Community Management Tidbits – Analytics

Community Management Tidbits – Analytics

Community Management Tidbits – Analytics are a term that scares a lot of people. Don’t panic.

You’ve got a community. And you’re working hard on it. It’s growing. But you have no idea whether what you’re doing is having any sort of an impact whatsoever. This is where analytics comes in.

Community Management Tidbits - Analytics
Google Analytics: How to Identify Top Content Posts (Photo credit: IvanWalsh.com)

Now, don’t panic if you don’t have a data analysis background. It’s not strictly necessary. What you do need, though, are (a) a means of measurement (preferably you should have a few of these) and (b) the willingness to measure. Really, it’s that easy. You do not need a degree in Advanced Statistics.

Google Analytics

First of all, the primary measurement stick you want is Google Analytics. And it is free and very easy to use. It’s also a rather robust measurement system, showing trends in Visitors, Absolute Unique Visitors, and more. In addition, it shows, among other things, where your traffic is coming from, where your users land, and where they departed your site from. It also shows Bounce Rate, which is defined by Measurement Guru Avinash Kaushik as, “I came, I saw, I puked.” In other words, only one page of the site was viewed.

Compete

Yet another place for measurement is Compete. Since Compete gathers data for a good six months before you get anything useful, be sure to set it up as soon as possible. Compete’s virtue is that it allows for a comparison between you and up to two of your competitors at a time, assuming they are also on Compete. And a comparison of trends over time can be extremely enlightening.

Alexa

And another yardstick (albeit a far less useful one) is Alexa. Alexa really only works well for anyone using Alexa’s own toolbar for their search. Still, it is of some use, and it is free. Hence as an aside, ask your users if they will prepare a write-up about your site on Alexa.

More Yardsticks

Furthermore, there are also measuring websites specifically designed to help you comprehend how you’re doing on Twitter, namely:

  • Link Diagnosis – measure backlinks
  • HootSuite – count the number of clicks you receive on shortened URLs, to supplement your Google Analytics click counts
  • Hubspot – measure how influential you are and
  • Tweet Reach – measure how many people are receiving your tweets and any retweetings of your messages.

Using Your Findings

So what do you do with all of this information once you’ve amassed it? Why, you act upon it! Does one page on your site have a far higher Bounce Rate than the others? Check it and see if the links on it are all leading users away from your site. If that’s not the culprit, perhaps its content isn’t compelling enough. Got a series of links you’ve tweeted that have consistently gotten you the most clicks? Then check to see what they all have in common, and offer similar links in the future. And maybe even build some onsite content around those subjects. Has your Hubspot grade tanked in the past week? That might be due to external factors beyond your control, but check to see if any of it is within your purview. Perhaps your server was down.

Finally, small fluctuations over short time periods are perfectly normal and are no cause for concern. However, much larger hikes and drops, or trends over longer time periods, are more of an issue. But you’ll never know about any of these things unless you start to take measurements, and read and use them.

Next: From Small Things.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Community Management Tidbits – Let’s Get this Party Started

Community Management Tidbits – Let’s Get this Party Started

Let’s Get this Party Started! You’ve made the decision to have a forum on your website. Great! 

Community Management Tidbits - Let's Get this Party Started

 

It can be for any number of reasons, such as to cut the number of lower level technical support calls, to generate buzz for various advertising campaigns, to generate sales leads, or maybe to bring together people interested in a common cause. And you havea site with forums, done up in Drupal, or maybe using Ning or a PHP application out of the box. Or it might exist on Facebook exclusively. Or perhaps you’ve conjured up your own proprietary software.

And … nothing.

You’ve got no users, no content, no conversations. The community should be a hubbub of activity, a virtual village. Instead, you’re stuck with a ghost town.

Whaddaya do now?

Don’t panic.

Recognize that no one wants to be first attendee at a party. So, you’ve got to get the party started. But how?

Success?

For any website to succeed, you need to be strong in four areas:

So let us operate under the assumption that you’ve got the first two set (and, if you don’t, make sure you fix, perfect and beautify your design as much as possible. If you’re not already getting metrics, go get Google Analytics and Yahoo Site Explorer and get started on Compete (Compete takes a few months to gather data, so get cracking now). Add Alexa and Quantcast if you wish, as well).

Now with those two set, you can, fortunately, work on the other two together. First of all, let’s work on some elementary Search Engine Optimization. SEO divides into optimizing onsite and optimizing offsite. So start with a few basic offsite measures. It used to be that you had to submit your site to the DMOZ Directory. Yahoo runs this human-edited directory. At this point in time, that advice is out of date. Don’t worry about it. You can do just fine with social media and indexing on social bookmarking sites instead.

Submit your site to the follow social bookmarking sites:

There are any number of others but these are the really big ones and give you the most bang for the buck (most readers) versus others out there. You don’t need to pay some service to do this. It will all take you less than half an hour, no lie.

Content

For onsite SEO, let’s move onto Content. Because the two are intimately intertwined. Furthermore, your future users are going to want to see topics. And they are going to want to see them started by a number of different people. You’ll need to pull in some friends for this, and divide the new topics up as much as possible. Be sure to start with topics like this:

  • Welcome to the New Members/Getting to Know You
  • Basic News from outside your company, about you (if you’ve got a company blog or press page already, link to them here and
  • A few (say, half a dozen) topics showcasing your best keywords

Keywords

That brings us to keyword research. Go to your competitors’ sites, right-click and select “View Source”. Which keywords are they using? Consider using similar if not the same ones. So if your site is about, say, infant and child care, your main keywords and key phrases are probably going to be words and phrases like infant, child, child care, childcare, children, baby, babies, pregnancy. Do Google searches using these keywords and key phrases, with and without the words forum or community added. Look at those sites’ keywords and key phrases as well. Because you want to keep thinking of terms that your target audience will use for their own searches. Incorporate these words into your site and into the titles of some of your first topics.

Specifics

Don’t be afraid to be specific, for the child care site, try topics on such subjects as teething, sibling rivalry and readiness for kindergarten. Keep the keywords in the titles if you can logically and grammatically put them there.

Now, you’ve got some content, and you’re getting some SEO, even if your still low in rankings (don’t worry, it’s percolating). But you still need users. Here’s where invitations come in. You, me, all of us – we have online networks. We’ve got friends on Facebook, followers on Twitter and a network on LinkedIn, and a whole host of other groups of online acquaintances. Plus we’ve got friend and family email addresses.

Invitations

So craft an invitation. Make it polite, pleasant, simple and short. Be definite about what your forums are about (e. g. write more than “Please check out my site.”). In particular, if you know people who like forums (perhaps you already regularly post on some other forums site, even if the main subject is radically different), invite those people. And do this in small doses, say, 30 people at a time. This will keep you from getting overwhelmed. And you can greet everyone personally. Furthermore, it will add to the feeling of exclusivity that a small site can engender. Don’t worry if people start inviting others to your site, even people you’ve never heard of before. Because this is a good thing. You want them to do this.

So look for sites to link to you, and be sure to get reciprocal links. Consider adding Google News Reader, and a blog to provide directed quality content. Furthermore, it will keep your users updated as to outages and new features as you add them. Add a Facebook fan page for your site, although I’d recommend waiting at least a little while after launching. After all, if no one likes you on Facebook, you’ll have the same issue. It’s trying to attract people who don’t want to be first. Furthermore, you’ll need at least 30 Facebook fans (that number may rise in the future) to get metrics. And then you can really get this party started.

But above all, have fun. And get this party started!

Next: Look at Me! Look at Me!

Enhanced by Zemanta

Almost Everything But the Tweet – Conquering Twitter (metrics and timing)

Almost Everything But the Tweet – Conquering Twitter (metrics and timing)

Metrics and timing. When you tweet may not seem to matter too much. In particular, if you don’t tweet too terribly often, your tweets will still be out there, so why bother to even care about timing?

metrics and timing

Not so fast.

Patterns

According to The Science of Retweets, Twitter users tend to follow some recognizable patterns. First thing Monday morning is prime time for retweeting; so is five o’clock on a Friday afternoon. And that makes sense, as tweeters are either settling into the work week or are just about to start the weekend. Weekend tweeting is another animal as well. Noon is another good time for retweeting — people are at lunch or are about to go.

Plus there’s also the matter of accounts (often for job sites) that pump out a good dozen tweets, one right after another. These have little individual impact and seem only to be useful for later searching.

Timed tweeting seems almost counterintuitive. But for a business to use Twitter effectively, the tweets should be planned anyway. Why not plan not only their content but also their timing?

Scheduling Software

Here’s where services like Tweet DeckSocial Oomph (formerly Tweet Later) and HootSuite can provide some assistance. By scheduling the most important tweets for the very start and end (and middle) of each business day, you can add to their impact. Separating out your tweets can also get them all out there while simultaneously preventing a flood of tweets which many users are generally just going to ignore.

Another positive upshot to spacing out your tweets is giving you content that can be used later. For Social Media platforms, it’s easy to initially attack them with an enormous amount of enthusiasm and then taper off or even fizzle out entirely. If you regularly spit out twenty tweets per day, you’ll be tweeting 100 times during any given work week. Even your most dedicated followers are probably not going to read every single one. Plus, you’re setting yourself up for burnout.

Time Zone Scheduling

Instead, how about scheduling only two tweets per day (say, at 9:00 and 5:00 PM in the time zone where you have the greatest market share)? That way, you’ll have more people reading and no one will feel overwhelmed. Plus your 100 tweets will work for a little over a month or even two, if you are judicious and don’t tweet on the weekends.

So long as your tweets aren’t intimately tied to a specific time (e. g. announcements of an upcoming event), it shouldn’t matter. And, if they are, you might want to consider splitting them over several Twitter accounts. Perhaps open up one for just events in Seattle, for example.

Now, what about metrics?

URLs

Unfortunately, Twitter itself doesn’t do much, so you’ll have to cobble things together yourself and use off-Twitter resources. One idea is to use a URL-shortening service that tracks basic metrics, such as Social Oomph or Idek. You may not get much more data from them than click count, but it’s still something. Hoot Suite provides .owly link metrics, with two free reports.

Another idea is to use a unique URL for the site URL in your profile, say, http://yoursite.com/twitter. If you’ve got Google Analytics set up, you can track when that page is used for landings to your site, and its bounce rate. For commercial ventures, you might even make up a coupon code and tweet about it, or use your Twitter landing page as a means of communicating certain special offers available only to Twitter users.

Follower/Following Ratio

Your number of followers, and the ratio of followers to who youfollow, is all well and good, but it’s hard to say what you’re measuring. On Twitter, as on much of the web, popularity tends to breed even more popularity. And, it doesn’t really mean much if you have a number of purely spammy sites following you. They aren’t reading your tweets, anyway, so what’s the point?

This dilutes any idea of what these numbers might provide regarding influence, but if for some reason you really want to be followed by a bunch of spammers, just place the term weight loss into your profile and never block the spammers. In fact, follow them back, and you can get even more of them.

It hardly seems a worthwhile trophy to be followed by the biggest-ever village of spammers, eh?

Some Metrics

Some sites, such as Audiense, show number of followers and their influence and activity. You can see which inactive people you follow (so you can drop them), which famous people follow you, etc. Some of these are admittedly vanity metrics, but they are helpful.

Tweet Stats demonstrates, among other things, a graph of daily aggregate tweets. And it also contains your most popular hours to tweet and who you retweet. Twitter Reach reveals exposure and reach. E. g. this means impressions and mentions of any topic, be it a word, a phrase, a userid or a hashtag.

In conclusion, keep up with Twitter, but don’t overwhelm your followers with floods of content, and measure your influence as well as you can, both using your own and external tools. If you can adjust your tweets to better serve your followers, your true influence will surely rise.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Responding to Facebook’s Organic Reach Decline

Responding to Facebook’s Organic Reach Decline

Responding to Facebook’s Organic Reach Decline – Facebook’s organic reach is going down. That is, fewer people are seeing your posts (unless you cough up some dough). What to do?

Facebook logo Español: Logotipo de Facebook Fr...
Facebook logo Español: Logotipo de Facebook Français : Logo de Facebook Tiếng Việt: Logo Facebook (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Social Media Today’s Pam Dyer has the scoop on how to respond.

In 2012, Facebook restricted brand content reach to around 16%. In 2014, the figure plummeted to just about a dismal 6%.

According to Dyer, “No one really knows for sure how Facebook decides what appears in news feeds, but some elements are well known as weighting factors:

  • Post types that receive the most user interaction
  • Posts that users hide or report as spam
  • How a user interacts with Facebook ads
  • The device that is used to access Facebook and the speed of its connection”

EdgeRank has less importance than it had, but it’s not quite gone from the mix. It consists of –

  • “Affinity: The closeness of the relationship between the user and the content/source
  • Weight: The action that was taken on the content
  • Decay: The freshness of the content”

Dyer lays out four steps.

  1. Optimize Facebook content. Test what’s working, and what isn’t.  What are people clicking on? And are they clicking through to your site? Look at Google Analytics for your site, and determine which content is the source for your Facebook-generated traffic.
  2. Create incentives for sharing content. Whether that’s offers, contents, or just can-you-believe-this types of posts, create the kind of content that people want to spread to their peers.
  3. Work a multi-network campaign strategy. Use hashtags; they show up in all sorts of places, and not necessarily on Facebook.  Put your hashtag in all of your promotions, e. g. blogs, television commercials, literature, etc.
  4. Track data, and act on it accordingly! What’s happening with your links? Where is your audience coming from? Dovetailing with step #1, be the company that knows where your traffic is really coming from. Know where your audience is clicking.

Knowledge is power.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Quinnipiac Assignment 01 – ICM501 – Ratings and Recommender Systems

Ratings and Recommender Systems

Unlike the offline world, the Internet is chock full of ratings and recommender systems. Why? Because metrics are everywhere. On YouTube, you know how many people watched a video, and who made it to the end. On WordPress, you know where your readers came from. On Facebook, you are constantly being served the likings, joinings, and friendings of your friends. Plus you have likely provided any number of cues about your preferences, your age, your gender, your marital status and/or sexual preference, and your location, among dozens if not hundreds of other data points. This includes everything from indicating you are a Red Sox fan to watching a cooking demonstration video to its end, to listing your college graduation year on LinkedIn, to joining a group devoted to German Shepherd Dog rescue, to reviewing a book on GoodReads about bi-curiosity. With all of this data, attempts are made to get a clear(er) picture of a person. With the picture comes an effort at predictability.

Amusingly, as I’ve been writing this blog post, to prove the point, the WordPress Zemanta plugin is currently serving me pictures of German Shepherd Dogs and a number of articles about them, allegedly related to this post. But, surprise! This post isn’t really about German Shepherds at all, this image notwithstanding.

Quinnipiac Assignment 01 – ICM501 – Ratings and Recommender Systems
German Shepherd Dog from 1915 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Close But No Cigar. Not Even a Kewpie Doll

Just as Zemanta screws up, so do plenty of other sites with recommender systems. Spotify, Pandora, and other music-matching sites seem to fairly routinely not get it. In September of 2013, Forbes reporter Amadou Diallo wrote about a search for a perfect playlist. In his article, Diallo compared iTunes Radio, Spotify, and Pandora, by using various seed artists to create playlists. The matching algorithms were given Stevie Wonder, Herbie Hancock, and The Alabama Shakes. Diallo concluded that Pandora had the best matching algorithm, but there were definite flaws with all three.

To my mind, a pure computer-driven search is a misplaced notion. One of the issues is of categorization. For musical, film, book, and other recommendations, it’s all only as good as how it’s categorized, and often goods are poorly organized. Consider Johnny Cash. A country artist? Sure. Male artist? Of course. He came from a particular time period and his work was generally guitar-heavy. And then, late in his career, he threw a curve and recorded a cover of Nine Inch Nails’ Hurt. If recommender systems had existed when he released it, the song would have dented the algorithms, perhaps even fatally.

A further issue with recommender systems is that they seem to treat people’s preferences like computer problems. E. g. if you like, say, movies that involve the American South, history, and a strong male lead, you might be served, under a movie recommender system, both Gone With The Wind and Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil. Yet one is a classic romance, whereas the other is a nonfiction work. Even if perfect granularity is achieved, and all of the seemingly relevant data points are hit, recommender systems still aren’t necessarily truly up to the task.

As J. Ellenberg says, in This psychologist might outsmart the math brains competing for the Netflix Prize. Wired (2008, February 25). [Link] “Of course, this system breaks down when applied to people who like both of those movies. You can address this problem by adding more dimensions — rating movies on a “chick flick” to “jock movie” scale or a “horror” to “romantic comedy” scale. You might imagine that if you kept track of enough of these coordinates, you could use them to profile users’ likes and dislikes pretty well. The problem is, how do you know the attributes you’ve selected are the right ones? Maybe you’re analyzing a lot of data that’s not really helping you make good predictions, and maybe there are variables that do drive people’s ratings that you’ve completely missed.” (Page 3)

There are any number of thoroughly out there reasons why people like or dislike something or other. Some are far from quantifiable, predictable, or replicable. They can’t be scaled to the entire population, or even one of its segments. Do we prefer a particular song because it reminds us of a point in our life that is no more? Do we avoid a film because it’s where we took our lost love on our first date?

Going Along to Get Along

Another issue with recommender systems is that people can often be persuaded one way or another. The Salganik and Watts study is rather interesting in this regard. These two researchers presented subjects with a number of unreleased songs and asked them to rate the songs and also download whatever they liked. Certain songs rose to the top of the charts (just like we normally see on Billboard, the Hot 100 and the like) whereas others were clunkers that fell swiftly. When the researchers switched the presented numbers, showing higher ratings for the stinkers and lower ratings for euphony, test subjects changed their minds. All Salganik and Watts had to do was convince their test subjects that this was the right outcome.

Salganik, M. J., & Watts, D. J. (2008). Leading the herd astray: An experimental study of self-fulfilling prophecies in an artificial cultural market. Social Psychology Quarterly, 71(4), 338–355. [PDF“…over a wide range of scales and domains, the belief in a particular outcome may indeed cause that outcome to be realized, even if the belief itself was initially unfounded or even false.” (Page 2)

Are these instances of undue influence? Self-fulfilling prophecies? Test subjects wanting to appear ‘cool’ or go along with the majority in order to increase personal social capital? And where are ratings and recommender systems in all of this? Are they measuring data? Or is it, like is the case with the Observer Effect, that the very acts of observation and measurement are skewing the numbers and generating false outcomes?

Or is it, perhaps still the case, that there’s no accounting for taste?

Enjoy Johnny Cash (but only if you want to).

Online Advertising: Facebook Ads vs. Google AdWords vs. LinkedIn

Online Advertising: Facebook Ads vs. Google AdWords vs. LinkedIn

Social Media Today recently compared these three types of online advertising, namely: Facebook Ads, Google AdWords, and LinkedIn.

Social Media Phobias
Social Media Phobias (Photo credit: Intersection Consulting)

Google

Google’s ads have gotten more expensive, and their success often seems to be hit or miss. Wide geographic ranges can give dramatic numbers but few results – narrowing things down geographically seems to accompany a commensurate rise in click quality.  According to the article, Google advertising, “… works if you have a unique and popular product or service. The interface feels professional, with excellent reporting tools, great usability and many various options.”

Facebook

The Facebook advertising experience seemed to be the most satisfying to the writer of the article.  With a demographic and geographic focus (and fast service by Facebook support), ads could be created with near-pinpoint accuracy.  When speaking of Facebook, which is much more of a leisure time site than LinkedIn or Google is, the article stated, “(t)he secret is not to become too serious in your ads and keep them simple.”

LinkedIn

LinkedIn was seen as being great for ads intended to reach strictly professional audiences. However, the LinkedIn admin team took significantly longer to approve advertisements than their counterparts at Facebook and Google took.  The reporting was also rather restricted, only offering a CSV file for download.

I agree with the conclusions drawn in the article – Facebook was overall the best, Google would be helpful for targeted ads for specific, unique or well-known products, and LinkedIn lagged, big time. To my mind, this also dovetails well with these sites’ overall purposes. Facebook is seen as for socializing and so it seems to work with ads in the same way that we are used to be served television commercials. Google and LinkedIn have other purposes and so there is less of an expected marriage of content and online advertising.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Quinnipiac Assignment #10 ICM524 – Google’s Monopoly

This week in class, we prepared HTML code with semantic categories and we also wrote about Google’s monopoly.

My essay is reproduced below, in its entirety.

Google’s Monopoly

Introduction – Ma Bell and Her Demise

We in the United States have been down the monopoly road before.

I well recall the telephone company being a monopoly. We were told, back when I was studying economics in High School, that it was a “good” monopoly. The teacher said that it was just the way that communications ran, and that it all made sense. The technology all went together. Installation, repairs, number assignment and indexing, and recordkeeping all went together perfectly.

Then came the 1980s and a court order to break up the Bell System. Apparently this “good” monopoly wasn’t so good after all. I had moderately high telephone bills then. I was living in a dorm but we were still responsible for our local and long distance bills. I even recall standing on a line to get a landline telephone and sign a contract.

In 1984, Bell was broken up into a few regional holding companies and I had moved to an apartment in Delaware. My telephone bills, particularly for long distance, had climbed. Then later in the 1980s and into the 1990s, there would be all of these commercials for long distance carriers. But the prices remained high.

Fast forward to today. My bill is pretty close to what it was when I attended school in Delaware. But I don’t just get local and long distance service; I also get Internet and cable. For nearly what I was paying when the phone system was in the regional holding company stage thirty years ago, I get considerably more for my dollar. Breaking up Ma Bell ended up, after some initial chaos, saving me money and getting me, the typical consumer, much better services.

Google and Analytics

Let’s look at Google.

As Steve Ballmer of Microsoft puts it, “This [search] is a scale game because the market for advertising is auction-based economics. If we have exactly the same quality of algorithms but less scale in search advertising we get less revenue per search than Google which means they have more money to pay for distribution on Samsung or Apple. Rumor is they pay each $1 to $3 billion a year for distributing their search products. We have to generate volume to step up.

It’s pretty bad when even Microsoft says you might be a monopoly.

Is Google’s attitude toward analytics driving some of this? After all, they offer it for free, and they strongly encourage website owners (commercial and noncommercial) to make use of it. But much like a man in an unmarked van offering candy, it seems to come at a price. A great analytics system definitely makes more online businesses successful. And what do successful and/or ambitious online businesses do? They buy search. They buy apps. They click on ads and convert more, and then those ads can be sold for more. And that’s where Google makes its billions – Google websites and Google member websites. The analytics program seems to be yet another great advertisement for Google.

Furthermore, a great, free analytics package definitely inclines one to think more favorably about Google. Microsoft, on the other hand, feels like it is bribing Bing users by offering rewards. Yet when Google offers better search placement in exchange for using Google+, it doesn’t seem so disingenuous. After all, what’s Google’s slogan? Don’t be evil. What’s Microsoft’s? Where do you want to go today? It is still positive, yes. But it’s not specifically assuring a customer that no harm is intended. Is that a requirement? It might very well be, given today’s skeptical consumer culture.

Google lulls the website owner into a comfortable sense of security, that a small business can be better analyzed and make more money, if only you could rank higher in searches! Except they’re selling the same bill of goods to that website owner’s competition. What happens when everyone is perfect at search? Then it’s more money for Google, as website owners buy more paid search to try to get back on top of the heap. The analytics package rather neatly tells website owners where they’re failing. The subtle hint is – buy search and you could improve again.

It’s Not a Monopoly If you’re Really That Good

There is one corollary in all of this. A superior product or service should always rise to the top, given the free market. Consumers naturally are going to seek out better products and, when price is no longer a factor, then quality is going to be the main driving force behind usage, with convenience being important as well. Is Google a better service than Bing or Yahoo? Maybe. It’s bigger, yes. But is its size defining its superiority? As Ballmer stated above, it’s a scale game. Search Engine Watch says that Google has just over 2/3 of all searches. Bing held the second spot with 18.7%. Yahoo had 10%. The remaining 3.7% was divided between Ask.com and AOL.

A site that enormous is going to, by definition, have considerably more money to throw around. This will result in the hiring of better engineers, more development, more frequent updates, and more innovations. Right now, it just seems like Google has the best product. It does not seem to be actively trying to require usage of its services (unlike Microsoft, which bundled Internet Explorer with its PCs and was court ordered to stop doing that). An active attempt to require usage of goods or services would be a violation of the Clayton Antitrust Act. Google has been careful to not stray into Clayton Act territory. Yet if it continues to crush its competition, it may end up there anyway.

Conclusion

Google is offering the best search experience. It’s also offering the best free analytics package, which strongly encourages businesses to put their advertising eggs into the Google basket. Being better is not a Clayton Act violation. But I think Ballmer’s got a point (although of course he’s also got an agenda). The scale is so wildly out of proportion that almost anything Google does essentially promotes it as a monopoly. Much like Facebook, Google is the category killer.

Quinnipiac Assignment #10 ICM524 – Google's Monopoly
Theodore Roosevelt

Perhaps the United States government needs to step into both areas, and put on the brakes a little on this kind of wild growth. It’s not your father’s monopoly anymore, but it sure seems to be a monopoly all the same. And the last time one that was this big was broken up, it resulted in an eventual win for consumers. Maybe it’s time the heirs of Teddy Roosevelt took an axe to Google.

References

Quinnipiac Assignment 01 – Qualitative and Quantitative Analytics in my Life

Quinnipiac Assignment 01 – Qualitative and Quantitative Analytics in my Life

Quinnipiac University
Quinnipiac University (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I began a new semester at Quinnipiac University; this new course is on social media analytics, which includes Google Analytics plus the collecting and interpreting of actionable data.

My professor is Eleanor Hong, who was also my professor for Social Media Platforms. I had really loved that class, so I made sure to take this one with her as well.

Our first assignment was to create a video. I was very pleased to see some names that I knew who are taking the course with me and I had originally met in Social Media Platforms. My final project partner from that course, though (Kim Scroggins), is graduating later this year and is instead just taking a Master’s Degree capstone project credit course. I have to admit that I do miss my final project partner a bit!

It already looks like it will be an interesting course. This video is about quantitative and qualitative analytics that I use in my daily life.

Enhanced by Zemanta