be achieved only through social networking. Although am not sure whether the the social networking present would be able to achieve this yet in the years to come things hopefully would change more and then it would only the process.Anyways thanks again for your post Steve.

[violawu]

It's healthier for the whole industry to have more than one real competitive player on the field. I think the pressure from facebook is good for Google, "Social Search" is the new direction.

[Jaky Astik]

Facebook is also building pages. that means, Facebook will have its own expert social search engine in a few years. So basically, facebook will turn itself into a search engine by searching pages.

[babor_7uiu]

Both will be helpful to increase traffic, but facebook traffic will provide more conversion rate than twitter. http://www.adnpost.com`

[Alex Avery]

@babor_7uiu Wow! I've written some scathing stuff about this article. I don't care if you read it, but I'll drop a bomb on your idea here. One of the sites I manage, a B2C site - pefectly demographically setup for Facebook etc. And here are relative stats. I'll symplify - rounding down to make Facebook look better:In the same period, the site received traffic from:Google:10,000 visits (organic), Bounce Rate: 18%, Time on Site: 4 minutes, Conversion Rate: 20%Facebook: 150 visits Bounce Rate: 28%, Time on Site: 2:30 minutes, Conversion Rate: 12%.Both the website and Facebook presence have been up for the same amount of time. There is not a single metric on any site I manage where Facebook delivers better stats in any area - traffic, conversion, sales, engagement, return visits etc. - compared to Google. Period.Long story short, no matter how you cook it, Facebook DOES NOT deliver compared to Google. People who make unsupported statements based on no, or poor data, be warned. Your clients will sack you when you give them crap advice.

[website value]

I would are with this because my website receives about 25% of traffic from Google but it gets 38% of traffic from facebook which is quite unbelievable. For quality analytics i would recommend the use of http://www.websitevaluebot.com because it gives in depth stats in comparison to other websites.