Interesting post, Gordon.
The debate over whether a) Labour really understands social media and b) what difference it will make to them in the run up to the next election inspired some heated debate following the post we did after interviewing Labour's "Twitter Tsar", Kerry McCarthy:
pr-media-blog.co.uk/new-labour-from-spin-to-social
The risk that politicians make by staking a claim to social media savvy is that their capability is not only there to be analysed (what they say on Twitter and blogs is freely available to anyone with internet access) but also subject to equally public support or ridicule. The ability to criticise them in public is no longer the preserve of professional journalists.
Pingback from Twitter Trackbacks for Gordon Brown needs to consider his social media reputation - Gordon's Republic - Blogs - Brand Republic [brandrepublic.com] on Topsy.com
Thanks for the comment Jon I read/enjoyed and linked to your blog in my last post and you are spot on in what you say, which is why whatever Labour does must be done carefully and with thought as it can and does blow up quickly in people's faces exactly because as you said people can equally support or ridicule.
interesting? Plausible? Who can tell, unless we know how are these figures arrived at?
And no, this line on their web site doesn't do the job: "It is worked out via a formula that uses data from manual and automated processes." nor do subsequent similarly opaque statements about "latest automated natural language technology,".
If I sound a little cranky its because if we want social technologies and environments are to be used effectively we need to be able to substantiate these kinds of figures, otherwise we risk being accused (and possibly guilty?) of gimmickry, and quackery.
And surely marketing has seen enough of that?
Just wanted to say firstly thanks for picking up on the report, we will also being doing a post speech score for both Gordon Brown and David Cameron after their respective conference speeches and will publish these over the next couple of weeks.
Just in answer in Leo's point I couldn't agree more the world of online reporting can be a nightmare and bad scoring systems harms us all, as potential clients trust the whole industry less.
In terms of how the score is calculated in simple terms we start with a monitoring tool based on spidering content, the results of this are loaded into a reporting system and categorised based on the platform the results come from.
This process provides the raw data, This data is then processed through natural language filters to gauge sentiment. This sentiment is then manually checked as natural language filters aren't perfect yet.
From this raw data the score is calculated and weighted based on target audiences.
If anyone wants to go through it in more detail drop me an email joe@yomego.com
Thanks
Joe Hughes
Research and Insight manager Yomego
Hey Joe, thanks for responding, I'd love to hear more about the detail behind this and will drop you a line.
Interesting that Joe doesn't include engagement in the scoring here.
AND I'm not sure the UK political parties have really learned from the US presidential election. The Obama team understood that that they had not only be in the "space" but get also their supporters active in the social media space. I'm sure that, like most of the social media industry, the political parties have a plan for their visible spokespeople but social media works because it provides a channel for real people to debate.
Gordon Macmillan
Blogging for:
Member since: 03 Jun 2008
Last login: 20 Nov 2009
Total Posts: 1,616