Wednesday, 6 July 2011
Back after so long...
I had pretty much forgotten about this blog and came across it this evening. Will have to start posting again...but right now I need a hair cut.
Friday, 29 January 2010
Antisocial Media...an experiment
I am currently conducting a research project into how traffic can be driven to a site using negative comments in discussion threads, blogs etc.
I have noticed in recent years how many more comments and responses a negative comment receives on a blog or discussion thread than a positive one...or at least that is my perception.
I wanted to see if this response to the negative could be used in a positive way to increase traffic to a website, blog etc. I know from my personal experience if I read something I find offensive or derogatory on a discussion thread I will frequently look at the poster's profile to find out "what sort of person could say that". If I do this, then surely it is reasonable to assume others may do the same - but I am not aware of any research on this.
The methodology for my experiment is fairly simple.
1) I have selected a number of different discussion threads on Linked In to post a negative comment on. I have restricted my activity to Linked In for the initial phase to reduce the number of variables, though clearly it would be interesting to expand the research into a number of different areas such as facebook, twitter etc after the initial phase.
2) The selection of groups to comment on has been based on a) size of group b) number of active posts and c) nature of discussion.
For size of group I have tried to find groups each matching the following criteria. Groups with relatively few members (under 150); groups with 150 - 500 members; groups with 500-1,500 members; groups with 1,500 - 5,000 members and finally groups with over 20,000 members. I am interested to see if groups behave in different ways depending on their size.
For number of active posts, I have selected groups that are currently active. I have also selected threads that are generating regular responses.
For nature of discussion I have selected discussions of a general nature rather than those of a specific technical nature.
3) The nature of the post is that it must be negative. I am looking at a number of different variables for this, but they range from criticism of the nature of the discussion itself (e.g. "why are you lot wasting your on this topic") to more personal criticism of an individual within a group (e.g. Person X clearly doesn't understand what's going on here, or Person Y's opinion is invalid because the can't even spell"). I want to understand how the group reacts and behaves towards criticism. Does it round on the critic or is the criticism perceived as reasonable expression of an opinion? How quickly do people react? Is there a defensive reaction by the group? How does the individual criticised react? How long does the reaction last? And most importantly, what traffic does it generate to my linked in profile and then to my website or blog? As my linked in profile contains information about myself, my working career and links to my website and blog, it is the ideal place to direct traffic. At this point I should make it very clear that this research is being carried out on a personal level and has not been commissioned or requested by either my current or any previous employers, and has no connection with any of their businesses. Furthermore, my linkedin profile is genuine and is not a fake created for the research project.
4) There are certain ground rules I have imposed on myself in the way I make the criticism. These include:
a) I do not post anything that could be considered racist, sexist, against a particular religious group or that is intended to incite antisocial behaviour. Posts do not contain profanities of any kind. The criticism is "low level".
b) As well as making a criticism I also participate in the discussion as part of the process, i.e. I make a contribution at the same time I make the criticism. This allows people the option to respond to the comment (i.e. judge and comment on my contribution) and not just react to the criticism.
c) On 50% of posts I make a deliberate mistake (e.g. a misspelling, inaccurate fact, or similar leaving me open to the response "You think you are so smart, but what about this mistake you've just made!"
d) I abide by the rules of the discussion group. If I'm asked to remove or moderate a comment I do, and post a brief apology.
e) After the initial posting I make no further comments, other than the apology statement is I am asked to remove the post. I do not enter into further debate or try to defend my actions.
5) If you have read this far I hope you are interested in this project. I'll make my results available in time. If you have arrived here in response to a negative post from me PLEASE DO LEAVE A COMMENT. I would be really interested to understand why you followed up on the negative post, what your motivations for visiting my site were etc.
Finally I would like to say a big thank you to all the discussion threads that I am using to aid my research, and an even bigger thank you to any individuals who I have passed comment on who feel they have been duped or criticised in some way. I realise some people may think it is "unethical" to carry out research without people knowing they are taking part - but hey, this goes on all the time in cyberspace, and were people to know what I was doing in advance it would completely change the results. I believe at least by leaving this message I am allowing people to feedback to me (positive or negative) and I would be more than happy to discuss the findings with any individual affected.
I have noticed in recent years how many more comments and responses a negative comment receives on a blog or discussion thread than a positive one...or at least that is my perception.
I wanted to see if this response to the negative could be used in a positive way to increase traffic to a website, blog etc. I know from my personal experience if I read something I find offensive or derogatory on a discussion thread I will frequently look at the poster's profile to find out "what sort of person could say that". If I do this, then surely it is reasonable to assume others may do the same - but I am not aware of any research on this.
The methodology for my experiment is fairly simple.
1) I have selected a number of different discussion threads on Linked In to post a negative comment on. I have restricted my activity to Linked In for the initial phase to reduce the number of variables, though clearly it would be interesting to expand the research into a number of different areas such as facebook, twitter etc after the initial phase.
2) The selection of groups to comment on has been based on a) size of group b) number of active posts and c) nature of discussion.
For size of group I have tried to find groups each matching the following criteria. Groups with relatively few members (under 150); groups with 150 - 500 members; groups with 500-1,500 members; groups with 1,500 - 5,000 members and finally groups with over 20,000 members. I am interested to see if groups behave in different ways depending on their size.
For number of active posts, I have selected groups that are currently active. I have also selected threads that are generating regular responses.
For nature of discussion I have selected discussions of a general nature rather than those of a specific technical nature.
3) The nature of the post is that it must be negative. I am looking at a number of different variables for this, but they range from criticism of the nature of the discussion itself (e.g. "why are you lot wasting your on this topic") to more personal criticism of an individual within a group (e.g. Person X clearly doesn't understand what's going on here, or Person Y's opinion is invalid because the can't even spell"). I want to understand how the group reacts and behaves towards criticism. Does it round on the critic or is the criticism perceived as reasonable expression of an opinion? How quickly do people react? Is there a defensive reaction by the group? How does the individual criticised react? How long does the reaction last? And most importantly, what traffic does it generate to my linked in profile and then to my website or blog? As my linked in profile contains information about myself, my working career and links to my website and blog, it is the ideal place to direct traffic. At this point I should make it very clear that this research is being carried out on a personal level and has not been commissioned or requested by either my current or any previous employers, and has no connection with any of their businesses. Furthermore, my linkedin profile is genuine and is not a fake created for the research project.
4) There are certain ground rules I have imposed on myself in the way I make the criticism. These include:
a) I do not post anything that could be considered racist, sexist, against a particular religious group or that is intended to incite antisocial behaviour. Posts do not contain profanities of any kind. The criticism is "low level".
b) As well as making a criticism I also participate in the discussion as part of the process, i.e. I make a contribution at the same time I make the criticism. This allows people the option to respond to the comment (i.e. judge and comment on my contribution) and not just react to the criticism.
c) On 50% of posts I make a deliberate mistake (e.g. a misspelling, inaccurate fact, or similar leaving me open to the response "You think you are so smart, but what about this mistake you've just made!"
d) I abide by the rules of the discussion group. If I'm asked to remove or moderate a comment I do, and post a brief apology.
e) After the initial posting I make no further comments, other than the apology statement is I am asked to remove the post. I do not enter into further debate or try to defend my actions.
5) If you have read this far I hope you are interested in this project. I'll make my results available in time. If you have arrived here in response to a negative post from me PLEASE DO LEAVE A COMMENT. I would be really interested to understand why you followed up on the negative post, what your motivations for visiting my site were etc.
Finally I would like to say a big thank you to all the discussion threads that I am using to aid my research, and an even bigger thank you to any individuals who I have passed comment on who feel they have been duped or criticised in some way. I realise some people may think it is "unethical" to carry out research without people knowing they are taking part - but hey, this goes on all the time in cyberspace, and were people to know what I was doing in advance it would completely change the results. I believe at least by leaving this message I am allowing people to feedback to me (positive or negative) and I would be more than happy to discuss the findings with any individual affected.
Wednesday, 9 December 2009
The sun coming up...
Some days we wake up and the world is just the most beautiful place.This is the Oxfordshire countryside on a cold December morning. Apologies for the poor quality of the image (not the best phone camera with me at the time) but you get the idea.
If you've spend almost a year in the desert you can't beat sunrise over green fields.
Working in a DPA free world
Since moving out to Dubai I've been exposed to a world of marketing with virtually no data regulation. Though this may seem like heaven (see my earlier rant against the DPA ) there are certain drawbacks I have discovered.
a) In a world where data is so unprotected it also seems to be of very poor quality. Not sure if this is because people don't feel ownership of their own information and therefore don't care about it, or it just reflects the local conditions of dealing with many different languages and cultures in on place.
b) It makes marketers lazy - why bother targeting your e-shots too carefully if you can just spam everyone without fear of prosecution?
So even though I loath the DPA in its active and practical application, I'm coming round to thinking in principle it may not be a bad thing if only to make marketers better practitioners.
Also I hate to think what massive opportunity for bank fraud there is out hear...if only the banks had any money left in their coffers.
a) In a world where data is so unprotected it also seems to be of very poor quality. Not sure if this is because people don't feel ownership of their own information and therefore don't care about it, or it just reflects the local conditions of dealing with many different languages and cultures in on place.
b) It makes marketers lazy - why bother targeting your e-shots too carefully if you can just spam everyone without fear of prosecution?
So even though I loath the DPA in its active and practical application, I'm coming round to thinking in principle it may not be a bad thing if only to make marketers better practitioners.
Also I hate to think what massive opportunity for bank fraud there is out hear...if only the banks had any money left in their coffers.
Monday, 29 December 2008
I'm off to Dubai
At the end if this week I'll be flying out to Dubai to work on some major life sciences events. I'll start posting once I'm out there.
TTFN
TTFN
Friday, 14 November 2008
In Blogs We Trust
As an academic and "natural born sceptic" I have a problem with blogs and all sorts of other UGC...which I don't have as a marketer. That problem is authority. "Authority" is related to "author" which in turn comes from the Latin word auctor, meaning to originate, increase, promote. Yes bloggers certainly originate and promote their ideas. But today authority (in the sense that a written work has authority) has come to mean "an influence exerted on opinion because of recognised knowledge or expertise". Authority should not be confused with authenticity, which incidentally comes from the Greek "authentikos" which means principle or genuine. What's the difference you say? Well authentic, means something is the original, genuine undisputed article... but something has "authority" because of the relative influence it exerts on others.
This is why as a marketer I have no problem with blogs and their power to shape opinion. In the blogosphere you can say what you like and as long as enough people read what you say and agree/disagree with it it has AUTHORITY.
Take the simple example of hotel reviews. Anyone can review any establishment on the many review sites, and their review can gain AUTHORITY through acceptance by bloggers and readers. However, this does not mean the review is AUTHENTIC. Marketers the world over are writing false reviews of establishments they have never been to which gain authority, promote business, but are essentially untrue. Authority does not equal authenticity.
But fortunately the law of averages kicks in. For every evil genius out there promoting their ideas, product or service through disingenuous blogging, there is another person saying the opposite for equally twisted reasons. The net effect is that for most topics people can gain a view by filtering a number of other opinions. The authority comes not from the single author, but from the mass of authentic authors...so ultimately in blogs we trust.
This is why as a marketer I have no problem with blogs and their power to shape opinion. In the blogosphere you can say what you like and as long as enough people read what you say and agree/disagree with it it has AUTHORITY.
Take the simple example of hotel reviews. Anyone can review any establishment on the many review sites, and their review can gain AUTHORITY through acceptance by bloggers and readers. However, this does not mean the review is AUTHENTIC. Marketers the world over are writing false reviews of establishments they have never been to which gain authority, promote business, but are essentially untrue. Authority does not equal authenticity.
But fortunately the law of averages kicks in. For every evil genius out there promoting their ideas, product or service through disingenuous blogging, there is another person saying the opposite for equally twisted reasons. The net effect is that for most topics people can gain a view by filtering a number of other opinions. The authority comes not from the single author, but from the mass of authentic authors...so ultimately in blogs we trust.
Friday, 7 November 2008
Why I hate the DPA and why it is unworkable
The Data Protection Act 1998 has been with us for ten years now, which in my opinion is eleven years too many.
This unworkable, unenforceable act has become the bane of most professional marketers, the justification to be lazy for most data services departments and the excuse to be unhelpful for seemingly every major UK company's customer service department.
A quick scan through recent prosecutions under the DPA and you'll find the majority relate to companies not registering themselves correctly with the Information Commission. Well, whoopdedoo, what a victory for Mr Average that a Bolton solicitor is fined over £3,000 for not sending in a piece of paper to the Information Commission. No doubt the solicitor in question is in all other respects a highly professional operator who protects the business of his clients with care - oh, but he hasn't filled in a form for the IC so let's slap him with a big fine.
Where are the prosecutions for the real abuses of data - the constant telephone calls from Asian call centres on behalf of UK based companies where our personal data is being sent across national boundaries without our approval or knowledge? Banks putting our information in the hands of people who are not employees of the bank - and are in many cases not even employees of the call centres they work for, but are casual hired help.
Where are the prosecutions of government and military departments for losses of huge amounts of personal data that put our children's identity and safety at risk?
In the last two days I have had two separate reasons to bemoan the total failure of this Act to do what it is supposed to do. Sadly these failures are virtually daily occurrences, in an Act that permeates our every day lives but serves virtually no purpose.
The first was when my son returned from school with a note regarding his forthcoming school trip, which contained details of the "telephone cascade" for when he would return from said trip. The purpose of the cascade is that the teacher on the coach calls the two numbers at the top, tells them that the coach will be back in 30 minutes, then the people called call the next two on the list, etc until everyone is informed, and each person only has to make a couple of calls. In practice a very sensible thing (and in the days before the DPA, totally legal). However, the problem is that the phone number (including in many cases the mobile phone number) of every parent of every child was listed on the page. The school has distributed personal information it has collected, without the permission of the people supplying the information. Some of those numbers may well be ex-directory, and personal information may have been supplied to people who will abuse it.
Some may take the view that "It's a small community [it is a rural village], everyone knows everyone else, so what is the big deal?" and yes, common sense may say that is so. But, imagine this scenario (sadly all too common in a small village). Husband checks telephone bill and notices repeated calls to number he doesn't recognise. Husband thinks nothing of it until little Johnny hands him piece of paper from school which has number on it showing it to be mobile number of single male living 2 miles away. Husband starts to put 2 + 2 together and gets 4 (or 5 depending on whether calls were innocent or not) and "has it out" with wife... matrimonial chaos ensues.
OK, I might be over-elaborating or choosing a particularly nasty scenario, but there are plenty of petty arguments and unpleasantness in small villages where having the telephone number of an individual could be used to harass, bully or stalk someone. My point is the school should not have given out numbers without permission.
The other DPA waste of time is when Financial Services institutions call you to sell you a product and begin by saying "For Data protection reasons, can I take you through security?". Well hang on just one minute...YOU CALLED ME. Therefore, I have no idea who you are, so NO, I'm not going to give you my name, address, date of birth, password, inside leg measurement or anything else, because I don't know who the hell you are. Click - brrrrrrrrrrr. As we all become more and more obsessed by data theft banks are really going to have to find a better way of establishing who we are.
There are so many things I hate about the DPA I could spend all day writing this - especially the power it gives small minded process-driven data services people to stop creative marketers from doing their job properly - but enough for now. We'll save that to another day.
This unworkable, unenforceable act has become the bane of most professional marketers, the justification to be lazy for most data services departments and the excuse to be unhelpful for seemingly every major UK company's customer service department.
A quick scan through recent prosecutions under the DPA and you'll find the majority relate to companies not registering themselves correctly with the Information Commission. Well, whoopdedoo, what a victory for Mr Average that a Bolton solicitor is fined over £3,000 for not sending in a piece of paper to the Information Commission. No doubt the solicitor in question is in all other respects a highly professional operator who protects the business of his clients with care - oh, but he hasn't filled in a form for the IC so let's slap him with a big fine.
Where are the prosecutions for the real abuses of data - the constant telephone calls from Asian call centres on behalf of UK based companies where our personal data is being sent across national boundaries without our approval or knowledge? Banks putting our information in the hands of people who are not employees of the bank - and are in many cases not even employees of the call centres they work for, but are casual hired help.
Where are the prosecutions of government and military departments for losses of huge amounts of personal data that put our children's identity and safety at risk?
In the last two days I have had two separate reasons to bemoan the total failure of this Act to do what it is supposed to do. Sadly these failures are virtually daily occurrences, in an Act that permeates our every day lives but serves virtually no purpose.
The first was when my son returned from school with a note regarding his forthcoming school trip, which contained details of the "telephone cascade" for when he would return from said trip. The purpose of the cascade is that the teacher on the coach calls the two numbers at the top, tells them that the coach will be back in 30 minutes, then the people called call the next two on the list, etc until everyone is informed, and each person only has to make a couple of calls. In practice a very sensible thing (and in the days before the DPA, totally legal). However, the problem is that the phone number (including in many cases the mobile phone number) of every parent of every child was listed on the page. The school has distributed personal information it has collected, without the permission of the people supplying the information. Some of those numbers may well be ex-directory, and personal information may have been supplied to people who will abuse it.
Some may take the view that "It's a small community [it is a rural village], everyone knows everyone else, so what is the big deal?" and yes, common sense may say that is so. But, imagine this scenario (sadly all too common in a small village). Husband checks telephone bill and notices repeated calls to number he doesn't recognise. Husband thinks nothing of it until little Johnny hands him piece of paper from school which has number on it showing it to be mobile number of single male living 2 miles away. Husband starts to put 2 + 2 together and gets 4 (or 5 depending on whether calls were innocent or not) and "has it out" with wife... matrimonial chaos ensues.
OK, I might be over-elaborating or choosing a particularly nasty scenario, but there are plenty of petty arguments and unpleasantness in small villages where having the telephone number of an individual could be used to harass, bully or stalk someone. My point is the school should not have given out numbers without permission.
The other DPA waste of time is when Financial Services institutions call you to sell you a product and begin by saying "For Data protection reasons, can I take you through security?". Well hang on just one minute...YOU CALLED ME. Therefore, I have no idea who you are, so NO, I'm not going to give you my name, address, date of birth, password, inside leg measurement or anything else, because I don't know who the hell you are. Click - brrrrrrrrrrr. As we all become more and more obsessed by data theft banks are really going to have to find a better way of establishing who we are.
There are so many things I hate about the DPA I could spend all day writing this - especially the power it gives small minded process-driven data services people to stop creative marketers from doing their job properly - but enough for now. We'll save that to another day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
