Keywords

Social Media, Facebook, Advertising, Consumer opinion, India.

Introduction

Internet is the most significant development that affects the advertising across the globe in this era of globalization. It has been very successful in terms of mass communication, internet as a new communication tool has posed new challenges to mass media advertising. With this advancement in the communication, companies are trying to modify their traditional techniques of advertising to cater the vast range of public. Internet has tremendous potential as an advertising medium because of its universal presence. The purpose of social networking sites is to promote social interaction in a virtual setting. Communication is generally facilitated by the information provided in the profile. It frequently includes a member's photograph and personal information about his or her interests, both of which reveal information about one's identity. According to a latest study of college students in the United States, social networking sites are primarily used to maintain ties with offline acquaintances rather than to gain (Ellison et al. 2007). Youth media consumption, which accounts for a considerable percentage of their time, provides a vital backdrop for their social, emotional, and cognitive development (Roberts, et al. 2005). Facebook has become one of the important platforms for all the corporate across globe for advertising. Advertising through Facebook has become very popular nowadays. Social media is a type of media that allows people to interact socially and participate in public debates (Mohrah, 2012). Social media has touched almost the life of every individual throughout the globe. After the advancement of internet the world has become a global village. The boundaries throughout the globe blurred and people to people contacts developed beyond the limits. Social media has contributed to the lives of millions of people worldwide. Social media as all of us know is any online media that helps people to socialize with one another. Socializing here would mean interacting with one another and developing social contacts.

Literature Review

Advertising is a predictor of civilization's progress, improvement, and perfection. It is a part of our social, cultural, and economic landscape (Batra, Myers and Aaker 2002). The practice of connecting social network members to target categories that have been specified by the advertiser is known as social media targeting (Goyal, 2013). The process by which humans interpret sensory input has been termed as perception (Lahlry, 1991). Many studies have been conducted on the attitudes of social media users toward advertising (Campbell, et al. 2012; Kelly, et al. 2010; Wolin, et al. 2002), and they all conclude that customers have a strong desire to avoid advertisements. Previous research on social network users has revealed the benefits that members of online groups look for. The changes in media habits have also been noted (Palmer, Lewis, 2009). Facebook is the most popular and fascinating social media platform for businesses to use for marketing (Roberts, 2010). The emergence of social broadcasting technologies has substantially improved free access to information globally (Shi. et. al. 2014). After the 1970s, people's perceptions of advertising shifted from positive to unfavourable (Shavitt et. al. 1998). Social media is rapidly expanding and has enormous potential, but it is still in its infancy in India (Bashar et. al, 2012). Social media has evolved into a platform that anybody with Internet connection can use (Bajpai. et. al. 2012). Facebook is one of the efficient advertising platforms, because social interaction and communication is already taking place there. This permits different organisations to be directly merged into conversations simply by appearing on the website (Learmonth, 2009). Chu (2011) inspected the connection between Facebook mark related gathering support, publicizing reactions, and the mental variables of self - exposure and states of mind among individuals and non-individuals from Facebook gatherings. The examination verified that clients who are individuals from bunches on Facebook will probably unveil their own information than non-individuals are. Chu (2011) that clarifies gather cooperation and engagement with online advertisements requires a more elevated amount of individual data since clients transparently uncover their associations with Facebook gatherings and advance brands or items when they pass on promotions to their companions. "Facebook bunches give channels that customers regard valuable when looking for self-status in an item classification, as does passing on viral substance about brands to their social contacts" (Chu, 2011). Facebook scrutiny can enable different companies to use disconnected and internet showcasing activities, by furnishing extra following information as for promoting. The quintessence to promoting on a web-based social networking medium, for this situation Facebook, is the thing that the business needs the prospects to do subsequent to review the notice. For example go to a site, call a telephone number, round out per user answer card, or call their business delegate (Hindshaw, 2005). These activities produce drives that achieve the coveted after effect of promoting. Web-based social networking have been acclaimed for having sensational effects on each phase of the customer basic decision process and also affecting general conclusions and behaviour development (Mangold & Faulds, 2009). Mangold & Faulds (2009) examine the effect of the collaborations among buyers of web-based social networking on the improvement and execution of IMC procedures, recommending another interchanges worldview be produced. Keller (2009) underpins this idea with his dialog of compelling brand working through IMC and the client based brand value show (Reid, et al. 2005). Thus the hypothesis is formulated as below.

Ho-1: There is no significant perceptual difference towards Facebook Advertising among young male and female respondents.

Methodology

Factors

As discussed earlier, five factors are considered for this study. A structured questionnaire with five point scale was used to collect opinions of the respondents, where 1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree. The questionnaire was circulated on Facebook and responses were collected from individuals in through their respective Facebook accounts. Questionnaire consists of two parts namely demographic profile and five factors adopted from famous study conducted by Pollay & Mittal in (1993). Table 1 shows that structured questionnaire, which is pre-tested and reliability (Cronbach’s Alpha) is found to 0.794 for Entertainment, 0.804 for Product Information, 0.918 for Advertising Response, 0.852 for Brand Building and 0.812 for Consumer Manipulation) in Table 1.

Participants

In this study stratified random sampling technique was used. The respondents were split into four categories based on their occupation.’ viz. Govt. employees, Private employees, Students and Homemakers, also others were included in the sample like businessmen, daily wagers, and unemployed youth. The respondents were categorized into two groups: 200 males and 200 females. The study was carried out in Hyderabad, the capital of Telangana State, India, with the audience being heavily exposed to Facebook advertising. The city of Hyderabad was chosen for this reason since the researcher has personal and professional connections there. As a result, residents of the city had easier access to information. Furthermore, Hyderabad is expanding in terms of the IT industry, and the city's residents come from a variety of ethnic backgrounds in Table 2.

Findings

Descriptive statistics

Table 2 shows the demographic profile of respondents in terms of gender, frequency of going online and profession. The table clearly shows that young gender composition of respondents is 50% male and 50% female. It also displays that most of the respondents i.e. 90.5% of the respondents are daily users of Facebook. It can be also seen that sample composition of profession is from each profession viz. Govt. Employees, Private Employees, Students and self-employed in Table 3.

Table 4 displays that 51.6% agree that sometimes Facebook Ads are even more pleasant than other media contents followed by 22% of the respondents who feel neutral about the same. Additionally 20% of the respondents strongly agree that sometimes Facebook Advertisements are even more pleasant than other media contents. Table 2 also reveals that 41.4% of the respondents agree that Facebook Advertising is interesting and attractive followed by 31.2% of the respondents who strongly agreed about the same.  Additionally 22.6% of the respondents were undecided about the same in Table 4.

Table 4 shows that 40.7% of the users agree that Facebook Ads are valuable source of information about most recent style followed by 32.0% of the respondents who strongly agree with the same. It also displays that 47.8% agree that Facebook Advertising helps them keep up-to-date about products/services available in the market places followed by 25.2% of the respondents who strongly agree with the same. Additionally 20.0% of the respondents feel neutral that Facebook Advertising helps them to get recent updates about products/services available in the marketplace in Table 5.

Table 5 shows that 39.8% of the respondents agree that they would like to purchase a product advertised on Facebook followed by 31.8% of the respondents who feel neutral about the same. Additionally 15.0% of the respondents disagree that they would like to purchase a product advertised on Facebook.

Tables also depicts that 45.0% agree that they would like to visit a product website after being exposed to it through Facebook advertisements, followed by 22.2% of the respondents who feel neutral about the same. 15.7% of the respondents strongly agree that they would visit a product website after being exposed to an ad in Facebook; additionally 11.3% of the respondents disagree with the same.

Table 6 depicts that 49.7% of the respondents feels neutral that it is easy for them to memorize brands advertised through other mediums such as broadcast media as opposed to the ones advertised on Facebook, 19.7% of the respondents agree with the same, whereas, 17.2% of the respondents disagree that it is easy for them to memorize brands advertised through other mediums such as broadcast media as opposed to the ones advertised on Facebook. Table also shows that 45.2% agree that they recognize brands that are advertised on Facebook followed by 25.4% who opted neutral for the same. Additionally 15.0% of the respondents strongly agree that they recognize brands that are advertised on Facebook, 13.6% disagree and a negligible 0.8% strongly disagree that they recognize brands that are advertised on Facebook.

Table 7 depicts that 41.1% feel neutral that Facebook Advertising persuades people to buy things they should not buy followed by 29.4% of the respondents who agree with the same. Additionally 11.2% of the respondents strongly agree with the same, whereas, 11.9% of the respondents disagree that Facebook Advertising persuades people to buy things they should not buy and remaining 6.4% of the respondents strongly disagree that Facebook Advertising persuades people to buy things they should not buy. Table also reveals that 36.0% feel neutral that most Facebook Advertising insults the intelligence of the average consumer followed by 31.2% of the respondents who agree with the same. Additionally 15.4% of the respondents disagree that most Facebook Advertising insults the intelligence of the average consumer, whereas, 11.0% of the respondents strongly agree that most Facebook Advertising insults the intelligence of the average consumer and remaining 6.4% of the respondents strongly disagree with the same.

Test of Hypothesis

Table 8 displays the mean scores for all five variables by gender. As seen in the table of variables, male and female respondents had mostly identical mean scores for Entertainment and Product Information, indicating that both male and female respondents have a favourable opinion of these two aspects. Whereas on factors Advertising Response, Brand Building and Consumer Manipulation.

Ho-1: There is no significant perceptual difference towards Facebook Advertising among young male and young female respondents.

In order to know the mean score difference across young respondents, an independent sample students’ test was performed. The results of the test are presented in the Table 9 as showed by the Table on two factors (Entertainment & Product Information) there was a significant difference. These two factors yielded p value more than 0.05.

Conclusion

Majority of the respondents use Facebook on a daily basis; most of the respondents think that Facebook advertisements may be more engaging at times. The majority of respondents also stated that Facebook advertising is a great source of knowledge about the current fashion trends and keeps them updated on products/services available in the market. Majority of the respondents agree that they recognize brands that are advertised on Facebook. On factors, Entertainment and Product Information male and female respondents have almost same mean score, This clearly shows that both male and female respondents had a favourable opinion of these 2 factors. Whereas on factors Advertising Response, Brand Building and Consumer Manipulation, Value Distortion male respondents have got highest mean score. On two factors (Entertainment & Product Information) there is statistically a significant difference. These two factors yielded p value more than 0.05. It would be safe to conclude that present paper clearly highlights that advertising through Facebook is being appreciated by the consumers and there is a positive view regarding the same, however there is still a room for improvement as results clearly shows that female respondents don’t hold a positive view in comparison with male respondents.

References

1. Aaker, D. A., Batra, R. and Myers, J.G. (2002). Advertising Management, 5th Ed. London: Prentice Hall International.
2. B ajpai, V. Pandey, S. and Shriwas, S. (2012). Social media marketing: Strategies and its impact. International Journal of Social Science and Interdisciplinary Research, 1 (7).
3. Bashar, A., Ahmad, I., & Wasiq, M. (2012). Effectiveness of Social Media as a Marketing Tool: An Empirical Study, International Journal Of Marketing, Financial Services & Management Research, 1(11), 88-99.
4. Chu, S. C. (2011). Viral advertising in social media: participation in facebook groups and responses among college-aged users. Journal of Interactive Advertising, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 30-43.
5. Colin Campbell, Carla Ferraro, and Sean Sands (2012). Segmenting Consumer Reactions to Social Network Advertising. Advances in Consumer Research Volume 40, eds., Pages: 870-872.
6. Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook “friends:” Social capital and college students' use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143–1168.
7. Goyal, S. (2013).  Advertising on social media. Scientific Journal of Pure and Applied Sciences, 2(5), 220-223.
8. Hindshaw, M., (2005). A survey of key success factors in the financial services Marketing and Brand Management, 10(1):37-38.
9. Keller, K., (2009). Building strong brands in a modern marketing communications environment. Journal of Marketing Communications 15 (2), 139-155.
10. Kelly, L., Kerr, G. & Drennan, J. (2010). Avoidance of advertising in social networking sites: the teenage perspective. Journal of Interactive Advertising, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 16-27.
11. Kothari C. R. (2009). Research Methodology: Methods & Techniques (Second Revised Edition), New Age International Publishers, New Delhi.
12. Lahlry, S. (1991). A blue print for perception training. Journal for training and development, Volume 45, Issue 8, Pages 21-25.
13. Learmouth, M, & Klaassen, A. (2009. Facebook’s plan to ramp up ad revenue.Advertising Age, 80(4).
14. Mangold, W., &Faulds, D. (2009). Social Media: The new hybrid element of the promotion mix. Business Horizons , 52 (4), 357-365.
15. Palmer, A. and Koenig‐Lewis, N. (2009). An experiential, social network‐based approach to direct marketing, Direct Marketing: An International Journal, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 162-176.
16. Pempek, T. A., Yermolayeva, Y. A., & Calvert, S. L. (2009). College student’s social networking experiences on Facebook, Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 30, 227-238.
17. Pollay, R. W. & Mittal, B. (1993), Here’s the beef: Factors, determinants and segments in consumer criticism of advertising. Journal of Marketing, 57(7), 99-114.
18. Reid, M., Luxton, S., Mavondo, F., (2005). The relationship between integrated marketing communication, market orientation, and brand orientation. Journal of Advertising 34(4), 11 23.
19. Roberts (2010), Privacy and Perceptions: How Facebook Advertising Affects its Users, The Elon Journal of Undergraduate Research in Communications, Vol. 1, No. 1.
20. Roberts, D. F., Foehr, U. G., & Rideout, V. (2005). Generation M: Media in the lives of 8–18 year-olds. Menlo Park, CA: Kaiser Family Foundation. Stern, S. R. (2004). Expressions of identity online: Prominent features and gender differences in adolescents' World Wide Web home pages. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 48(2), 218–243
21. Saadeghvaziri, F. J., & Hosseini, H. K. (2011). Mobile advertising: An investigation of factors creating positive attitude in Iranian customers. African Journal of Business Management, 5(2), 394–404
22. Shavitt, S., Lowrey, P. and Haefner, J. (1998). Public attitudes towards advertising: More favorable than you might think. Journal of Advertising Research 3
23. Shi, Z., Rui, H., & Whinston, A. B. (2014). Content sharing in a social broadcasting environment: Evidence from Twitter. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 38(1), 123-142.
24. Wolin, L. D.; Korgaonkar, P.; Lund, D. (2002).  Beliefs, attitudes and behavior towards web advertising, International Journal of Advertising 21(1): 87–113
25. Zeng, F., Huang, L., Dou, W., (2009). Social factors in user perceptions and responses to advertising in online social networking communities. Journal of Interactive Advertising 10(1), 1-13.