Bright Matrices

Writings & musings of Mike Zavarello (a.k.a. brightmatrix), a "red mage" web developer.

Author: brightmatrix (page 4 of 7)

Scales and Sheen: How Very New Social Media Accounts Can Amass Influence So Quickly

As social influence metrics like Klout continue to gain, well, clout in the industry, instances will arise where folks will cry foul over perceived inconsistencies in how scores are generated. An example I’ll use in this post is how very new Twitter accounts are able to amass very high influence scores in a very short period of time.

Let me preface this discussion with influence as opposed to popularity. Numerous articles were written last year that clearly illustrated that one does not equal the other. Hollywood celebrities, musicians, and other popular figures have a great deal of popularity, but this does not translate well into influence, which is defined as being able to convince others in your social network to take action. Mark Schaefer, author of the {grow} blog, described just how challenging and difficult it can be to get your followers to do something, even if you have the popularity and reach of Alyssa Milano.

So, how can new accounts become so influential so quickly? Let’s study the Twitter accounts of a well-known and controversial actor and well-known, and currently missing, snake.

First, the actor. Charlie Sheen opened his Twitter account on Tuesday, March 1, 2011 to much fanfare. At the time, Sheen had a much-publicized falling out with Chuck Lorre, the director of his CBS show, “Two and a Half Men.” Folks speculated, and were quickly confirmed, that Sheen would use Twitter as a mouthpiece to share his perspective on the situation. Once word got out that his account was up and verified, the followers piled on fast. According to TwitterCounter, Sheen’s account accumulated 519,343 followers on the very first day. March 2 saw a subsequent increase of well over 530,000 additional followers, leading Sheen to reach the 2 million follower mark in well under a week. With over 3.3 million followers as of March 30, @CharlieSheen currently holds an astronomical Klout score of 94.

TwitterCounter chart for @CharlieSheen

Now, on to the reptile. On March 27, 2011, a venomous Egyptian cobra was found missing from the Bronx Zoo’s reptile house in New York City. The zoo promptly closed the enclosure as the search went on for the wayward serpent. It didn’t take long for a clever mind to make light of the situation, and on Monday, March 28, a Twitter account appeared under the handle @BronxZoosCobra that posted updates of the cobra’s adventures around NYC. On the first day the account was opened, TwitterCounter shows 86,140 followers tuned in to follow the cobra’s exploits. By 11 a.m. ET on Wednesday, March 30, the account has nearly 140,000 followers. While not as dramatic as Sheen’s account activity, the trend clearly shows a strong demand from folks on Twitter, resulting in a Klout score of 73 for the cobra (as of March 30).

TwitterCounter chart for @BronxZoosCobra

So, what can these two accounts teach us about social influence and the algorithms that determine their scores relative to others? It’s simple.

Demand, in particular, a sharp increase in your network, is a strong factor in measuring overall social influence. Both @CharlieSheen and @BronxZoosCobra attracted a massive number of followers in a very short period of time, and, in Sheen’s case, the demand has risen over the four weeks since the account’s creation (although it is starting to level off a bit). While their influence scores may not indicate that their network will take any kind of action on their behalf, it does clearly show that they’re producing content that folks want to consume and share with their own networks.

Now, it can be assumed that an accelerated drop in a network’s size (think rats jumping from a sinking ship) would result in a corresponding plummet in influence. To a lesser extent, steady or very slow changes in network size would result in a similarly consistent influence score. I’ve observed this in my own personal account: my network size is growing, albeit grudgingly and gradually, and my Klout score has remained relatively stable for several weeks.

What’s the take-away from all of this?

  • First, the systems themselves aren’t broken or being gamed. Demand is one of many factors these algorithms are using in their calculations, and sharp changes in network size seem to greatly influence (pun intended) the weight this specific metric has on the entire score. It would be informative to study Sheen’s and the cobra’s accounts after several months to see whether their overall influence continues to maintain itself over time. As always, don’t just look at the score itself. Do your homework and dig into the underlying metrics to figure out just what’s driving that high number.
  • Second, don’t look for demand alone to change your fortunes. It’s already been shown how sizeable networks don’t always translate to positive action from their audience. Exercise proactive listening and active engagement to energize your followers and fans. Learn about them and their interests, understand their needs, and give them what they want.
  • Third, be creative and innovative. Whoever created the @BronxZoosCobra account used a captivating news story about the cobra’s release to create something fun and clever for the folks on Twitter. This adaptive and nimble thinking is precisely what Jay Baer and Amber Naslund describe in their book, “The Now Revolution.” Another excellent example is how Aflac turned its fortunes around by creating casting call for their signature mascot after their principle voice actor, Gilbert Gottfried, was fired from the job.

Update (4-1-11): About midday on Thursday, March 31, 2011, it was reported that the Bronx Zoo’s cobra was found, apparently in a “non-public” part of the reptile house. No status update from the @BronxZoosCobra Twitter account as of 8:45 a.m. today, but I suppose the zookeepers took its iPhone away. It will be informative to see whether the owner of the account keeps up the cobra’s commentary, and also whether its followers and influence will fade over time.

The parody account @BPGlobalPR, set up after the Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf Coast last year to poke fun at BP’s series of public relations flubs, is still active but seems to be slowly losing followers as the attention around the incident fades. Its Klout score, however, has stayed relatively steady over the past 30 days, hovering around 64.

Editorial note: I also updated the title of this post to read “Very New Social Media Accounts” vs. its original “Very New Social Media Networks.”

Taking Aim at the Cloud of Doubt

It seems that ever since I dove into the realm of social media, specifically Twitter, I get this nagging, flagging feeling of doubt every six weeks or so. It’s like some miniature existential crisis, but on a recurring basis. I wonder: how can my works matter in the presence of other great thinkers? Why didn’t I think of that concept, that idea, that perspective?

When you’re part of a swift-moving current of constant thoughts, adamant opinions, and vibrant conversations, it’s easy to be overwhelmed by the sudden awareness that talent is all around you, and you’re the least of it all. It can be a crushing weight, that sensation of mediocrity. But really, if you think about it, the new challenger who’s arrived is that awareness. Never before have we been able to tap into so many creative minds at once. Industry leaders and luminaries have always been generating ideas, writing books, keynoting conferences, etc. It’s that level playing field tools like Twitter offer that make it seem like you’re in direct competition with the heavyweights.

So, what can both you and I do about all this?

Get over it, shake it off, and don’t get sucked into an imaginary popularity contest.

Did you make a mistake? Learn from it and grow. Do you admire another’s work? Absorb their teachings and add to your knowledge and skills. Are you questioning your own professional self-worth? Take both the good and bad from your colleagues and connections for a balanced viewpoint; learn not only what ideals you want to obtain, but which to avoid.

We’re each our own worst critics. I firmly believe a hallmark of the creative thinker is the constant criticism of our own works coupled with the incessant drive to simply do better. It’s the motive power that keeps us questing and questioning the world, ourselves, and our place within it. The key, I think, is to continuously remind ourselves of that, accept the times of uncertainty alongside the great works we do produce, and realize that this too shall pass. You’re not in a race to win with these folks; you’re out there to do the very best with your life and your talents.

I’m taking aim at the cloud of doubt, and I hope you are, too. Let’s wish ourselves great victory!

Related goodness: Here’s two outstanding posts related to my train of thought that I discovered in this morning’s blog reading:

Suck It, eBooks; I’m Keeping It Real

I’ll be the first to admit it: I have a love affair with books. Not the next iteration of their evolution, ebooks, but the real deal; the true printed word.

I’ve consumed books with a great zeal ever since I learned to read. Yes, I was the odd child in the gifted and talented classes who was reading at the collegiate level in the seventh grade. Engrossed in thick, thousand-page fantasy and sci-fi novels is how I’ve enjoyed spending my free time for nearly three decades now.

I love the tactile experience of books. The thump of your hands when you clasp a hardcover. The jagged, offset page edges some publishers use to embellish their titles. The clean smell of the paper. The colored threads at the base of hardback’s spine. The subtleties of the fonts and typefaces; a bonus if the publisher gives you a short soliloquy about the ones they chose after the author information at the back.

The entire process of picking up a book, thumbing to either the very first page or wherever you left off, and paying homage to your collection when you’re through is a wonderful experience to me. I continue to entertain the fantasy of someday owning a true library, all decked out with hardwood shelves, a leather chair, thick rugs, and those wheeled ladders to reach the taller stacks.

While I’m a full-fledged convert to digital music and have never looked back since the arrival of the MP3, I find I have great hesitation when it comes to ebooks and their ilk. There’s just something distant and cold in the act of “paging” through a text on a Kindle, and the crystalline, candy-like display on the iPad is just ripe for distraction (“Call me Ishmael…”; say, what’s happening on Twitter?). There’s no satisfaction to me in lending, returning to, or passing down a treasured text in digital format. These stories, treatises, and essays are art forms that deserve the sanctity of physical dimensions.

Rest assured, I’m no literature luddite; I’m fully enthralled with Twitter and the information streams in social media, and I do see the promises and opportunities inherit in the ebook format. I’m certainly not one to advocate against an ebook format simply because I won’t use it; you have to give the users what they want.

Nonetheless, I have no fear saying today that, as far as I’m concerned, ebooks can suck it. When it comes to settling down with a riveting dungeon crawl, an essay on astronomy, or Norse mythology, I prefer to keep it real.

Photo: The gorgeous stack of texts I received on Christmas 2010: two treatises on psychology, four sci-fi novels (three of which I’ve finished as of this post), one essay on the demotion of Pluto to dwarf planet status, and a Dungeons & Dragons strategy guide. Oh, and some polyhedral dice, just for good measure.

Social Authority in Search Results and Lessons from the Past

I read a very interesting article on Mark Schaefer’s blog {Grow} today that discussed some relatively new topics in the search world: “social scoring” and “social authority.” He cited excerpts from interviews with Google and Bing that explain how both search firms are considering changes to their algorithms to account for the influence of content authors.

The concept of “social authority” is a sea change in how online content is indexed and discovered. With the rise of user-contributed content over the past few years, the fact that Google and Bing are giving more credence to this medium is, to me, a logical outcome. We’ve already borne witness to real-time search results appearing in our queries; calculating the weight of one’s social authority is merely the next step.

Reading through the comments, however, this trend doesn’t seem to sit well with folks.

Is social authority going to be gamed? Of course it will. One of the reasons the phrase “search engine optimization” still tastes funny in many mouths is due to “black hat SEO” that used sneaky and misleading techniques to propel biased or unrelated content to the top of search engine rankings. Google’s Page Rank, once considered a key metric in figuring out the overall importance and relevance of your online real estate, has pretty much fallen off the radar due to numerous attempts to exploit the algorithm.

Social authority doesn’t have to be scary. What needs to happen to prevent a dark future for this concept is twofold.

Google, Bing, and other search entities need to be relentlessly proactive in how they integrate social authority into their results. I expect results that incorporate author authority to improve steadily over time as the search firms gather more data on the authors, their influence (including how that influence is generated and calculated), and the nature of their publishing platforms (Twitter, Facebook, blogs, etc.). Evolution of search algorithms needs to be intelligent enough and sophisticated enough that the relevant content “naturally” rises to the top.

Content authors need to come clean and stay that way. We all witnessed how black hat SEO came to ruin the party for those who genuinely and continuously thought about how to get the right content in front of the right viewers. We have to heed the lessons of the past and do things right this time around. Authors must be counseled on how to continue to create excellent content, in the proper medium, in the proper context. They must understand that silver bullets do not exist and that cutting corners will come back to bite them in the end.

Let’s fight hard to prevent “social authority” and “social scoring” from becoming the next four-letter words in the content world.

My 2011 Wish List for Klout

This has been quite a year for Klout. Their suite of measurements, specifically their “Klout score,” has risen to become a recognized standard in the realm of user-generated content and social communications. They’ve generated numerous articles on how corporations and industries are considering Klout to award perks, recognize influencers, and even possibly screen for job applicants. Klout has become, in essence, a “credit score” for the social space. Of course, detractors have had their say, and I’ve written my own article on why Klout’s metrics need to be used within their proper context.

I realize Klout is nascent, but the fact that they’ve gained the clout (pun intended) they have today speaks volumes for the need for solid, reliable metrics in social media. With each announcement Klout releases, I admit I find myself craving more. So, in the spirit of the holidays, I’ve cobbled together a “wish list” of features I’ve love to see from the good folks at Klout in 2011.

More Historical Data

Right now, Klout’s various charts show measurements up to 30 days in the past. As an avid student of analytics, the ability to delve further into the past and download that data for further analysis would be valuable for tracking trends and correlating against other communications and campaigns I work on.

I really enjoy the flexibility offered by Google Analytics, where you can show comparisons between two spans of time, send yourself automated reports in various formats, and slice the data in any number of ways. If Klout released a similar suite of data tools, they would make me, and I’m sure many other analytics geeks out there, very, very happy.

Comparison of Metrics

Klout provides a healthy array of charts that show trends and measurements of several supporting metrics, not just the Klout score itself. It would be great to see overlays of various metrics, such as my inbound/outbound message ratio laid atop my amplification score, to see how the various data points interact with and affect each other.

I realize this could stray into “correlation does not equal causation” territory, but we’re not talking “pirates vs. global warming” here. I don’t see the various data points being that off target to create egregiously false assumptions. That is, of course, provided people continue to do their homework.

Data Segmented by Channel

Originally, Klout was focused specifically on Twitter. Starting in October 2010, however, metrics from personal Facebook pages were added to the mix, and a beta for gathering LinkedIn data is in the works. If you had tied your Klout profile to Facebook, historical data was adjusted as of October 21, 2010, which resulted in often dramatic changes to your overall score.

A sound tenet of communications strategy is matching your message to the medium. It may not be effective or possible to broadcast, engage, or interact the same on Twitter as Facebook or LinkedIn. Therefore, I would expect overall influence to differ between channels.

While an overall Klout score (and its supporting metrics) is useful as a broad indicator, it would be immensely helpful to segment the data by channel so I can give more thought and consideration to how I communicate on that channel.

Real-time “Influenced By/Influencer Of” Updates

Klout offers a simple chart of whom you influence and who influences you. Up to five of each is shown in your profile. Currently, this “rogue’s gallery of influence” isn’t updated with any frequency; my set has been the same for many months, and others in my network have reported the same situation. Most the accounts shown in this chart are pretty obvious, but it remains a good insight into the cornerstones of your network. I’d love to see more “drift” here.

Transparent Data on Total Number of Profiles Indexed

Klout doesn’t automatically connect to every single Twitter or personal Facebook profile; in most cases, you need to create a profile to share your data and acquire a score. Why is this important? If you connect your Twitter account to Klout, your score is relative to all other Twitter accounts captured in Klout’s database, not every Twitter account in existence.

As with any study or poll, it’s necessary to know the total size of the data set in order to establish weights or bias on the resulting statistics. Currently, Klout doesn’t share the precise number of accounts they index. I’d like to see more specificity and transparency here.

I feel this is important for measuring and reporting on success in the social web. While I’m sure a healthy amount of influencer heavyweights are already ensconced in Klout’s data sets, knowing the total number of indexed profiles will help put the scores into more accurate and meaningful context.

Hub-and-Spoke Influence Diagram

This is more of a “pie in the sky” request, but it would be sweet to see a hub-and-spoke diagram of influencers. The current “influenced by/influencer of” chart allows you to click on a specific account to jump to their Klout profile, wherein you can see who influences them and who they influence in turn. I’d love to browse through a Flash- or AJAX-based hub-and-spoke diagram that could show me dynamically who connects to whom in the influence realm.

The Obvious Conclusion

The obvious conclusion about the features in this wish list is that Klout could set up a “freemium” model: continue to offer the current suite of metrics and charts at no cost, and then offer an extended array of features to monthly paying subscribers. Hootsuite did much the same recently with their social services. Such a model would allow Klout to continue to add to its user base and secure a source of revenue from dedicated users.

Behind the Juggernauts’ Curtain: Highlights from BlogWell’s Social Media Case Studies Event

On November 9, 2010, I attended BlogWell: How Big Brands Use Social Media at SAP Headquarters in Newtown Square, Pennsylvania. Hosted by the Social Media Business Council and GasPedal, BlogWell brought together case studies from eight major firms such as Hershey, Scholastic, Pfizer, and Discovery Communications in a fast-paced, half-day event.

Major themes discussed at BlogWell were the structure of social media initiatives within large, often heavily regulated industries, ways these firms are using innovative social campaigns to engage with their audiences, and the legal and ethical challenges they’re facing. Overall, it was refreshing to get a peek behind the curtains to see these corporate juggernauts taking well thought out, pragmatic, and innovative paths to successful social solutions. I’ve compiled notes from several of the sessions I attended.

Pfizer’s Social Media Playbook

Kate Bird, Digital Communications Professional for Pfizer, presented her company’s social media playbook, which she billed as “practical guidance for colleagues”.

The playbook boils down aspects of Pfizer’s official social media policy into a 20-30 page “umbrella” document that covers each of the major channels and provides guidance on how employees should engage in these channels, both professionally and personally.

It contains a resource repository that links to existing policies and training materials, official Pfizer social media channels, best practice documents, and illustrates how employees can get started. The playbook is evolving into an interactive digital tool encompassing wikis, videos, and collaborative spaces.

Kate also shared how Pfizer offers corporate-wide webinars and training on social media to all interested employees across different parts of the organization. All training is managed and conducted by employees.

Within the broader scope of social media, Pfizer expects to create a rich catalog of social properties, communities, and initiatives, with the goal of connecting the people who need to be connected to each other. They also hope to reduce agency costs by eliminating duplicate and redundant social media outlets with the organization. In addition, they want to offer their employees a deeper understanding of core social media principles. Finally, Pfizer seeks to have a more relevant and connected social footprint.

Keeping Bloggers Honest with Disclosures

Andy Sernovitz led the middle-of-the-afternoon main session on ethics and disclosure. His points were succinct and direct: it’s OK to have a commercially-minded social media program, so long as it’s clear. Disclosure increases the authenticity of your message, making you more credible and powerful.

The Federal Trade Commission requires disclosure and truthfulness in all social media outreach. It’s your responsibility to monitor the conversation around your brand or business and correct misstatements. Andy stated that it’s essential to have social media policies and training programs. He also cautioned that while bloggers are not your employees, you need to make a good faith effort to make certain they disclose. If the blogger or agency you hire is found to be unethical, the FTC will find you responsible.

Andy’s advice for handling bloggers is simple: never pay bloggers and insist on real disclosure. Paying bloggers changes the game from word-of-mouth to advertising, and readers will learn to distrust you. As for disclosure, make sure the bloggers are up front and clear with their statements, not burying them on their “About Me” page.

The “10 magic words” in disclosure are: “I work for X, and this is my personal opinion.” Disclosure statements need to clearly show who the blogger is, whether they were paid, and whether they’re offering an honest opinion based on a real experience. It’s then up to the reader to decide what the disclosure means to them.

The Social Media Business Council has a Disclosure Best Practices Toolkit that’s available for anyone download and use as a basis for their own social media efforts.

Coordinated Social Communications at Johnson & Johnson

Marc Monseau, of Corporate Communications at Johnson & Johnson, talked about how his corporation is taking advantage of the opportunities in social media, creating relationships, and learning more about their audience and how to best support them.

Starting first with a blog describing the history the company, Johnson & Johnson’s social media footprint has expanded over the past four years to include a corporate blog, YouTube channel, Facebook page, and four Twitter accounts. Each channel allows them to connect with key online stakeholders talking about health care and offer their own thoughts on health care topics.

Both their corporate blog and YouTube channel have healthy discussions. Marc described how they’ve become pathways into Johnson & Johnson for users to provide feedback on the topics presented and as a way to generate community discussions.

Marc explained how each of their channels operates in concert with each other. His staff has regular editorial meetings to discuss how to best engage their audiences. They then select the appropriate channel based on the nature of the message and where their audience is located, and decide which bloggers and influencers to interact with. By being open, responsive, and timely, Johnson & Johnson has been able to turn the tide in online conversations.

Johnson & Johnson has separate social media policies for their employees, based on whether the activities are external or integral to the organization. These policies give departments pathways to create their own initiatives.

Marc advised that, before you begin any foray into social media, you need to understand where conversations about you are taking place, who is saying them, and why. You must understand the dynamics of these discussions and your role in them. He recommended a consistent approach and behavior across all touch points, both in official publications and third-party websites; this is especially critical for heavily regulated industries.

Experimenting with Social Solutions for Internal Collaboration

The last session at BlogWell was led by Jonathon Haley, Director at BlackRock, an asset management firm. Jonathon elaborated on the social solutions for internal collaboration currently under way at BlackRock. His group is experimenting with ways social media can offer solutions with true business value. While the process isn’t expected to be finalized until early 2011, Jonathon shared what they’ve done to date and what they’ve learned along the way.

The key problem being addressed, he explained, is inefficient communication to and collaboration among the sales teams. Everyone is trying to feed valuable information to the sales team. How do you manage the mass of incoming information?

They first started with adding content authoring, on both personal and professional levels, to the teams’ annual objectives, then turned to internal blogs. Jonathon’s group gathered data to learn how social the teams were and conducted more intensive tests on specific channels with volunteers. This process allowed the group to find the social advocates within their organization and use them to lead the way.

Jonathon and his group then created “villains” to rally the teams around. First, they flagged PDFs in internal communications as the villain to encourage to teams to share information in more accessible, shareable, and searchable platforms. Then, they identified fringe players attempting to disrupt asset management models, as well as competitors with thought leaders on their sides, as the external villains.

Ultimately, the social solution at BlackRock must provide real business value: revenue creation and cost savings to the firm. The group has defined several metrics, such as number of phone calls per day to content experts, as benchmarks for the solution.

Jonathon advised gathering dedicated resources to work on social efforts like his, and to keep those teams tight. He emphasized that his group is comfortable with “small wins” in social as they consider how they’ll expand their solution across the company.

The Mystery of the Silent Partner, Part II: Three Additional Theories

In a post this past August, I discussed a relationship I had observed on Twitter that I called the “silent partner”: accounts that follow you but never interact with you, or those who follow you back, but seemingly refuse interaction. I had put forth some proposals on why these connections occur, but I’ve since developed three additional theories on why you may find yourself linked up with a silent partner.

First, you may have become trapped in what I call the “follow-back haystack”. If your silent partner follows back everyone who follows them (a custom I find unnecessary), their timeline will become choked with thousands upon thousands of tweeters. Your questions, observations, mentions, and references get lost in the shuffle: the needles in their haystack. Or, to use another analogy, it’s like trying to raise your voice in a crowded restaurant or bar. You’re not silent, and neither is your partner, but they’re dealing with far too much noise to hear you. Some follow-back users are better at getting back to mentions than most, but even then, it may simply be a matter of your post getting viewed a just the right moment.

Your silent partner could also be a “list-exclusive conversationalist”: one who only pays attention to those they’ve added to a Twitter list or TweetDeck group. This is especially true if they’re the follow-back type: what better way to cut through all the noise of their timeline then to converse only with a select group of friends, colleagues, and peers? These users may tune back into their timeline now and again, but if you’re not on one of their lists, you may as well be tweeting into the ether.

Or, lastly, your silent partner may be an “inattentive idler”: someone who is either sporadically active on Twitter or who dropped off the map altogether. They may have followed you after comments you made in a Twitter chat, or a mention in one of their friend’s timelines. In the meantime, though, they either lost interest or were never really that much into Twitter in the first place. If the idlers only post once every few weeks or months, they’re not likely to spend time scanning back through their timeline’s history to catch up on your posts. Plus, mentions may fall on deaf ears if they’re away for extended periods.

I’m sure there are other ways to diagnose the syndrome of “silent partners”. What symptoms have you observed in your travels through the Twitterverse?

Older posts Newer posts

© 2020 Bright Matrices

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑