Church Website and Facebook

[Pete Vecchi]

I'm not sure if this is the type of "media" with which this forum mainly deals, but I thought I'd just throw this out here to see if it is interesting to anyone or if anyone has any comments.

Recently, we changed our congregation's website to be that when a person types in the URL of www.alphanazarene.com it takes them directly to the congregation's Facebook page. I've found that it's been much easier to keep the facebook page up to date, and that I can post sermon manuscripts under "notes", and that I can post announcements and reminders that will go the people who have said that they want to get those Facebook notifications.

Feel free to check it out. The only "down" side I've found thus far is that when the Facebook page first comes up after typing in www.alphanazarene.com the page comes up gray. However, it becomes the regular Facebook white as soon as the page gets clicked on. I don't know how to stop that gray from coming up first, though.

Anyway, please feel free to check out the web page/Facebook page, and let me know what you think of it. Also, I'm interested in any comments people may have about the church's website being a Facebook page in the first place.

[Susan Unger]

I see what you mean. I don't know why it comes up gray though I have had that happen to me before one time. I like the interactiveness of FB for a church's website, personally.

[Craig Laughlin]

We are working on the connection between our web page and Facebook. We have created a lot of Facebook pages including the main page where most of the pictures and fun stuff goes but also a lot of ministries have there own or are thinking about creating their own. We are currently posting VBS photos and hopefully tonight some video. We hope this will direct new people to our facebook page as well as some more of the regulars.

We also have a closed Prayer request facebook page that is very popular because people can keep up and can add their own updates.

www.Marysville-Nazarene.org

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Marysv...?v=wall&__a=3&

[Rich Schmidt]

The only "down" side I've found thus far is that when the Facebook page first comes up after typing in www.alphanazarene.com the page comes up gray. However, it becomes the regular Facebook white as soon as the page gets clicked on. I don't know how to stop that gray from coming up first, though.

It looks like when you set up your domain name to forward to your Facebook page, you opted for some kind of domain masking, so that it keeps your domain name (alphanazarene.com) in the address bar, opening Facebook in an iframe (well, opening your page hosted at squadron282.com, which then opens your facebook page). It looks like Facebook doesn't like being in an iframe. When you click on the gray page, it's breaking out of it.

You should be able to go back and change that setting.

Another possibility is that you have a background image set on your squadron282.com page (pressbkgd.jpg) before it loads Facebook in the iframe. So if for some reason you want to keep the domain masking feature on, you could try to get rid of that background image, and maybe that would solve the problem. But, really, you should just lose the domain masking thing and opt for a simple redirect.

OK, as for having the Facebook page as your church's website: go for it! If it works for you, and it works for the folks you're reaching, then I think it's great.

[Kelly R Davis]

You should know that "Facebook" is often blocked in the business world. My company web site is www.ubs.com/fa/kellydavis

[Rich Schmidt]

You should know that "Facebook" is often blocked in the business world. My company web site is www.ubs.com/fa/kellydavis

Oooh. Good point. My wife works for the school district, and facebook is blocked across the board - at all the schools, central office, etc. That includes at teachers' desks.

[Pete Vecchi]

It looks like when you set up your domain name to forward to your Facebook page, you opted for some kind of domain masking, so that it keeps your domain name (alphanazarene.com) in the address bar, opening Facebook in an iframe (well, opening your page hosted at squadron282.com, which then opens your facebook page). It looks like Facebook doesn't like being in an iframe. When you click on the gray page, it's breaking out of it.

You should be able to go back and change that setting.

Another possibility is that you have a background image set on your squadron282.com page (pressbkgd.jpg) before it loads Facebook in the iframe. So if for some reason you want to keep the domain masking feature on, you could try to get rid of that background image, and maybe that would solve the problem. But, really, you should just lose the domain masking thing and opt for a simple redirect.

Thanks! It appears that one of those things fixed it!

[Gary Creely]

I'm not sure if this is the type of "media" with which this forum mainly deals, but I thought I'd just throw this out here to see if it is interesting to anyone or if anyone has any comments.

Recently, we changed our congregation's website to be that when a person types in the URL of www.alphanazarene.com it takes them directly to the congregation's Facebook page. I've found that it's been much easier to keep the facebook page up to date, and that I can post sermon manuscripts under "notes", and that I can post announcements and reminders that will go the people who have said that they want to get those Facebook notifications.

Feel free to check it out. The only "down" side I've found thus far is that when the Facebook page first comes up after typing in www.alphanazarene.com the page comes up gray. However, it becomes the regular Facebook white as soon as the page gets clicked on. I don't know how to stop that gray from coming up first, though.

Anyway, please feel free to check out the web page/Facebook page, and let me know what you think of it. Also, I'm interested in any comments people may have about the church's website being a Facebook page in the first place.

Pete brings up an interesting point- Facebook only?

I tend to think this is a bad idea.

Lets work backwards from this premise: the internet is not facebook and facebook is not the internet. The truth is Facebook would be perfectly content if your entire online experience was through their site (and for some it virtually is).

Why I think a facebook only approach to a churches online presence is a bad idea:

1. You are pushing people into the facebook eco system (even though they don't have to join to see the page), and with some of their recent security and personal information misgivings I am not sure that I would want to be responsible for funneling my people in that direction.

2. It lacks professionalism- Many tech savvy younger people (myself included) would see a facebook only online presence in poor taste, to me it says the the church doesn't value having an online presence and so we just slap up a free facebook page and redirect our site there.

3. FB lacks the kind of flexibility you need to even do even a mediocre job of presenting your church and its ministries to the public.

4. You are not able to get some really useful metrics that you can get from services like google analytics that can tell you a who lot about the traffic on your site.


Having said all that-

Facebook is better than nothing, or a really bad site.

Facebook is an excellant (if not the best) companion to a website, and a great way to keep of with the facebookers in your church, and outside of your church.



In the end FB is part of a good online strategy, it just will not function well as the strategy alone.

Church website IMO serve 2 primary purposes 1. One is to be a searchable multi-media billboard for the church (creating more first time visitors) , and the 2nd is to serve as an online community or informational hub for the current members. Face book does a good job with the second, but an awful job at the first.

[Rich Schmidt]

2. It lacks professionalism- Many tech savvy younger people (myself included) would see a facebook only online presence in poor taste, to me it says the the church doesn't value having an online presence and so we just slap up a free facebook page and redirect our site there.

I have the feeling that for people younger than you (and me), the response might be flipped. (Emphasis on "might be.")

Most young people don't create their own websites anymore. They have pages on Facebook or MySpace or YouTube or whatever. Maybe they're blogging using WordPress.com, Blogger, etc. So my guess (and it's only that) is that some young people would land on Pete's church's Facebook page and think, "Cool! They're on Facebook!"

As for the rest, I think the reasons Pete gave for going the Facebook route are decent ones. (Echoing your comment: a Facebook-only site is better than a not-updated-regularly site.) Yes, he'll lose out on (any) design flexibility and the metrics. But the biggest negative, to me, is the one Kelly mentioned: it may be inaccessible to lots of people in the places where they do their web browsing (work, school).

FWIW, our church website isn't all that great. I almost never update it, except to update service times/location/staff/etc. So it's pretty much just a brochure for the church. But many of the visitors to our church find us through our website and mention how welcoming they thought it was. It made them want to visit. Just tossing that out there...

[Gary Creely]

Most young people don't create their own websites anymore. They have pages on Facebook or MySpace or YouTube or whatever. Maybe they're blogging using WordPress.com, Blogger, etc. So my guess (and it's only that) is that some young people would land on Pete's church's Facebook page and think, "Cool! They're on Facebook!"

Most young people never did create their own web sites. Some people would not have a problem with the face book only approach, but some would see it as very unprofessional. You are very limited in how you can present your information on facebook, and it is a poor platform to present your church to first time visitors.

As for the rest, I think the reasons Pete gave for going the Facebook route are decent ones. (Echoing your comment: a Facebook-only site is better than a not-updated-regularly site.) Yes, he'll lose out on (any) design flexibility and the metrics. But the biggest negative, to me, is the one Kelly mentioned: it may be inaccessible to lots of people in the places where they do their web browsing (work, school).

Just to add one more issue, is by being on facebook only you are pushing potential visitors onto a page that will display advertising you have no control over. (advertising like the next Benny Hin rally)

FWIW, our church website isn't all that great. I almost never update it, except to update service times/location/staff/etc. So it's pretty much just a brochure for the church. But many of the visitors to our church find us through our website and mention how welcoming they thought it was. It made them want to visit. Just tossing that out there...

Exactly, web sites are a really big deal for 1st time visitors, and that is the function FB does not serve well.