It should be both!
I was prompted to seriously investigate the whole Facebook Pages vs Groups aspect because of the ChurchMag post ‘The Benefits of Using a Facebook Group For Your Church‘. The key issue for me revolved around the 100% notification capability that Facebook Groups gives, against the limited newsfeed push that Pages gives because of EdgeRank.
But the issue is bigger than just whether everyone get’s to see my Church’s content. Rather, deciding on whether to use Facebook Pages and/or Facebook Groups is an issue of strategy; not just your Social Strategy, but also your Web Presence Optimisation (WPO) Strategy (that is your digital footprint) and your Search Engine Optimisation (SEO) Strategy (that is your online “findability”). It also has to do with Privacy.
This is the first post in a five part series where I’m going to share what I’ve learned as I considered key points that I felt impacted Church communications strategy the most. The first two points that we’ll be looking at are WWW Visibility and Branding.
WWW Visibility
Facebook Pages are visible to the WWW. Their content is also visible to and indexed by search engines. In simple terms, this means that search engines can find you. But it also means that other people can find you through them. Facebook Pages then have a direct (positive) impact on your SEO (search engine optimisation) and WPO (web presence optimisation) strategies. The implication of this is that people who are not linked to or registered with Facebook, can still read your Facebook Page content – they just cannot engage with it (like, comment, or share). This WWW visibility is super important if your Social Strategy includes evangelism (outreach) content.
Facebook Groups on the other hand, are not visible to the WWW. Whilst the content of open Groups are publicly visible to anyone on Facebook, they are not publicly visible to anyone on the web. Thus, to a large degree, you influence or reach only those who are members of the Group.
Branding
A Facebook Page allows you to have a “vanity” URL (i.e. facebook.com/churchmag). Besides the in-your-face benefit of having a branded URL, search engines love relevant search content contained in URLs. URL branding of course makes it easier for people to find you as they can kind of guess what it’s most likely going to be, and it usually is. Facebook Groups on the other hand, do not allow for vanity URLs. It will always be www.facebook.com/groups/and-a-very-long-number. So not cool!
Conclusion
We’ve all heard the real estate mantra “location, location, location.” Well the same is true for the WWW and your online presence. If people cannot find you and your “Church brand” online (your “online-location”) via search engines or social media platforms, then the reality is that they’ll most likely go somewhere else. This is not an issue of filling the pews with numbers, but rather fulfilling the reality that the local Church is the hope of the world. Online visibility and branding is key to achieving this strategic goal.
In part 2, we’ll be looking at the whole aspect of Facebook Notifications and how they differ between Groups and Pages.
Chad Gleaves says
Great article, and although I am seeing things differently, my following questions do not really have a right or wrong answer. I think the answer depends on the personality of the users and what works best for them and what works for the strategies each person has to reach the lost. I only hope to add to the think tank we have going here. 🙂
Question: Is the role of Facebook to be a place to find new people on the World Wide Web?
Or is it to communicate with people?
Does it have to do both?
Or is it okay to focus on what it was designed for and that is to communicate with people?
I see a separation of purpose.
Reaching out: (examples)
1. Web page – Reaches out to Google search
2. Google places, yelp, etc.- Reaches out to Voice search like siri and google voice.
3. A tv commercial – Reaches Tv viewers.
4. A billboard – Reaches Car owners
5. Facebook pages reach Facebook users.
In this day and age, we must be careful in thinking that being listed on Google search is the holy grail. Our generation can be reached WITHOUT a Google search and Google knows their search engine is a giant that is dying. Please understand, Google in not dying, but Google search as we know it dying. http://www.zdnet.com/blog/facebook/former-google-exec-facebook-twitter-are-killing-search/8812 It will be cannibalized into other forms of search. Other forms of getting our information. It may take 15 years to die but it is dying. Search as we know it will have gate keepers such as Google voice, Siri, Microsoft “voice” search, Facebook, Twitter, and Tumblr, that will limit and direct searches to the places THEY decide is relevant.
Reaching in: – These are places that we “collect” people because they want to hear what we have to say.
1. Email
2. Facebook groups
3. Newsletters
4. Pinterest
5. DVD and CD’s
So if we try to make something it is not, (example) a Cell phone (reaching in) into a Billboard (reaching out), we risk never expanding our own horizons because we assume EVERYTHING has to be one thing. Search Engine Optimization SHOULD be considered and taken into account but should never be ones focus. Our focus should be to use each form of communication for its intended purpose.
My point in all of this rambling is that I feel it serves us best to divide up the roles of our electronic communication by what it is INTENDED for and use it for those purposes.
Web pages – work great for Calendars and SEO
Email – works best for direct communication but…
Text message – works great as a email replacement for most phone users.
Facebook pages – work well to reach out and draw Facebook users in. It is also decent at communication.
Facebook groups – work amazingly well at communicate with people who are on Facebook.
Please understand, I only want to add to the “think tank” here on Churchm.ag, I hope to hear others jump in and give their view on these newer technologies and how we can use them to further Gods Kingdom and reach people for Christ.
Darryl Schoeman says
Hey Chad.
Thank you for your comment and what a wonderful set of questions to consider. you have indeed truly contributed to the think tank.
I think your comment (“the answer depends on … the strategies each person has to reach the lost”) highlights my driving point and that is that serious thought must be given to deciding which platform to use (how and why). Neither one on its own is the correct one – each has it’s specific purpose and we (the Church) must know what that purpose is. But sometimes we discover purpose by understanding what something does. This is why I wrote this set of articles – so that we can understand the differences between Groups and Pages and in so doing, hopefully fuel the Church’s communications strategies.
Again, awesome questions.
Brad Caldwell says
Actually, Facebook groups do allow you to create a vanity URL, even though it’ll still be Facebook.com/groups/whatever. I think this is a relatively new change though…
Darryl Schoeman says
Hi Brad
Thanks for that. I went and checked and there it is under “Set Up Group Address”. I think you’re right about the “newness” of the feature. But then, when Mr Zuckerberg making statements like, “We do things like shift code every single day”, it’s no wonder we are never on top of things (see here http://goo.gl/0rFC8).