-
Website
http://www.ignitesocialmedia.com/ -
Original page
http://www.ignitesocialmedia.com/quantifying-the-impact-of-social-media-where-the-edelman-white-paper-got-it-right-and-where-they-got-it-wrong/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
- Top 10 WTF Social Media Moments of 2009 | Ignite Social Media
- "Social Media is a Cocktail Party" is now 99 cents on Kindle | Ignite Social Media
- Radian6 Sentiment Analysis Review - Does Natural Language Processing Work? | Ignite Social Media
- The 4 Cornerstones of Social Media Monitoring | Ignite Social Media
- "Marketing with Meaning": A social media book, and then some | Ignite Social Media
You make excellent points. I think your point about context and topic is very central to this whole discussion. This is exactly how we approach influence at Radian6. Influence is context specific and topic specific, as you say. That is why our measurement of influence needs to be context-based (by topic) and not only personality-based. Now, there is a factor (let’s call it popularity instead of influence), where “by their nature” someone has a greater potential to become an on-topic influencer, but this potential does not make them an influencer (yet) until they become active in that topic and they begin to generate the conversational dynamics that demonstrate their influence (i.e. posts/memes, comments, unique commenter, on-topic links, engagement, etc.).
In terms of your proposed ideas, I would love to see this “white pages” directory materialize. There are several attempts underway (Spock, lifestreams/Tumblr, etc.), but none of them have tipped yet. In our monitoring tool, we already analyze contribution levels from multiple sources and measure topic/context-based influence down to a user level but each of your online personas would be identified and ranked independently. If we had such a directory, we could unify them in a snap. We are thinking through various ways extract these persona linkages, but a directory would be great, even if it was just a simple lookup.
Marcel LeBrun
CEO, Radian6
@Peter Kim: That's a good idea. I've stumbled across various thoughts on the white paper that are all across the board. Anything from a del.icio.us page of links on it to a wiki could be cool. We could do it, of course, but maybe better coming from the roundtable. Don't want to steal/monopolize the conversation you started.
@Marcel: Glad you liked it. What you're doing in the space seemed to fit very naturally and your technology seems like it would adjust nicely to it. I was poking around Naymz last night, and it could be it, but they've got it walled off to even see a full profile, so I doubt you could get all that data..
Ideas have power. But when the idea is matched with a proven personality, power becomes dynamite.
Similarly, when an influential person propagates bad ideas regularly they lose influence. Rubel is a great example of that.
Also, I thought Edelman's perception study was not that great. Businesses are not gaining more respect in my opinion, nor in DC pollster's opinions. Edelman needs to try harder.
Thanks for the thoughtful post.
As Jonny wrote, our (the round table's) intent was always to open this dialogue up to the community. We're well aware that we don't have all the answers; we're not even sure there is "one." What we all agreed on was this: the current tools and approaches to measuring the impact of social media are incredibly flawed.
We all think a wiki would be a great way to capture the dialogue and move this effort ahead. I presume you'd be moe than willing to contribute your thinking. We'll build it / launch it next month (as in February). With any luck, we can generate the kind of momentum Chris Brogan got with TwitterPacks earlier this week. .
Finally, irony noted. I read plenty, but have have been doing all my talking on facebook and twitter. Feel free to follow teitter.com/rickmurray. And FWIW, a new blog is being launched within the week.
Cheers,
Rick
At any rate, hoose to believe it or not, we actually hoped for this kind of dialogue.
At the same time, I also think that certain industries (particularly tech) will have their alpha bloggers and the rest of the world that are just using the tools to talk may be having thousands of conversations without an alpha leaders. But those micro-influencers are certainly out there, and if we can find them we can help our clients immensely.
~Jim
Been thinking about this topic for a few weeks now after reading several of those white papers you mentioned.
Also been trying to define the success of several social media campaigns.
I also would like to understand and evolve my own social media index.
I have a great opportunity to start fresh with a new social media persona, I am starting a new job next week. It will be in the outdoor gear and clothing industry and I'll be starting fresh with some new social media campaigns.
So I have started tracking my regular social media and tech activity under one account. And I will start tracking fresh my activities in this new role as well next week.
I am using Google Notebook and Google Docs to track all of my activities in hopes of sharing and publishing the data for analysis. I hope to define some benchmarks for success, rating, and analyzing reach of my social media index.
I invite anyone to collaborate and can have access via API to my META Data and Daily content feeds for analysis and feedback.
I also invite anyone track and share their own data.
Your number 1 got me going Jim: To move the social media index forward, we'll need a system that serves as the white pages of social media with RSS.
~Jim
Find the people who are passionate about the topic in question. Give them the tools to spread the news. Viral will happen. Stop looking for the big dogs ... they don't run fast. Gather up a herd of chihuahuas and more people will hear the bark.
I like your thoughts about hubs of influence. Over time, it has been my experience that people rise up as an influencer and then ebb and flow as time goes on. Let me explain, where someone may have once been the go-to person on a particular topic in a small community, say useful tips, for example, they may then become a more credible voice on some other aspect, or they may fade from the scene entirely. It changes.
One caveat, if they are one of the top influencers in their niche, their opinion or referral might still carry more weight than others on topics outside their expertise.
Check out what Plaxo announced today, they are trying to build this aggregate network.
To see what Kami is referring to, check out: http://blog.plaxo.com/archives/2008/02/introduc...
Thank you for linking to the paper. As Rick stated above and as we mentioned in the paper, we never intended to present a fait accompli but rather an aim to try and act as a catalyst for dialogue. I think what you have written is great and has raised a few thoughts in my mind as to how things could progress moving forward.
I think we are a long way of from having a definitive answer but with so many people actively engaged in understanding this, I am sure that we are closer to achieving some consensus. I like the idea of a wiki and look forward to the discussions moving forward.
In other words: A user is looking online for experts on photoshop. Who does he trust? Or (an even better question) with whom does he/she feel comfortable enought to ask the question? The photoshop super 'expert' (years of experience blah blah blah) or a friend that dabbles in photoshop?
Leads me to think that it's not just about the nodes themselves but that the quality of the connection changes according to the subject and the way the nodes view each other.