tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32202893.post693110765136238318..comments2023-10-18T08:32:17.510-07:00Comments on Kevin Hillstrom: MineThatData: Are Marketing Bloggers Positive, Critical, Or Something Else?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32202893.post-13809886099253417792012-06-01T13:47:32.841-07:002012-06-01T13:47:32.841-07:00I believe it sounded like you have problems yourse...I believe it sounded like you have problems yourself by trying to solve this issue instead of looking at the problem in the first place.dining room furniturehttp://buyitnowfurniture.com/index.php?page=shop.browse&category_id=12&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=122noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32202893.post-2162069784566649022007-04-09T13:50:00.000-07:002007-04-09T13:50:00.000-07:00Hi Graham --- yes, I'm absolutely in danger of mak...Hi Graham --- yes, I'm absolutely in danger of making unfounded generalizations. Well said!<BR/><BR/>I suppose I need to go back to what I was trying to accomplish in the first place. <BR/><BR/>I had been frustrated by what I perceived was a lot of negativity.<BR/><BR/>I looked at a small slice of information, and found that small slice to be more positive than I expected it to be.<BR/><BR/>Given that the commentary was generally positive, I decided to say something about it. <BR/><BR/>Somewhere in the late 1990s, I made a transition away from my statistical heritage. As I sat in on leadership meetings in the companies I worked at, I saw that there were so few problems that could be solved by a 95% confidence interval. Most of the problems executives were asked to solve were problems that had too little data. If I had stuck to my statistical guns, I'd have struggled to make decisions.<BR/><BR/>So, a lot of my experiences over the past decade spill over into what I do now. And in this case, you're 100% right --- this is too small a sample to make broad, sweeping generalizations. That being said, I'd write the post over again, because I was sharing that folks were writing positive things, even if for just a week.MineThatDatahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14014200122021988374noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32202893.post-25270828665729645322007-04-09T13:29:00.000-07:002007-04-09T13:29:00.000-07:00KevinNice EDA.But, as one statistician to another....Kevin<BR/><BR/>Nice EDA.<BR/><BR/>But, as one statistician to another. Are you not in danger of making unfounded generalisations about blogging based upon a hugely inadequate number of observations. <BR/><BR/>Graham Hill<BR/>Independent CRM Consultant<BR/>Interim CRM ManagerAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32202893.post-35251784696491088092007-04-08T22:17:00.000-07:002007-04-08T22:17:00.000-07:00Gavin --- you have me thinking about categorizing ...Gavin --- you have me thinking about categorizing the topics over time, so that I could do a "retrospective", if you will, of what was important six or twelve months ago. That might be interesting.<BR/><BR/>Toby --- this is only my personal opinion. I didn't think the top 10 were intentionally trying to be more critical. After reading 188 posts, it seemed like the top ten have a bigger platform, and maybe more confidence to speak their mind. <BR/><BR/>I had an instance back in October where I was critical of vendors in my industry --- and within just a week, I lost half my readership.<BR/><BR/>After spending months getting back to where I was, and then finally breaking through and getting a decent number of readers, I don't lose everybody when I go sideways in a manner that offends folks.<BR/><BR/>So, maybe my experience is unique to me --- but I sense that in the confident the top ten have verses numbers eleven through twenty-five.MineThatDatahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14014200122021988374noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32202893.post-92049800004442530802007-04-08T21:49:00.000-07:002007-04-08T21:49:00.000-07:00Kevin - Thanks for your time and efforts on this p...Kevin - Thanks for your time and efforts on this project. Very interesting, especially the way you segmented. I would not have thought that the top 10 bloggers were posting so differently from 11-25. Does that mean pundits are more critical or quick to judge?Tobyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00040457020085852360noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32202893.post-6988831299300110962007-04-08T14:04:00.000-07:002007-04-08T14:04:00.000-07:00Really interesting approach, Kevin. It would be in...Really interesting approach, Kevin. It would be interesting to see if this changes over time -- whether these perceptions shift with trends or as trends. Plenty to think about!Gavin Heatonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08505818390611807191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32202893.post-15198706039872081692007-04-08T10:08:00.000-07:002007-04-08T10:08:00.000-07:00In some cases, I took your content and put it in t...In some cases, I took your content and put it in the Blogging/Social Media/Web 2.0 bucket. That way, you could get away with calling folks who are uncomfortable with "twittering" as fools (The End of Thought Leadership Post you wrote yesterday), without being dinged for being snarky.<BR/><BR/>In Brands +/- and Strategy/Opinion +/-, I made sure that the blogger was writing about something that an actual company did. To me, you often get your point across without clobbering folks at a specific company/brand.MineThatDatahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14014200122021988374noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32202893.post-25676709707054348102007-04-08T04:44:00.000-07:002007-04-08T04:44:00.000-07:00Hmmmm. Interesting study. If I were to go throug...Hmmmm. Interesting study. If I were to go through some of my posts, it would be difficult to discern what's "positive" and "negative". How do you classify non-snarky constructive criticism? Is that positive or negative.<BR/><BR/>Seems like that decision alone (neatly classifying positive vs. negative) is not an exact science.<BR/><BR/>Cool study though.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32202893.post-11314929026653099312007-04-07T22:27:00.000-07:002007-04-07T22:27:00.000-07:00Hi Bob --- thanks for the comments, I subscribed t...Hi Bob --- thanks for the comments, I subscribed to your feed!<BR/><BR/>Maybe you have to have nearly a quarter of your posts be about blogging or Web 2.0 or whatever folks want to call it, so that marketing departments eventually hear enough about it to eventually become interested. At least that's been my experience ... the message has to be told repeatedly, and in a positive manner, for the ideas to take root.MineThatDatahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14014200122021988374noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32202893.post-60400482901775702762007-04-07T21:58:00.000-07:002007-04-07T21:58:00.000-07:00Nice analysis, Kevin. You spent some good time doc...Nice analysis, Kevin. You spent some good time documenting your assumptions. I especially like your follow up in comments to Paul and John. Also your 3rd of 4 conclusions - that 22% of posts were about blogging etc. I had to chuckle - if our marketing department let me talk about blogging 10 minutes out of every hour everyone's eyes would glaze over :) - I think its fair to say no alignment is needed. Wonder what if it did align though?<BR/><BR/>Thanks for the thought provoking post.Bob Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02487941305976922088noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32202893.post-85592080060354449302007-04-07T16:28:00.000-07:002007-04-07T16:28:00.000-07:00John, I failed to answer your final question. Sin...John, I failed to answer your final question. Since you have both positives and suggestions in your comments, and I feel there are more positives, I'd classify it as Strategy/Opinion positive.<BR/><BR/>Mack --- well said, I hadn't considered that point of view. I struggle with promoting books & speaking engagements on my own blog. I did check out the blogs, and you, in general, have a point regarding longevity.MineThatDatahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14014200122021988374noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32202893.post-60744871999809186632007-04-07T16:13:00.000-07:002007-04-07T16:13:00.000-07:00Thanks for the comments, Paul & John. It was nice...Thanks for the comments, Paul & John. It was nice of you to hop on and say something!<BR/><BR/>My categorization about the top ten blogs being more "promotional" means that top ten folks were more likely to tell readers about something they were doing, regarding their blog, book, work assignments, etc. For instance, Seth mentioned a new blog about his new book --- I classified that as promotion.<BR/><BR/>In terms of brand analysis being positive or negative, I struggle with this concept all the time. If the post focused on "the brand", and not as much about one specific element within the brand, I called it "brand analysis, negative".<BR/><BR/>There were several comments about Sprint. One was about how the author enjoyed the product. There was one comment about Sprint where the author was frustrated because s/he were forced to re-up for two years if s/he wanted to switch plans. While this is a perfectly valid concern that a customer can/should voice, I still classified it as "brand analysis, negative".<BR/><BR/>There was a post on Daily Fix about DirecTV which I classified at "brand analysis, negative". The poor author was on hold for ten minutes trying to get resolution on a problem.<BR/><BR/>If I were to do this again, I might create two categories. "Brand Analysis, Negative" could be split into "rants" and "suggested improvements". That might be a better approach.<BR/><BR/>I viewed "Strategy/Opinion" differently. This is where a blogger chose to address one specific topic --- maybe it was Apple and DRM-free music. This falls into Strategy/Opinion, and can be positive or negative. These posts were generally positive.<BR/><BR/>Blogosphere comments include stuff like "Most Valuable Blog" tournaments, participation in book writing activities among 100 bloggers, etc. These are discussions that are largely relevant to the bloggers who read the blogs.<BR/><BR/>I wish my analysis were more technical than that -- but it's not. I purposely didn't categorize the content by individual blogger, my goal wasn't to clobber or praise any one individual. I just sat down with a white sheet of paper and a red pen, read 188 posts over the course of almost three hours, and counted where the posts fell, based on my subjective opinion.<BR/><BR/>My original perception was that marketing bloggers were generally negative. <BR/><BR/>The reality is that, in this study, marketing bloggers are generally positive. In fact, only 18% of the posts had some element of negativity in them.<BR/><BR/>And as you say, negativity is subjective --- if there is a suggestion for improvement, that isn't necessarily negative.MineThatDatahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14014200122021988374noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32202893.post-53558005684380506382007-04-07T16:11:00.000-07:002007-04-07T16:11:00.000-07:00"The top ten were more promotional"If you have the..."The top ten were more promotional"<BR/><BR/>If you have the time, at least for your own curiousity, check and see the avg. age of the Top 10 blogs versus the rest of the Top 25. Or more specifically, look at the Top 5 versus the rest of the Top 25. I think the Top 5 or so are the A-Listers, and lets be honest, many of the A-Listers got there due in great part due to longevity, and promotion. Content plays a factor, but not IMO as much as some would have us believe.Mack Collierhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02723628321171539590noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32202893.post-36774331889361937002007-04-07T15:27:00.000-07:002007-04-07T15:27:00.000-07:00Kevin-Well done!There's some really interesting st...Kevin-<BR/><BR/>Well done!There's some really interesting stuff in here. I'm shocked that 1-10 was actually the more negative bunch.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for putting that together!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com