Comments on: Influencers- Another Social Media Buzzword I Hate http://www.randomactsofdata.com/influencers-another-social-media-buzzword-i-hate/ Wed, 11 Jan 2012 15:35:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: annaobrien http://www.randomactsofdata.com/influencers-another-social-media-buzzword-i-hate/comment-page-1/#comment-938 annaobrien Thu, 25 Mar 2010 07:24:45 +0000 http://www.randomactsofdata.com/?p=233#comment-938 Mark-<br><br>I have to disagree with you then. Perhaps Alice was a bad example, because it was the simplest example. <br><br>If somebody with little to no influence gets upset at a brand they can stir up quite a ruckus in social media, often with little to no support from influencers. Just because thousands of people on twitter dont see it does not mean it isn't affecting a brands reputation. In my opinion a bunch of normal people upset with a brand are just as important if not more so then one person with a strong online presence. So it's hard to get people to spread your success and difficult to prevent them from sharing your failure. Why? Because bad news spreads faster than good. Online & offline. And that s the key point here.. YOU CANNOT MEASURE OFFLINE WORD OF MOUTH. I know plenty of people with tiny digital footprints, who could squash a company or person because of thier offline influence. Plus, is it so wrong to think of each customer's opinion to be as valuable as the next's? <br><br>A lot of this thinking comes from my own corporate experience, which unfortunately I am not at liberty to comment on here. I will say however that I have met many others who have had similar experiences who also work for large brands.<br><br>in the end if a story is juicy enough it will eventually get a bunch of people with tons of followers, yes. But by the time it gets there it's already had plenty of time to stew. And in that stewing time a company could have resolved the issue. So yeah, influencers may spread information, but for me and my business strategies I am going to focus on making sure people's issues are handled regardless of their followership. Because you never know. At the end of the day, everyone should be viewed as equal and the context should serve as your guide on how to resolve an issue or spread your message. Unless of course you've figured out some magic way to tie together the joint influence of every person, on every social niche ( both offline and on) and weighted their relative strength of voice by category , virility, demographics, sentiment & myriad of other variables, then I still say it's unmeasurable. And if you have figured this out, how the heck do you have time to comment on my blog :) ( and can I buy your technology?)<br><br>Perhaps, we must agree to disagree.<br>[excuse the snark- it's one of natural charms and by charms I mean flaws] Mark-

I have to disagree with you then. Perhaps Alice was a bad example, because it was the simplest example.

If somebody with little to no influence gets upset at a brand they can stir up quite a ruckus in social media, often with little to no support from influencers. Just because thousands of people on twitter dont see it does not mean it isn't affecting a brands reputation. In my opinion a bunch of normal people upset with a brand are just as important if not more so then one person with a strong online presence. So it's hard to get people to spread your success and difficult to prevent them from sharing your failure. Why? Because bad news spreads faster than good. Online & offline. And that s the key point here.. YOU CANNOT MEASURE OFFLINE WORD OF MOUTH. I know plenty of people with tiny digital footprints, who could squash a company or person because of thier offline influence. Plus, is it so wrong to think of each customer's opinion to be as valuable as the next's?

A lot of this thinking comes from my own corporate experience, which unfortunately I am not at liberty to comment on here. I will say however that I have met many others who have had similar experiences who also work for large brands.

in the end if a story is juicy enough it will eventually get a bunch of people with tons of followers, yes. But by the time it gets there it's already had plenty of time to stew. And in that stewing time a company could have resolved the issue. So yeah, influencers may spread information, but for me and my business strategies I am going to focus on making sure people's issues are handled regardless of their followership. Because you never know. At the end of the day, everyone should be viewed as equal and the context should serve as your guide on how to resolve an issue or spread your message. Unless of course you've figured out some magic way to tie together the joint influence of every person, on every social niche ( both offline and on) and weighted their relative strength of voice by category , virility, demographics, sentiment & myriad of other variables, then I still say it's unmeasurable. And if you have figured this out, how the heck do you have time to comment on my blog :) ( and can I buy your technology?)

Perhaps, we must agree to disagree.
[excuse the snark- it's one of natural charms and by charms I mean flaws]

]]> By: MarkLeVell http://www.randomactsofdata.com/influencers-another-social-media-buzzword-i-hate/comment-page-1/#comment-937 MarkLeVell Thu, 25 Mar 2010 06:50:42 +0000 http://www.randomactsofdata.com/?p=233#comment-937 You make a lot of good points, but in regards to your main one I'll have to respectfully disagree with you. An Influencer's ability to influence a market segment CAN be measured and often leveraged. OBVIOUSLY that measurement is quite imperfect and certainly PREDICTING specific communications (as in your example) is unlikely. But the tools to measure that influence are usable now and will improve over time. And while I agree that the term "Trust" is a poor term to describe whether someone believes a particular blogger or not, it still has some use, to convey the believability in the marketplace of a particular person. <br><br> Even in your example you miss the fact that ALICE is the influencer (not you) and she did, in fact influence a segment. Having previously identified Alice would have enabled a company to respond faster to this issue, and having a relationship with Alice might have enabled the company's response to get out quicker. In addition, if Alice's repost or link spreads as you purport, it will spread successfully primarily via other influencers... who again, if the company has connected with them, the company can use to spread it's response more quickly.<br><br> Working to identify and influence the Alices/Influencers of a company's market segment is an extremely valuable tactic that can garner results that are quite disproportional to the investment. <br><br>Is doing this in social media easy or precise? No. <br><br>Extremely valuable? It certainly has been for companies that I've worked with. You make a lot of good points, but in regards to your main one I'll have to respectfully disagree with you. An Influencer's ability to influence a market segment CAN be measured and often leveraged. OBVIOUSLY that measurement is quite imperfect and certainly PREDICTING specific communications (as in your example) is unlikely. But the tools to measure that influence are usable now and will improve over time. And while I agree that the term “Trust” is a poor term to describe whether someone believes a particular blogger or not, it still has some use, to convey the believability in the marketplace of a particular person.

Even in your example you miss the fact that ALICE is the influencer (not you) and she did, in fact influence a segment. Having previously identified Alice would have enabled a company to respond faster to this issue, and having a relationship with Alice might have enabled the company's response to get out quicker. In addition, if Alice's repost or link spreads as you purport, it will spread successfully primarily via other influencers… who again, if the company has connected with them, the company can use to spread it's response more quickly.

Working to identify and influence the Alices/Influencers of a company's market segment is an extremely valuable tactic that can garner results that are quite disproportional to the investment.

Is doing this in social media easy or precise? No.

Extremely valuable? It certainly has been for companies that I've worked with.

]]> By: eugmandel http://www.randomactsofdata.com/influencers-another-social-media-buzzword-i-hate/comment-page-1/#comment-935 eugmandel Fri, 19 Mar 2010 22:45:09 +0000 http://www.randomactsofdata.com/?p=233#comment-935 I don't like the term "influencers" too, but what would you call people who others turn to when looking for content on a topic? You said that you read Perez Hilton's site, but not because you trust him. Is it fair to say that you trust Perez Hilton to find interesting information on a particular topic (Hollywood, celebrities, etc.)? I don't like the term “influencers” too, but what would you call people who others turn to when looking for content on a topic? You said that you read Perez Hilton's site, but not because you trust him. Is it fair to say that you trust Perez Hilton to find interesting information on a particular topic (Hollywood, celebrities, etc.)?

]]> By: RhettMcNulty http://www.randomactsofdata.com/influencers-another-social-media-buzzword-i-hate/comment-page-1/#comment-927 RhettMcNulty Thu, 04 Mar 2010 08:02:13 +0000 http://www.randomactsofdata.com/?p=233#comment-927 Great Point. Here is another example. I market an apparel product online and was "lucky" enough to have it featured on the Tyra show. I could not correlate any transaction related to the press received. Just recently I had an unknown video blogger post a demonstration and review of the product and he is driving quite a bit of traffic to the site. Isnt Trya an influencer? Great Point. Here is another example. I market an apparel product online and was “lucky” enough to have it featured on the Tyra show. I could not correlate any transaction related to the press received. Just recently I had an unknown video blogger post a demonstration and review of the product and he is driving quite a bit of traffic to the site. Isnt Trya an influencer?

]]> By: kittenthebad http://www.randomactsofdata.com/influencers-another-social-media-buzzword-i-hate/comment-page-1/#comment-926 kittenthebad Wed, 03 Mar 2010 21:48:01 +0000 http://www.randomactsofdata.com/?p=233#comment-926 The other thing about influence is that it's very much in terms of context. For example, I work on twitter visualizations, looking at engagement and (dare I say it!) influence, so when I put out stuff about that I've built a reputation (with some people) that it's worth reading. That's great, but it doesn't translate to influence in terms of random other things like, opinions on sports or restaurant reviews. Restaurant reviews are a particularly good example here, because I'm in Ottawa, and even I'm very influential to someone in Alabama, it's highly unlikely that my opinion on restaurants in Ottawa is worth anything to them at all. Someone might be influential, but they are likely only influential in a certain niche - and I think that's important to consider too.<br><br>(great post by the way!) The other thing about influence is that it's very much in terms of context. For example, I work on twitter visualizations, looking at engagement and (dare I say it!) influence, so when I put out stuff about that I've built a reputation (with some people) that it's worth reading. That's great, but it doesn't translate to influence in terms of random other things like, opinions on sports or restaurant reviews. Restaurant reviews are a particularly good example here, because I'm in Ottawa, and even I'm very influential to someone in Alabama, it's highly unlikely that my opinion on restaurants in Ottawa is worth anything to them at all. Someone might be influential, but they are likely only influential in a certain niche – and I think that's important to consider too.

(great post by the way!)

]]> By: Klynn http://www.randomactsofdata.com/influencers-another-social-media-buzzword-i-hate/comment-page-1/#comment-925 Klynn Wed, 03 Mar 2010 21:27:27 +0000 http://www.randomactsofdata.com/?p=233#comment-925 Another good article Anna, in my field of Medical communication information we have a group of leading Healthcare professionals we called Key Opinion Leaders (KOLs)/Thought Leaders. Their clinical "influence" can be tangibly be measure by a term called "impact factors". Any paper a KOL writes and gets published is rated based on where its published (the prestige of the journal), how many times the article is republished and the numbers of citations. This however is only a measure of that clinicians "technical influence". He/She can and generally also has a measure of "social influence" i.e. colleagues they went to Med school with, Research partners etc. The mix of these influences can usually dictate a Pharmaceutical companies targeting strategy.<br>Perhaps something similar (if at all possible ) could be applied to the "technical influence" of social media? <br>i.e. Where and article is published, <br>How many people have referenced it, <br>Has any body rated it highly (and how many)<br>Has it made it into offline media<br>the list could go on...but I wouldn't want to bore you any more than i am myself ;-)<br>But I agree "social influence" is a harder metric to measure if not impossible, therefore I would go with technical influence as a marker only...I guess its a start.<br>your thoughts? Another good article Anna, in my field of Medical communication information we have a group of leading Healthcare professionals we called Key Opinion Leaders (KOLs)/Thought Leaders. Their clinical “influence” can be tangibly be measure by a term called “impact factors”. Any paper a KOL writes and gets published is rated based on where its published (the prestige of the journal), how many times the article is republished and the numbers of citations. This however is only a measure of that clinicians “technical influence”. He/She can and generally also has a measure of “social influence” i.e. colleagues they went to Med school with, Research partners etc. The mix of these influences can usually dictate a Pharmaceutical companies targeting strategy.
Perhaps something similar (if at all possible ) could be applied to the “technical influence” of social media?
i.e. Where and article is published,
How many people have referenced it,
Has any body rated it highly (and how many)
Has it made it into offline media
the list could go on…but I wouldn't want to bore you any more than i am myself ;-)
But I agree “social influence” is a harder metric to measure if not impossible, therefore I would go with technical influence as a marker only…I guess its a start.
your thoughts?

]]>