Twitter to please advertisers

The Social media micro-blogging site has released a new special tool for advertisers which allows them to see what users are tweeting about in regards to TV. This then allows them to target their ads more specifically to users who are discussing particular shows.

This is mainly focused at the TV industry and specifically any networks wishing to create greater interest in live events and shows. Twitter has already forged partnerships with networks like CBS as well as sports leagues like the NFL. 

It has already been shown that TV ratings will boost based when a show starts to trend on the site. This is why targeted TV show ads can raise interest in other shows which may be similar to the one the user is already watching and commenting on.

I recently wrote about the then upcoming launch of TWTR (the Twitter stock) and how Twitters model probably was going to change in order to incorporate more ads; this seems to be the first step to please the new shareholders. Naturally Twitter has had this platform in the pipe for a long time, but it is interesting to see that this is the route they are going to take to start making that all important revenue.

Already Twitter is getting more and more connected with other forms of media, especially the TV. One of the really cool partnerships there includes a linked button with Comcast. This allows Comcast customers who use Twitter to set recording reminders based on Tweets about certain shows.

The interface is easy and intuitive; check it out below. I think this may be the first step in a Tweetsplosion on the Internet.

https://business.twitter.com/start-advertising

 Are you a business owner ready to advertise using Twitter? Leave us your comments below. 

Google Misogyny?

A recent campaign by UN Women, has caused some controversy on the web. The campaign depicts women gagged by the Google auto-complete function, which then suggests what "women should ...". The results that the auto-complete function suggests are not really the results you would want women to do nor get subjected to. 

What the UN wanted to show with this campaign is that there still is a lot of misogynistic ideas circulating the web, and draw attention to this. However, this campaign has also raised the question; what blame is Google to carry in this debate?

To debunk this we first have to come clear concerning what the auto-complete function really does, and to do so we first need to understand how the search function is set up. Google's search does actually not return the most accurate answer, but rather the most popular one, in short the most frequently visited answer.

There is a lot more to this, but handling Google search parameters is a different story, so for now we will have to simplify this process and just set it as the most popular one. 

The effect this has on the auto-complete function is that it will also display the most commonly used search terms that starts with a specific search parameter; "women should ...". As a result of this programming method, if a large number of people search for "women should obey men" this will automatically yield a high position in the auto-complete function.
On a personal note: I use Google to find answers to questions, and in these examples above it seems to me that the asker already has the answer set. This is not as much a question as it is a statement. 

So, how much blame does Google have in this? While it is true that Google has developed a function for censoring this feature (searching for "bitch ..." will not yield any auto-complete suggestions) one cannot really blame them for what the users search for, and therefor how the system will continually be built up. If users, en mass, started searching for "women should be independent" then that would yield a totally different result. This may seem like a fruitless endeavor but it is worth noting since it underlines the fact that the system is built for the user, and the user also, to some extent, dictates how it is being used. 

Personally, I think this is a case of missed screening on Google's part. Everyday more than 5 billion searches are done using Google, and to demand Google to police all of them is asking to much. However, one must also ask oneself; is that really the way we want the system to work? 

I think what has happened here is a perfect example of the system actually working the way it is suppose to work. Google provides the tool for us to botanize an almost infinite amount of knowledge, and we, as the users, will then help Google to point out when this knowledge is flawed - or, as in this case, out right deprecatory. Google will then review the claim, and possibly remove or censor the input. 

Right now we just have to see how Google reacts to this information provided by the UN. Hopefully (most likely, anything else would be brand-suicide) they will censor these ill informed auto-complete suggestion. 

Ball is in your court Google, lets us see that you still want to play fair!

note: to read up more on this story I recommend this post by Jessica Lee. As always please let me know what you think in the comments below!

How to EdgeRank

Ever wondered how Facebook always seem to know what´s best for you, and how to target you for those ads just you want? If this algorithm (left) is clear to you, then you can stop reading now. If not, here’s how to decipher this important calculation. 

The method has been dubbed “Facebook's Edge Rank”, and is an algorithm that determines what content appears in users' news feed. An Edge is basically everything that "happens" in Facebook. Examples of Edges would be status updates, comments, likes, and shares.

Facebook looks at everything published - status updates, links, images, video etc. - as "objects." Each object then receives an over-all point-ranking (an EdgeRank if you may), determines whether the object will be displayed in the user's personal news feed. An object's EdgeRank is based on several factors, where only three factors are officially known: the relationship between the creator and the user, the interaction with the object (how many likes, comments, etc.) and immediacy (time-decay parameter).

Affinity: is a one-way relationship between a User and an Edge.

Weight: is a value system created by Facebook to increase/decrease the value of certain actions within Facebook.

Time-Decay: refers to how long the Edge has been alive; the older it is the less valuable it is.

Objects with high EdgeRank appear in the "Top News" feed. Objects with low EdgeRank may not appear at all. Unlike Google's PageRank, which remains the same from user to user, each EdgeRank is based on the individual Facebook users who may (or may not) see the object in their news feed.

If a Brand generally has low EdgeRank objects, then the Brand's updates will be seen by less people. This means that their Facebook marketing budget is less effective than it could be. Brands that are succeeding with high EdgeRank objects are leveraging their Facebook budget by multitudes. The difference between leveraging and being punished by EdgeRank is substantial, and your brand will ultimately be judged by your ability to engage your content. Some Brands have natural success such as the NBA and NFL due to their media rich content, and highly engaged audience.

Tracking your EdgeRank is vital to anyone who wants to run a Facebook marketing campaign, since it is probably the only way to get an actual reading on the campaign’s penetration. Combining EdgeRank with a strong Analytics monitoring will yield a successful Facebook campaign!

Heres a quick tutorial: