<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Marshall Clark &#187; New Media</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.marshallclark.net/category/new-media/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.marshallclark.net</link>
	<description>Digital Strategy and Search Marketing Professional</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2009 19:05:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Making Friends and Spreading Memes</title>
		<link>http://www.marshallclark.net/making-friends-spreading-memes/</link>
		<comments>http://www.marshallclark.net/making-friends-spreading-memes/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2009 00:46:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>marshallclark</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Advertising]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Analytics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tutorials]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.marshallclark.net/?p=69</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Case Study on Social Media Publishing &#38; Analysis
Marshall Clark – Head of Search, Organic
As a follow-up to my earlier ‘Futurecasting Social Search’ presentation at the 2008 Search Insider Summit; in Summer 2009 I wrote an article for the Organic blog &#8216;ThreeMinds&#8217; titled ‘Docs are Old School, Why We Need PageRank for People’.
The central idea [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>A Case Study on Social Media Publishing &amp; Analysis</strong><br />
Marshall Clark – Head of Search, Organic</p>
<p class="alignleft"><em></em>As a follow-up to my earlier ‘<a title="Futurecasting Social Search" href="http://www.marshallclark.net/the-future-of-social-search/" target="_blank">Futurecasting Social Search</a>’ presentation at the 2008 Search Insider Summit; in Summer 2009 I wrote an article for the Organic blog &#8216;ThreeMinds&#8217; titled ‘<a title="Docs are old school we need pagerank for people" href="http://bit.ly/128U9V" target="_blank">Docs are Old School, Why We Need PageRank for People</a>’.</p>
<p class="alignleft">The central idea was that Google’s PageRank algorithm was becoming obsolete by continuing to assign reputation to web documents/URLs at a time when the web is moving to syndication and distributed content.  The article also outlined a novel solution to the problem by assigning reputation to content authors via a system integrating Social Graph data, OpenID, and existing search ranking strategies.</p>
<p class="alignleft">Following publication I launched a campaign promoting the article through a variety of social media channels &#8211; the following case study documents results and learnings from this campaign.</p>
<p class="alignleft"><span style="text-decoration: underline;">The Results</span><br />
The promotion campaign for the ‘PageRank for People’ article was a success.  Shortly after publication on ThreeMinds the article went viral on Twitter, spreading rapidly through the search and technology communities.  The article was commented and retweeted by several tech luminaries including:</p>
<ul>
<li><a title="Dave Winer" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Winer" target="_blank">Dave Winer</a> – Creator of RSS</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><a title="Tim O'Reilly" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_O%27Reilly" target="_blank">Tim O’Reilly</a> – Founder of O’Reilly Media &amp; originator of term “Web 2.0”</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><a title="John Battelle" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Battelle" target="_blank">John Battelle</a> – Author of the book “The Search”</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><a title="Leo Laporte" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Laporte" target="_blank">Leo Laporte</a> – Founder of TWiT.tv Network &amp; popular tech commentator</li>
</ul>
<p><img class="alignright size-large wp-image-68" title="PageRank for People ReTweets" src="http://www.marshallclark.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/tweets-415x1024.png" alt="PageRank for People ReTweets" width="291" height="717" />
</p>
<p class="alignleft">Analysis of traffic patterns showed a clear pattern of trickle-down content distribution/syndication originating from each of these Twitter Influencers.</p>
<p><img class="alignleft size-large wp-image-75" title="ThreeMinds Stats" src="http://www.marshallclark.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/totalstatsredact-1024x970.png" alt="ThreeMinds Stats" width="607" height="575" /></p>
<p class="alignleft">ThreeMinds  is one of the most highly visited blogs in the advertising agency world.  Despite an already large volume of baseline traffic, the &#8216;PageRank for People&#8217; article generated a huge boost in traffic to the ThreeMinds site, increasing total site traffic by more than 60% during one two-week period.  The graph below shows total traffic to ThreeMinds for the last year with the two spikes on the right illustrating PRP traffic.  Additional reports show the article was the #1 viewed article for the last year and one of the most popular posts ever published on ThreeMinds.</p>
<p><img class="alignleft size-large wp-image-79" title="Yearly Traffic Uptick" src="http://www.marshallclark.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/yearlyuptickredact-1024x847.png" alt="Yearly Traffic Uptick" width="607" height="550" /></p>
<p class="alignleft">Traffic sources for the article were unusual as nearly all of the traffic for the post came direct from Social Media (85%+). ThreeMinds posts typically get a fairly even distribution between Direct, Referral, Search, &amp; Social Media sources.</p>
<p><img class="alignleft size-large wp-image-77" title="Social Media Stats" src="http://www.marshallclark.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/socialredact-1024x1001.png" alt="Social Media Stats" width="607" height="575" /></p>
<p class="alignleft"><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Learnings</span><br />
In preparation for promoting the article, I talked with several top Twitter and Social Media experts to learn how to best increase the chances of having my post picked up.</p>
<div class="alignleft">
<p>Some of the things I learned:<br />
1.	Make sure your article has a name that is both catchy and descriptive.  Catchy to grab people’s attention, and descriptive to let them know what they’ll get when they click-through.</p>
<p>2.	Build a sound bite into your title, a ‘meme’, something that people can borrow, repurpose, and pass along but will still connect back to your original content.  Ex: “PageRank for People”.</p>
<p>3.	For Twitter, keep your original tweet well below the 140-character limit.  This encourages users to retweet your content, since ‘Retweeters’ (yes &#8211; seriously  :/ ) can add their own comments and still be below the character limit.</p>
<p>4.	Use Bit.ly to shorten your article URL.  This allows additional room for content and Bit.ly also provides some great analytics tools for tracking traffic to your post.</p></div>
<div class="alignleft">
<p>Other things I found as the project progressed:<br />
1.	When people retweet your content, the first thing most do is snip out your Bit.ly link and replace it with their own shortened URL link.  This link still points to your same destination URL, so you still get the traffic.  I’m guessing they do this to track how much traffic they send. In many cases they replaced my original Bit.ly link with their own Bit.ly link. – Fortunately Bit.ly allows you to view aggregate data for all Bit.ly links pointing to your destination URL, whether you own them or not.  Smart.</p>
<p>2.	On Twitter, Influencers are everything.  Several times during the project I thought I had reached a traffic plateau, only to have a new Influencer retweet the link and deliver a new, higher traffic spike.  What’s more, these traffic spikes and the prominence of the Twitterers responsible for them, tended to increase over time.  This seemed to point to a hierarchical web of connections, one where influential people follow other, more influential people.  Seems like with a good connection mapping program and a database of related topics, this could become something very useful for PR firms.</p>
<p>3.	Your content will live everywhere, including some places you wish it didn’t.  Several bloggers ‘borrowed’ the content of the article as the basis for a blog post, many giving little to no attribution.  While there’s not much that you can do to stop this, I found that friendly comment on the blog, building on their ideas and linking back to the original article was usually permitted.  In one case this even led to a productive conversation on how my original idea could be improved.</p></div>
<div class="alignleft">
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Conclusions</span><br />
1.	Twitter has great potential as a PR/Marketing tool, provided you can get Influencers to pick up your story.</p>
<p>2.	Your content will be mashed-up multiple ways and spread across the web.  Make sure your core concepts are tightly connected and contain at least one ‘meme-like’ component so you keep credit for your concept.  See <a title="Cornell Meme-Tracking Study" href="http://www.cs.cornell.edu/home/kleinber/kdd09-quotes.pdf" target="_blank">Meme-tracking and the Dynamics of the News Cycle</a> for an analytical perspective on why this is important.</p>
<p>3.	Keep your concepts short and memorable.  This encourages distribution and commentary while reducing the effects of dilution, misinterpretation, and short attention spans.</p>
<p>If you have questions on anything presented in this case study please feel free to ping me on Twitter.  I&#8217;m always happy to discuss.</p></div>
<div class="alignleft">
<p><strong>Marshall Clark</strong><br />
Head of  Search | Organic, Inc. | 555 Market St., 4th Floor | San Francisco, CA 94105<br />
<a title="Twitter - Marshall Clark" href="http://twitter.com/marshallclark" target="_blank">@marshallclark</a></div></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.marshallclark.net/making-friends-spreading-memes/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>PageRank for People</title>
		<link>http://www.marshallclark.net/pagerank-for-people/</link>
		<comments>http://www.marshallclark.net/pagerank-for-people/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 May 2009 17:36:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>marshallclark</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Advertising]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Media]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.marshallclark.net/?p=49</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<h2>PageRank for People</h2>
What we’re talking about here is a fundamental shift in how we track and evaluate content online.  One that mirrors how we assess information in the physical world: “Who’s this guy talking?  What’s he done before? Do I like him? Do people I like, like him?”]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h2>Docs are Old-School</h2>
<p>I’m going to let you in on the Search industry’s dirty secret.<br />
Google is slipping. </p>
<p>Google’s big innovation was in realizing that a link to content is the same as a vote.  By tracking all the links pointing to a page of content Google assesses how influential that page is – its reputation. Google calls this ‘PageRank’ and it’s old tech.</p>
<p>PageRank assigns a reputation score to the URL where content is published.  This makes it a great fit for content that stays put in one location.  However, evolving content distribution via blogs, RSS, guest columns, and syndication are a challenge for PageRank.   Micropublishing, Tweets, Retweets, ratings, and comments &#8211; even bigger problems. The solution lies in associating reputation with the identity of the author – a PageRank for People.</p>
<h2>Reputation is Personal</h2>
<p>At issue is how Google attributes reputation.  </p>
<p>If marketing guru Seth Godin publishes an article on NYT.com, marketing wonks want to read it.  If he publishes it instead at PodunkMarketingBlog.net, they still want to read it, because hey &#8211; it’s Seth Godin.  Google would rank the article at NYT highly, but Seth’s work would be next to invisible when published at Podunk.</p>
<p>We assign reputation to people; experts, advisors, consultants, coaches, gurus, friends, etc.  Search engines to date have relied on some proxy for this real-world reputation. </p>
<h2>Content Lives Everywhere</h2>
<p>In the physical world, your reputation follows you.  If you’re the world’s foremost expert on AJAX, your opinion on the topic will be respected wherever you go.  Imagine if the same held true online.  Publish an article on an obscure web dev blog, it ranks highly, because hey &#8211; you’re an expert.  Pen a guest column on “AJAX and You” for Women’s Day magazine and it ranks great, because you’re the best in your field.  Post a <em>comment</em> on the blog of an up-and-coming developer and that post gets a boost, because one of the luminaries in the industry judged it worth weighing in on. These are just a few of the possibilities, I’m sure there are plenty more.  </p>
<p>Mapping reputation to people instead of URLs makes PageRank portable.  It’s PageRank for people.</p>
<h2>PageRank for People</h2>
<p>What we’re talking about here is a fundamental shift in how we track and evaluate content online.  One that mirrors how we assess information in the physical world: “Who’s this guy talking?  What’s he done before? Do I like him? Do people I like, like him?”</p>
<p>Some of the criteria the PageRank for People algorithm would look at:<br />
•	Topics of expertise<br />
•	Number of links to your posts and the reputation of those doing the linking<br />
•	Number of comments and the commenters’ reputations<br />
•	Who’s in your community (those linking, commenting, reposting your content frequently)<br />
•	Ratings, weighted by the reputation of each rater<br />
•	Where you’ve been published<br />
•	How long you’ve been online<br />
•	Maybe even semantic analysis of your content (are you a troll?)</p>
<h2>What About Privacy?</h2>
<p>“Ok – so we’ve got a new search engine that knows who you are and on the topics you’re an expert on. What about privacy?”  The key thing here is that the search engine doesn’t need to actually know who you are, only that you’re the same identity it has been tracking across the web.  The New York Times recently published an article “A Service to Prove You Are Really You” describing a new Equifax I-Card identity verification service that could provide verifiable, anonymous ID on the web.  Imagine the ability to use one or more aliases online, all of which track back to an I-card capable of verifying these aliases while keeping your real identity anonymous.  OpenID with modifications might also provide the necessary anonymity + verification needed to make the system work.</p>
<h2>The Future is Social</h2>
<p>In the physical world we’ve got couple millennia worthy of debugging invested in how we evaluate information and people in real life.  Moving these same systems online will deliver huge gains in the accuracy and trustworthiness of information and will help align Search with the increasingly social aspects of the Web.  As associated technologies improve, I’m sure we’ll see some of the ideas discussed here implemented in one form or another.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.marshallclark.net/pagerank-for-people/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
