<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Social Media Monitoring: Broken Conversations, Broken Tools</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.emergence-media.com/2008/04/social-media-monitoring-broken-conversations-broken-tools/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.emergence-media.com/2008/04/social-media-monitoring-broken-conversations-broken-tools/</link>
	<description>Between the Internet (Social Media) and Marketing</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2008 02:48:12 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Philip Sheldrake</title>
		<link>http://www.emergence-media.com/2008/04/social-media-monitoring-broken-conversations-broken-tools/#comment-94531</link>
		<dc:creator>Philip Sheldrake</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2008 18:13:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.emergence-media.com/?p=180#comment-94531</guid>
		<description>Social Web Analytics remains nascent, although 2008 is shaping up to be the pivotal year. As such, "the forest" is an appropriate concept this year. However, to try and extend the metaphor, that forest is getting cut up into smaller woods by the day. Tracking the distributed conversation, and doing so with semantic assessment of sentiment / tonality, will be the differentiator in the ensuing couple of years.

I've put some of my thoughts on the matter, and a review of the major Social Web Analytics vendors in The Social Web Analytics eBook 2008, available at http://www.socialwebanalytics.com.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Social Web Analytics remains nascent, although 2008 is shaping up to be the pivotal year. As such, &#8220;the forest&#8221; is an appropriate concept this year. However, to try and extend the metaphor, that forest is getting cut up into smaller woods by the day. Tracking the distributed conversation, and doing so with semantic assessment of sentiment / tonality, will be the differentiator in the ensuing couple of years.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve put some of my thoughts on the matter, and a review of the major Social Web Analytics vendors in The Social Web Analytics eBook 2008, available at <a href="http://www.socialwebanalytics.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.socialwebanalytics.com</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Social Media Measurement and Brand Control : 123 Social Media</title>
		<link>http://www.emergence-media.com/2008/04/social-media-monitoring-broken-conversations-broken-tools/#comment-74283</link>
		<dc:creator>Social Media Measurement and Brand Control : 123 Social Media</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2008 00:14:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.emergence-media.com/?p=180#comment-74283</guid>
		<description>[...] Social Media Monitoring; Broken Conversations, Broken Tools - a review of why automated tools have such a hard time of dealing with the fluid social media realm. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Social Media Monitoring; Broken Conversations, Broken Tools - a review of why automated tools have such a hard time of dealing with the fluid social media realm. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: adrian chan</title>
		<link>http://www.emergence-media.com/2008/04/social-media-monitoring-broken-conversations-broken-tools/#comment-70939</link>
		<dc:creator>adrian chan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Apr 2008 17:26:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.emergence-media.com/?p=180#comment-70939</guid>
		<description>Great post and nice to see some heavy hitting commenters, too! 

I agree that the use of conversation tools and social media needs to follow from a clear definition of goals and objectives. 

I'm reminded of a distinction made by linguists between strategic action and communicative action. In a nutshell, the former occurs when a speaker seeks to influence the listener but doesnt seek mutual understanding. In the latter, reaching understanding (even if it's not agreement) is important. 

Put simply, most media are a form of strategic action insofar as they're not in conversation with their audiences. Daily conversation and especially that among friends is communicative -- it's a means of maintaining a relationship. 

This came to mind last wk at the New Comm forum. For ROI and related goals, metrics for reach, influence, etc would indicate campaign success; deeper topical analysis would then add content and context. 

But if the goal is engagement and organizational transformation (openness) -- which we heard a lot about last wk -- then the model would shift from speaking to conversing, from strategic communication to relational conversation. Which is where recent case studies in use of social media for customer service have been cited of late. 

Of course a mutual and reciprocal relationship between organiz/customer would look pretty overwhelming. I could see a path to engagement tho if tools could be used to identify the best points of entry and access to conversations. E.g. finding the person in a social graph with domain expertise, credibility (influence), and activity. Then engaging with that person -- and standing back to allow his/her own words propagate in a natural and organic fashion. That could be tracked for effectiveness. But just tracked, not led or directed. 

Social media marketing is going to head in this direction, with use of social gaming apps in which messages are turned into experiences. But I think at this point in time that users wont take direct marketing or PR through tools like twitter very favorably. That's an un-researched impression, however!

cheers, 
adrian</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great post and nice to see some heavy hitting commenters, too! </p>
<p>I agree that the use of conversation tools and social media needs to follow from a clear definition of goals and objectives. </p>
<p>I&#8217;m reminded of a distinction made by linguists between strategic action and communicative action. In a nutshell, the former occurs when a speaker seeks to influence the listener but doesnt seek mutual understanding. In the latter, reaching understanding (even if it&#8217;s not agreement) is important. </p>
<p>Put simply, most media are a form of strategic action insofar as they&#8217;re not in conversation with their audiences. Daily conversation and especially that among friends is communicative &#8212; it&#8217;s a means of maintaining a relationship. </p>
<p>This came to mind last wk at the New Comm forum. For ROI and related goals, metrics for reach, influence, etc would indicate campaign success; deeper topical analysis would then add content and context. </p>
<p>But if the goal is engagement and organizational transformation (openness) &#8212; which we heard a lot about last wk &#8212; then the model would shift from speaking to conversing, from strategic communication to relational conversation. Which is where recent case studies in use of social media for customer service have been cited of late. </p>
<p>Of course a mutual and reciprocal relationship between organiz/customer would look pretty overwhelming. I could see a path to engagement tho if tools could be used to identify the best points of entry and access to conversations. E.g. finding the person in a social graph with domain expertise, credibility (influence), and activity. Then engaging with that person &#8212; and standing back to allow his/her own words propagate in a natural and organic fashion. That could be tracked for effectiveness. But just tracked, not led or directed. </p>
<p>Social media marketing is going to head in this direction, with use of social gaming apps in which messages are turned into experiences. But I think at this point in time that users wont take direct marketing or PR through tools like twitter very favorably. That&#8217;s an un-researched impression, however!</p>
<p>cheers,<br />
adrian</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Guy Hagen</title>
		<link>http://www.emergence-media.com/2008/04/social-media-monitoring-broken-conversations-broken-tools/#comment-65861</link>
		<dc:creator>Guy Hagen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Apr 2008 14:55:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.emergence-media.com/?p=180#comment-65861</guid>
		<description>While I think there will continue to be value in aggregate statistics (the forest), the further that individual conversations can be tracked the more sophisticated the potential insights will be.  A simple comparison might be descriptive statistics ("72% of all lobbyists....") versus social network analysis ("consistent indirect connections are shown between lobbyists and key legislators...".  A very recent post by my colleage Valdis Krebs can show the importance of what can be learned when the missing pieces are put back together:

http://www.networkweaving.com/blog/2008/04/other-pentagon.html


Perhaps Google OpenSocial will be the first step in "reconnecting" broken social media conversations.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>While I think there will continue to be value in aggregate statistics (the forest), the further that individual conversations can be tracked the more sophisticated the potential insights will be.  A simple comparison might be descriptive statistics (&#8221;72% of all lobbyists&#8230;.&#8221;) versus social network analysis (&#8221;consistent indirect connections are shown between lobbyists and key legislators&#8230;&#8221;.  A very recent post by my colleage Valdis Krebs can show the importance of what can be learned when the missing pieces are put back together:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.networkweaving.com/blog/2008/04/other-pentagon.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.networkweaving.com/blog/2008/04/other-pentagon.html</a></p>
<p>Perhaps Google OpenSocial will be the first step in &#8220;reconnecting&#8221; broken social media conversations.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Todd Parsons</title>
		<link>http://www.emergence-media.com/2008/04/social-media-monitoring-broken-conversations-broken-tools/#comment-65475</link>
		<dc:creator>Todd Parsons</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2008 23:12:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.emergence-media.com/?p=180#comment-65475</guid>
		<description>Great post Daniel – and thanks for your mention. I agree that no one provider has successfully handled the aggregation, analysis and/or correlation of every social media platform – how much that matters really depends on your agenda. Katie's got it right--one should definitely be asking, "to what business end am I measuring social media"? Is it the success of a particular PR campaign with a cadre of specific bloggers?  Is it quantifying brand awareness within a specific social community? Or is it measuring the ROI of a social media ad campaign? These are unique tasks which require unique tools.
 
As an industry, we need think more about building applications which can power the business tasks that leverage social media, otherwise we'll continue to get lost in hopeless rhetoric. 
 
Todd Parsons
Co-Founder BuzzLogic</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great post Daniel – and thanks for your mention. I agree that no one provider has successfully handled the aggregation, analysis and/or correlation of every social media platform – how much that matters really depends on your agenda. Katie&#8217;s got it right&#8211;one should definitely be asking, &#8220;to what business end am I measuring social media&#8221;? Is it the success of a particular PR campaign with a cadre of specific bloggers?  Is it quantifying brand awareness within a specific social community? Or is it measuring the ROI of a social media ad campaign? These are unique tasks which require unique tools.</p>
<p>As an industry, we need think more about building applications which can power the business tasks that leverage social media, otherwise we&#8217;ll continue to get lost in hopeless rhetoric. </p>
<p>Todd Parsons<br />
Co-Founder BuzzLogic</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ideas That Spread &#187; Spreading Negativity</title>
		<link>http://www.emergence-media.com/2008/04/social-media-monitoring-broken-conversations-broken-tools/#comment-65359</link>
		<dc:creator>Ideas That Spread &#187; Spreading Negativity</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2008 15:35:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.emergence-media.com/?p=180#comment-65359</guid>
		<description>[...] some of them are unsure of what to do or how to track and monitor these conversations. Despite the limitations of Social Media Monitoring, the distributed web is increasingly setting off alarm bells with brands that find out that they [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] some of them are unsure of what to do or how to track and monitor these conversations. Despite the limitations of Social Media Monitoring, the distributed web is increasingly setting off alarm bells with brands that find out that they [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marcel LeBrun</title>
		<link>http://www.emergence-media.com/2008/04/social-media-monitoring-broken-conversations-broken-tools/#comment-64889</link>
		<dc:creator>Marcel LeBrun</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Apr 2008 17:12:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.emergence-media.com/?p=180#comment-64889</guid>
		<description>Daniel, 

Social Media is now much broader than blogs, even as blogs continue to grow in importance.  As I commented on Todd's post, the conversation is very fragmented and it is getting more diverse as the number of mediums or "channels" increase.

It is a great question, "How do you track conversations that occurs between different social media websites?"  It depends if you are asking this question as a participant in the conversation or from the perspective of a marketer/PR pro.

As a participant in the conversation, you will miss parts of the conversation unless you are active on all the mediums where it is taking place.  This is a challenge since you might be looking at the conversation on a blog and perhaps you are following it on twitter, but you miss some of it on Friendfeed because you are not following the person there. 

As a Marketer or PR/pro, it is important to take a broad multi-channel approach.  Of course, Katie is right in her comment – what you measure must be tied to your business goals.  

Most companies and PR agencies I talk to want to track more than blogs whether they are measuring the conversation around a campaign, identifying and engaging with influencers, or tracking issues or suggestions for customer service.  They don’t want to miss any content, and they want to spend their time diving into the conversation instead of trolling, cutting/pasting, searching, collating, etc.  

That is why it is important for monitoring tools to have a broad coverage of the conversation, from multiple sources, multiple media (text, image, video, etc.) and to track it as-it-happens.  Thanks for linking to Radian6.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Daniel, </p>
<p>Social Media is now much broader than blogs, even as blogs continue to grow in importance.  As I commented on Todd&#8217;s post, the conversation is very fragmented and it is getting more diverse as the number of mediums or &#8220;channels&#8221; increase.</p>
<p>It is a great question, &#8220;How do you track conversations that occurs between different social media websites?&#8221;  It depends if you are asking this question as a participant in the conversation or from the perspective of a marketer/PR pro.</p>
<p>As a participant in the conversation, you will miss parts of the conversation unless you are active on all the mediums where it is taking place.  This is a challenge since you might be looking at the conversation on a blog and perhaps you are following it on twitter, but you miss some of it on Friendfeed because you are not following the person there. </p>
<p>As a Marketer or PR/pro, it is important to take a broad multi-channel approach.  Of course, Katie is right in her comment – what you measure must be tied to your business goals.  </p>
<p>Most companies and PR agencies I talk to want to track more than blogs whether they are measuring the conversation around a campaign, identifying and engaging with influencers, or tracking issues or suggestions for customer service.  They don’t want to miss any content, and they want to spend their time diving into the conversation instead of trolling, cutting/pasting, searching, collating, etc.  </p>
<p>That is why it is important for monitoring tools to have a broad coverage of the conversation, from multiple sources, multiple media (text, image, video, etc.) and to track it as-it-happens.  Thanks for linking to Radian6.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dred Porter</title>
		<link>http://www.emergence-media.com/2008/04/social-media-monitoring-broken-conversations-broken-tools/#comment-64593</link>
		<dc:creator>Dred Porter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Apr 2008 22:47:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.emergence-media.com/?p=180#comment-64593</guid>
		<description>I have found that the actual numbers do not mean as much by themselves. But when you compare the rate of change over time against the change of the competition, or other issue, or advertiser, then you can measure the change in behavior. But the underlying need to measure the effectivness of PR campaigns remains. How well are you doing, and by how much.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have found that the actual numbers do not mean as much by themselves. But when you compare the rate of change over time against the change of the competition, or other issue, or advertiser, then you can measure the change in behavior. But the underlying need to measure the effectivness of PR campaigns remains. How well are you doing, and by how much.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Katie Delahaye Paine</title>
		<link>http://www.emergence-media.com/2008/04/social-media-monitoring-broken-conversations-broken-tools/#comment-64506</link>
		<dc:creator>Katie Delahaye Paine</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Apr 2008 15:49:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.emergence-media.com/?p=180#comment-64506</guid>
		<description>You're point about the forest not the trees is dead on. The point for all measurement is to figure out what the program is doing for the business or the organizational mission (if its a non-profit). Until people stop worrying about capturing every blog mention, and look instead at what impact its having on the business, we're all wasting our time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;re point about the forest not the trees is dead on. The point for all measurement is to figure out what the program is doing for the business or the organizational mission (if its a non-profit). Until people stop worrying about capturing every blog mention, and look instead at what impact its having on the business, we&#8217;re all wasting our time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
