LOLCats: A History

Jul 2010

10

LOLcats on teh InternetSource: Online Education

 

This is teh history of LOLCats, for those of u who hav ben liek “wtf?”

 

In all seriousness, a pretty neat infographic with some interesting statistics. Enjoy.

 

The Value of Perspective

Jun 2010

20

102_5480 copy

 

Perspective is a funny thing. It’s so important to our everyday decisions in life, yet something that is commonly overlooked in analysis. Every decision we make is based on perspective. As data becomes more and more available, a large proponent of people who do not know how to take that data into perspective grows. They’ll overvalue certain sets of data without taking into account small sample size or confounding variables that lead to faulty conclusions.

 

The problem with the increased availability of data is that we start to focus SOLELY on the numbers, without thinking about the vast importance of perspective and relationships. Ultimately a number is just a number. Whether we’re looking at web traffic, batting averages in a baseball game or a company’s stock. Without perspective, we have no idea whether 1,000,000 pageviews is a good thing, a .250 batting average is a bad thing, or if a $20 stock valuation is the right price. It’s only once we take all factors into account (competition, peripheral factors, causal relationships), that we can truly begin to see the big picture.

 

Baseball: A Case Study

Nolan-Ryan-Baseball-CardIf you’re heavily interested or involved in analysis, then baseball is probably the sport you want to get into. There is no sport that has a longer, more rich history of statistical measurement and analysis than baseball.*
*For the record, I am extremely biased on this subject. Not only did I play baseball since I was 5 years old, but I also credit baseball for my knowledge of simple math skills and ability to do fractions (having to calculate batting averages and ERAs does wonders!)

 

So, since every statistic can be tracked, it allows people to easily (and often) draw unfounded conclusions based on certain data points. Someone might look at a batting average of .350 and think “Joe Smith is a fantastic hitter!” without taking into account certain other facts like: the pitchers he’s faced (maybe he only played in games where lower-tier pitchers were throwing), the number of at-bats (small sample size is often a huge factor), an unrealistic batting average on balls in play (if the league averages .300 when they put a ball into play, and Joe Smith averages .450, maybe he’s getting unreasonably lucky), etcetera.

 

Even if his average is legitimate, we must then decipher the reasons for his success. Maybe he’s found a new hitting coach, changed his batting stance, or changed his workout program over the summer. Maybe Joe Smith moved to a new baseball park that suits his style of hitting. Perspective when measuring and analyzing any statistical set of data is extremely important, and baseball statistics illustrate this perfectly.

 

Web Analysis

So, this brings us to web (and social media) analysis. Just because we have tools to measure all of our web traffic doesn’t mean that we are truly understanding what it is that we are measuring. Still, we often run into issues of targeting the wrong metrics and singularly focusing on data rather than contributing factors.

 

Many people typically focus on certain mainstream metrics (unique users, pageviews, time on site), without ever analyzing or paying attention to the peripherals (entrance page, referring sites, bounce rate). Focusing on a website’s peripherals allows us to realize not just that people are coming to a website, but more importantly, why.

 

The other big issue arises when choosing to form conclusions based on initial hypotheses. For example, thinking: “if there’s an increase in traffic, it’s because of our marketing efforts; if there’s a decrease in traffic, it’s because of a problem with our content.” As any 10th grade science teacher can tell you: it’s wrong to base your conclusion upon the hypothesis that you started with. Yet when doing analysis, we often tend to see what we want to see. Yet, just as in baseball, there are hundreds of factors involved. Seasonality (what time of year is it?), decreased demand for a product, or many other confounding factors (maybe someone else stumbled upon an article of yours) sometimes act as much stronger factors than your own efforts. You should always start with a hypothesis, but being unwilling to bend if that initial theory comes into question (or being uninterested in digging deeper) can often lead to incorrect conclusions.

 

Let’s take an example of a company that has been trying to ramp up social media efforts. They’ve started a Twitter and a Facebook account, and they suddenly see a great spike in their traffic. Quickly breaking out the Microsoft Excel spreadsheet, the social media specialist (who is tracking their web stats with Google Analytics) sends his CEO the chart below and says “hey, look! The main traffic dashboard shows a spike right when we launched a new social media campaign!” The company rejoices and finally sees the value of social media.

 

social media campaign stats The Value of Perspective

 

…Only, that’s not actually what happened. Yes, the social media specialist launched a campaign. Yes the traffic boosted. But if he’d taken 30 seconds longer to actually investigate, he’d have realized where the traffic was actually coming from. It wasn’t a bump in traffic from the Twitter or Facebook domains, or even in direct traffic, which he might have been able to attribute to one of the two. Nope, it was a bump in traffic from stumbleupon.com to a blog post he’d written 3 months ago. But he was so excited to affirm his belief that it was the Twitter and Facebook launch that week, he didn’t even feel the need to do research.

 

stumble upon stats The Value of Perspective

 

Don’t be that guy. If you are actually doing analysis on everything your company does online, you’ve already taken one major step. Don’t negate that by being careless. Take into account all of the variables before you rush to a conclusion. We’ve all been excited about the campaigns we run, and the efforts we’re taking to increase sales, traffic, conversions, whatever. But then take the next step in making sure you’re using the numbers right to attribute your successes to the right place.

 

The increased availability of data is a gift, but one that must always be wielded with caveats and perspective. Data is not inherently good or bad, but it is imperative that we view and analyze it with the proper perspective before moving forth with conclusions. However, if you don’t care about factual accuracy or moral integrity, you would be far from the first to lie with statistics.

 

All I’m saying is that we are currently in an era where we are inundated with statistics. Numbers, data points and rudimentary analysis are constantly thrown at us. If we just take it at face value, or decide to solely use it to fit our hypotheses, we’re only hurting ourselves.

 

Segmented Networks and Recognizing Your Audience

Apr 2010

30

not listening Segmented Networks and Recognizing Your Audience
As you may know, I belong to (and am active on) a lot of different social networks. Though these networks have a lot of similarities, including connecting with friends, sharing information and meeting new people, it seems that those similarities cause many people to treat them as one and the same. How else can you explain the desire to link all Twitter posts to LinkedIn and Buzz, or all Foursquare posts to Facebook?

 

In efforts to make posting to social networks “easier” and “more automated”, many power users have try to link all of these networks together and batch update. When you accept an invitation to a Facebook event, it updates your Twitter and Buzz. When you update your Foursquare account, it posts to your Twitter, Facebook and Buzz. And when you tweet from the event, it updates your LinkedIn, Facebook and Buzz. Even if we’re aware that the networks are different and serve different purposes, by automatically linking everything, we’re essentially using them in the same way.

 

So why is that wrong? Well, for starters, the audience is entirely different. What are the differences and how do they compare to other networks? Let’s break it down:

 

foursquare NW Mktg Guy Segmented Networks and Recognizing Your Audience

Twitter

Twitter is almost entirely focused on its feed. Profiles are extremely limited, and though there is integration with a number of different clients using its API (and a lot of potential for Twitter in location-based mobile services), at the end of the day it’s all about the feed and the information spread through it. The volume of a power user on Twitter is generally much higher than for any other service (unless that service integrates a handful of other networks), which makes it difficult to translate to any other social network.

Facebook

Facebook is about MUCH more than just a stream of posts – it’s integrated with dozens of different applications, games and deeper profiles. Yes, there’s a live feed, but that feed is a very small part of what Facebook is. More than anything else, Facebook is about connecting with current friends. Where Twitter users will often discover new users through hashtags and location, that’s slightly more rare on Facebook, which puts a premium on the friends you already have, or people you’ve already met in person.

Foursquare

Foursquare, like Twitter is feed-based, but its focus is entirely location-centric. So, if I’m from Seattle and you’re from London, do you really care about which pizza joint I went to if it gets updated to Twitter? Probably not. Yet more often than not, people link their Foursquare directly to Twitter, which is more often used to connect you with users around the country rather than being hyperlocal.

LinkedIn

And LinkedIn is a work-centric network – how is a Foursquare post about my location or a Tweet about an unrelated event at all relevant to my LinkedIn audience? Yet, a good deal of the people I’m connected to on LinkedIn use Twitter as a direct feed into their profile. In terms of update frequency, it makes little sense – people are much less apt to check for updates on LinkedIn, a business network, than they are to check on Twitter – therefore an integrated Twitter feed tends to flood the LinkedIn network with irrelevant data.

 

As a society, we always look for the easiest solutions to our problems, and that solution often comes from automation. However, automation without consideration is madness. It leads to mixed messaging, spam and annoyance. Imagine if I sent out a mass email every time I checked into a new restaurant. Or if every picture I posted on Flickr automated a text message to each one of my friends. Automation is there to make life easier, but rather than mindlessly clicking an innocuous little check-box, take a few minutes to think of what you’re automating and who your audience is. I promise it will save everyone time and effort.

 

As part of my own due diligence, I’ve made a quick and dirty list of how I use my own networks, and what gets pushed where.

 

Twitter: Pushes nowhere. The stream is much more frequent than any other service, and pushing my Twitter stream anywhere else risks disenfranchising and annoying that audience. Honestly, this is my biggest concern for Twitter moving forward – it seems like the most overwhelming social network and is the first for people to drop in a crunch for time.

 

Facebook: Occasionally pushes to Twitter and Buzz. This stream is fairly versatile, but I still have a slightly different audience on Twitter than I do on Facebook.

 

Foursquare: Pushes to Facebook. I once pushed this to Twitter, but found that it was just the wrong audience. Facebook has a number of close, local friends, so posting on Foursquare makes sense in the event that people want to meet up at a local place.

 

LinkedIn: Pushes nowhere. LinkedIn is a pretty niched audience. Though I will sometimes post the same things on LinkedIn that I might on Twitter, I don’t update my LinkedIn status enough to ever post it elsewhere – the status/microblog portion of LinkedIn is a very, very small subset of the overall product.

 

Google Buzz: Pushes nowhere. Mostly because a lot of my content pushes to Buzz.

 

My blog: Techshots pushes to Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn and Buzz. Since these networks are in part used to promote my content and disseminate information, it only makes sense that my blog would push everywhere.

 

heartithateit: Same as blog, except it doesn’t push to LinkedIn, because it’s more for fun than for work.

 

How do you use your social networks? Where does your information get pushed, and why?

 

Heart it Hate it

Feb 2010

25

heart it hate itAs many of you know, I launched a website earlier this month, called heart it hate it. The idea behind the website is to take controversial topics like Google Buzz, Tiger Woods and Wal-Mart and to gain some user opinion and insight. So far, the results* have been quite interesting.

 

The vote percentages have been surprising to me. Companies that I thought would receive much more hate due to their perception as “evil conglomerates” like Starbuck’s and Wal-Mart are less hated than I would have guessed. Also, two of the most recent tech phenomenons come in the top 5 of most hated: The iPad (80% hate) and Google Buzz (75% hate).

&nbsp

I hope you’ll take the time to check out heart it hate it and vote on some of the topics you feel strongly about. It takes less than 2 seconds to vote and less than a minute to comment. Maybe more if you’re reading the descriptions :). Feel free to use this post to comment on some of your thoughts on the features and choices I’ve made with heart it / hate it. I’d love to hear your input.

 

* As most of you are aware, I have a background is in research and consumer analytics, so let me offer a few disclaimers here: 1) We’re working with extremely small sample sizes at the moment. Eventually I’d love to put together more representative data sets, but that’s a matter of getting better exposure; 2) The purpose of the website was for entertainment, not statistical analysis. As such, my own biases (in the “heart/hate” descriptions sections) may influence votes, as well as the vote percentage being displayed on individual vote pages prior to voting (which will be changed in the future); and 3) we’re looking at a group of primarily tech-savvy early adopters and a high percentage of digital natives. Because of that, there is certainly some bias to be considered.