An interesting study of twitter’s viability for eWom, or electronic Word of Mouth marketing, has been making the rounds (Twitter Power:Tweets as Electronic Word of Mouth). The research involved analysis of 150,000 tweets, treated as
I have been talking about socially-mediated branding without having really offered a description of what I mean by it. In follow up to yesterday’s post on consumers and their identification with brands, I want to
If one did a semantic analysis of the language I use in my blog posts of late, I’d not be surprised if two of the words I use most are “many” and “different.” I much
I started wondering last evening what twitter would be like if in addition to followers we could also see who was actually being paid attention to. The groups many of us use in clients like
I consider social media to be talk technologies, and I’ve been suspecting of late that the debate around “transparency” is a debate about communication. I say this only because transparency is sometimes used to describe
Influence metrics are growing up. According to Adage, Razorfish is about to introduce “the SIM score, which stands for social influence marketing.” The new score is covered by Abbey Klaassen in What’s Your Brand’s Social