I have recently had reason to focus on the area of monitoring of social media which has involved looking once more at the whole range of black box monitoring solutions that are out there. This has caused me deep feelings of confusion and uncertainty.
The reason is this: when I do monitoring for a client, or advise a client on how to do monitoring, this is what I do. I work out what issues the client needs to track. I devise from this relevant search queries. I punch these queries into a range of search tools, since no one tool covers all the bases. I have a quick look at the results and tweak the search queries if necessary and also have a quick look at the general shape of the conversation (i.e. any especially relevant blogs, the balance of conversation between twitter, blogs, social networks etc.) I then pull the feeds from these searches into an aggregator (Netvibes seems to be the best for this) and segment things by creating relevant tabs. I then start to watch what is going on and chase down the threads that seem to be interesting. Over time I add to and tweak the model as I start to get a better feel for where the conversation is happening.
With such a tool I seem to have everything I need to stay tuned in to the conversation. I can write a report or analysis of this for a client (or the client can access the information by tapping into the tool direct) as well as having all the information the client needs to actually “do” social media — i.e. respond to the conversation, create relevant content, engage with relevant communities.
However, out there is a huge industry selling incredibly impressive black boxes that reel of reams of charts and data and figures and tracking, with sentiment analysis and conversation mining (conversation mining?) and all sorts of other wizardry. This is very intimidating — surely my little homespun costs virtually nothing solution that relies primarily on the intelligence and analysis of a real person cannot be anywhere near as impressive as these mighty emperors with all their fancy clothes?
But the problem is — when I look at all these impressive reports I can't work out how they help me design and run a social media strategy. They could help me craft a one-to-many message (but that's called advertising not social media) and the sentiment / volume metrics might help in measurement — we did x and the volume / sentiment needle moved x per cent in this direction. But that's about it. And in any case all of this intelligence I would be getting through using my homemade tool anyway — albeit the intelligence would be in my head, not in a chart.
The analogy that springs to mind is this. Suppose there was a large room and inside it were all the key stakeholders of your organisation. Let's say these people were at a drinks reception that you had organised — gathered around in groups chatting about you, subjects relevant to what you/ they do or maybe just about sport and the weather. As hosts of this party what do you do? The logical thing would be to go into the room circulate around the groups, listen to what people are saying, have a chat, tell people what you were doing. What you wouldn't do is send someone else in to listen-in on the conversations or set up a form of remote surveillance and then sit in another room and wait for someone to prepare a presentation and report back. It may well be that this report is very detailed and gives you more information than you could obtain just by circulating round the room. It would tell you exactly what topics were being discussed, what volume and sentiment of conversation was attached to each, who was speaking the most, correlate the people with the most to say with the colour of their shoes, determine that those with black socks are marginally more positive about you than those with brown socks — or any other way you would want to “mine the conversation”. But exactly how useful would this information be? If all you were going to do was to walk into the room, stand on a platform and deliver a speech, this type of stuff might help. You could, for example drop in a subtle reference to the fashion credentials of black footwear. But that's advertising. That's good old-fashioned one-to many communication. Its not social media.
But there again — it appears to be big business. People are buying these remote sensing and analysis products. Is it just snake oil and are the purveyors of such trading (albeit unwittingly) on ignorance? Or have a missed something?

Link to original post






















kenburbary said:
I originally left this comment over on Ed Borasky's blog post about this topic, but am leaving it here as well since I'm not sure where the conversation is still taking place about it.
Social Media Monitoring (SMM) is an area I’ve spent a considerable amount of time on lately, and my sense is that the signal here is being lost in the noise (chatter) about this topic. Remember, these fancy black boxes are just TOOLS, that is all.
Tools can either be as useful or as useless as the operator wants them to be. Automation by itself cannot provide any company with the silver bullet answer of how to better understand customers. Humans, without tools, cannot manually do this in an efficient and effective manner (it doesn’t scale). That is why the truly successful companies, regardless of size, take a hybrid approach.
Combining best of breed tools with strong analysis and judgement skills puts companies in the best position to adequately sift through the mountains of data that the digital/social web produces, while not sacrificing quality, and the human understanding that is needed to actually derive valuable, relevant insights from the raw data. These insights are the “gold†that companies seek. Actionable outcomes can be attached to these insights, which inform and drive strategy & tactics to improve products, services, and customer experiences.
I think SMM is a critical exercise for any size company, but agree the space is moving at light speed with constant changes. In addition, these solutions are marketed in a oversimplified manner, which sets false expectations for outcomes and investment needed to realize value.
With the proper expectations, strategy and resources, SMM is a must have. Some call it conversation mining, I liken it to Brand Radar. Who wants to fly without it?
- reply
- 0 points
Fri, 2009-08-28 14:54 — Ken BurbaryRichardStacy said:
That said, as others have pointed out in these comments, the tools are becoming more sophisticated and they may start to incorporate features that bridge the gap between observation and action.
However, I still think it is an interesting principle to advise organisations that they should avoid the use tools or techniques which are not also available to consumers or citizens. Such tools can encourage distance and disconnection and perpetuate the old media planning mindset. It is interesting to note that the US State Department has recently chosen to use Ning, rather than proprietary white label social networking tools, to set up a network for participants in its cultural exchange programmes. But I guess this is a whole other issue!
- reply
- 0 points
Tue, 2009-08-04 05:39 — Richard StacyEdBorasky1 said:
- reply
- 0 points
Mon, 2009-08-03 11:37 — EdBorasky1RichardStacy said:
So it seems like Dell cover all the bases - some core pro tools, usage of the public tools plus dedicated teams of people.
- reply
- 0 points
Mon, 2009-08-03 10:45 — Richard StacyRichardStacy said:
And when it comes to scale, you scale by adding people, not by substituting machines for people. Dell has a team of people on twitter, a community management department etc. The future of the marketing department is to become the conversation department and you can't have a conversation with a machine.
Ed - Have also read your post.
It would be interesting to take a big company that has a highly effective social media presence (Dell being the example that springs to mind) and see what they do. It wouldn’t surprise me if they relied primarily on the hand-driven approach.
I can see the point about integration with other analysis tools, but the point of all analysis always has to be “what’s the point� For conventional mass media marketing you needed lots of data and analysis because the costs and therefore potential wastage of this type of communication was huge. To operate in the social media space you don’t need this type of analysis or precision. It is easy to get an effective read of the digital body language of your customer or prospects using the free tools – and what’s more, these tools naturally lead you to the place of action – actually responding or doing something specific. These broad spectrum analysis tools, no matter how detailed and precise they can become, are never precise or specific enough to help generate the type of communication that works within the many-to-many world of the connected consumer.
- reply
- 0 points
Mon, 2009-08-03 10:33 — Richard StacyEdBorasky1 said:
http://www.borasky-research.net/smart-at-znmeb/2009/07/is-much-of-social...
- reply
- 0 points
Fri, 2009-07-31 15:18 — EdBorasky1SteveDodd said:
Richard, this is an extremely thought provoking post and the comments equally intriguing. I think Connie said it best when she discussed the fact that her tool should come with human intelligence to support it. And, I'm not sure anyone providing an Online Media Monitoring / Analytics solution would disagree. After all, they are all just "tools". Nobody realistically in this market believes these tools are total black boxes. Some obviously are more powerful than others and provide different levels of functionality to perhaps make the job easier (ie: consolidation of sources) or at least the function more scalable. But again, none are capable of truly deep understanding without being augmented with human expertise, at least for now.
But, as Connie and Christine also pointed out, they can and will eventually become "better". Likewise, as has been evolving throughout the industrial / electronic era, people will become more and more dependent on them (right or wrong / good or bad) as they do "improve" (please note the quotation marks denoting subjective terms) thus trusting them more and more. This will become truly apparent as we transition from Web 2.0 human managed content retrieval/interpretation to Web 3.0 systematic managed content interpretation/provisioning.
For now, our industry is still evolving and today, human interpretation is absolutely necessary. But in time, the talents you are discussing will be as foreign to users as simple math is to students born in the era of the calculator and computer or for the same reason I had to “spell check†this post before submitting it. For this reason, I believe we as an industry should work with these advanced tools to help the providers ensure the quality and capability exists moving forward. At the end of the day, it will happen whether we like it or not.
Throughout time one person's progress has been another's snake oil.
- reply
- 0 points
Thu, 2009-07-23 20:35 — SteveDoddwww.conniebensen.com said:
I think that the whole social media industry is plagued with concern about snake oil. There are so many consultants and self-proclaimed experts out there. And they're offering up their services. It's truly a wild west situation.
As a disclaimer I do work for a company that offers a sm monitoring tool. The past 10 months have seen an evolution in this space that I foresee will continue at warp speed! But like consultants we're seeing a new tool crop up each week.
Does our tool <a href="http://sm2.techrigy.com">Techrigy SM2</a> require a human? Absolutely! In fact I would highly recommend a community manager to go with it (and ideally they would be empowered to work cross-functionally across the organization).
In regard to Christine's comment - they have the potential to do more, if one of these companies will figure out how to look at the market conversation in an important way rather than in a way that produces a bunch of reports that are just numbers
my company is headed in that direction. We announced yesterday that Alterian acquired us. Alterian offers an integrated marketing platform that allows marketers for comprehensive multi channel campaign and customer analytics. Our goal is to shift from mass marketing to an individualized experience.
I encourage you to try Techrigy SM2 and experience the full range of high level insights and reporting down to the granular level for daily interaction. We have automated sentiment and yes it is machine generated (about 75% accurate). But we allow the user to revise the dictionary as needed so that you can make it 99% accurate if you'd like.
I'd be glad to show you why Techrigy SM2 is an industry leading sm monitoring tool & how it can save you time in lieu of using Netvibes as a dashboard & the additional analytics it offers.
Connie
Community Strategist, Techrigy
@cbensen
- reply
- 0 points
Thu, 2009-07-16 22:16 — www.conniebensen.comLindaZimmer said:
People are buying these products because they are desperate to bring social media into the mix, but have to show measurements in ways the organization can understand for now. In time, the measurement tools will get better and more relevant, and at the same time, decision makers in organizations will begin to better understand the true value of social media.
For now, I'm with you. I'm going the ethnographic approach.
- reply
- 0 points
Thu, 2009-07-16 15:46 — Linda Zimmerchrissfife said:
We are a conversation marketing firm--we recommend social media activities in the context of helping our clients engage in the market conversation (meet 5 objectives: listen, speak, care, share and build relationships). But we feel the market conversation happens both on and offline and it is more important to find the optimal mix to meet these 5 objectives.
I love that you said, "respond to the conversation, create relevant content, engage with relevant communities." And, "where the conversation is happening." We think the market conversation universe is made up of Influencers, Participants and Listeners and they use conversation Tools to put content out in the conversation and to bring content to themselves from conversation Locations. We use several different search, alerting and aggregation tools, similar to how you describe them.
At this point, I think that these social media monitoring tools are a lot of snake oil, but they have the potential to do more, if one of these companies will figure out how to look at the market conversation in an important way rather than in a way that produces a bunch of reports that are just numbers. Soon this space will weed out a lot of players and the ones left standing will start to get it right--at least I hope so.
- reply
- 0 points
Thu, 2009-07-16 12:57 — chrissfifePost new comment