Jeff Lebowski is ... the Dude. Vestibulum id ligula porta felis euismod semper. Maecenas sed diam eget risus varius blandit sit amet non magna. Curabitur blandit tempus porttitor.

More >

Powered by Squarespace
  • The Big Lebowski (Limited Edition) [Blu-ray Book + Digital Copy]
    The Big Lebowski (Limited Edition) [Blu-ray Book + Digital Copy]
    starring Jeff Bridges, John Goodman
  • The Big Lebowski (Widescreen Collector's Edition)
    The Big Lebowski (Widescreen Collector's Edition)
    starring Jeff Bridges, John Goodman, Julianne Moore, Steve Buscemi, David Huddleston
  • The Big Lebowski - 10th Anniversary Limited Edition
    The Big Lebowski - 10th Anniversary Limited Edition
    starring Jeff Bridges, John Goodman, Julianne Moore, Steve Buscemi, David Huddleston
Tuesday
Dec092008

links for 2008-12-09

Monday
Dec082008

IAB's New Measurement Guidelines Are Trapped in a Time Warp

After months of work, the Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB) today published a series of measurement guidelines, MediaPost reports. A quick look at the PDF reveals a clear set of guidance on how to think about audience reach either through uniques (cookies, browsers, devices and users), vists, video views and/or time spent. Anyone can comment on the guidelines here until January 20.

The good news is that page views - a dead metric - are barely mentioned at all in the 35 page document (PDF). The bad news is that the guidelines are trapped in a time warp and do not adequately provide marketers or the industry the standards we so desperately need to stack programs up against each other. Future proof they are not.

I have long been a proponent for standards, particularly when it comes to how we measure the impact of digital and social media programs. After all, if I said to you Yao Ming is "tall" you would know what I meant. Now on the other hand if I said the YouTube program we ran was "successful," would you know what that means? No. And that's because there's a 50 ways to measure a program and across several different vectors: reach, engagement, repuation and purchase/trial.

Now of course, the reach metrics that the IAB task force covers in this document are certainly one key vector for measuring programs. However, they do not nearly go far enough. They're beholden to an era when the reach dinos ruled the online landscape. They don't any more. It's a new era.

To be truly useful, the IAB needs to step it up in conjunction with its partners and not only offer guidance around reach but also other measures. They should span to include engagement, reputation/sentiment and, ultimately, stronger links to sales. Otherwise, I fear this effort is creating an outdated set of measures that are truly set in a bygone era when just a small number of sites ruled the roost. They're not the right system for a web as fragmented as the one we live in today.

Hopefully they will take another pass at the process and think broader. Reach is a good starting point but we need more. The IAB may need to branch out here and include stakeholders who can see the bigger picture. Most of those who participated in the process (big publishers, vendors, ad networks) have a stake in propagating reach as currency. We need some other kinds of voices in the mix.

Monday
Dec082008

Wiki Indexes Social Media Marketing Cases

If you need inspiration for your next planning session, turn to Peter Kim and friends. They have created a terrific wiki of social media marketing case studies. I am sure I will be returning to this site over and again for ideas and to track the industry's progress overall. Kudos to the team that worked on this.

Monday
Dec082008

links for 2008-12-08

Sunday
Dec072008

WikiScanner2 May Link Home-Based Wikipedia Edits to Corporations

WikiScanner2

In August 2007 WikiScanner burst on the scene with a clever way to track anonymous corporate, government and NGO Wikipedia edits by matching them with their IP addresses. The buzz around the site, I suspect, sent many to their home computers to edit Wikipedia as they please. Some of them surely are PR professionals. However, coming soon, these edits too may be exposed - at least that's the developer's promise.

Virgil Griffith, the 25-year-old genius behind the original, and a team from CalTech is readying the launch of WikiScanner2. A beta site is already live. The previous version, Griffith writes, "would cut corners
and is easy to hide from either by creating a Wikipedia account or
editing from home." WikiScanner2 uses a more sophisticated IP-tracking
database to
purportedly "automatically discover salacious edits as well as provide a better
tools for humans to prowl through the data manually."

WikiScanner2 features a Google Suggest like interface. Enter a few keywords and it will return a list of relevant organizations. To put the tool through its paces I check to find what edits the Obama campaign allegedly made to the site. (For the record, I voted for Obama but decided this was a good test case.)

After entering in Obama for America, I was presented with a list of all edits from their IP addresses by location and telco. Some of these, it appears, could have been made with a home computer - although its unclear if that's the case. These could simply be the campaign's ISP at the time.

Once you enter a search, you're then given the option to view edits from any of these locations either individually or in unison. WikiScanner2 will provide a table with a list of the page allegedly edited, the user's comments, the date of the edit, IP address and - last but not least - the ability to rate edits up or down. The previous version was far more crude, as you can see from this screen capture.

The most interesting new feature is the addition of an algorithm that tracks potential conflicts of interest. It's unclear how this is calculated but one such search for the John McCain revealed that 46.7% of the 15 edits they made were a direct conflict of interest according to the rules that govern WIkipedia. Also noteworthy is that the site will now also highlight registered Wikipedia users if he/she has made a lot of edits from a particular domain.

As a purist, I welcome the addition of the new and improved WikiScanner tool. I want to see Wikipedia hopefully maintain its neutral point of view. I may be conservative, but generally I advise companies not to create their own WIkipedia pages or to edit existing entries. I advocate that they plead their case on the talk pages and see what shakes out.

If it's true that WIkiScanner2 can track home-based edits, perhaps this will lead to greater scrutiny around what I am sure takes place on the site every day - bogus edits and astroturfing. However, the jury is out right now just how capable this site in that regard. Still, there's no doubt it's dramatically improved.