A place for my stuff | by Ian Ketcheson
{ Monthly Archives }
Building on Brendan’s discussion of new quantitative approaches to social media, I’m going to look a bit at the stem cell research debate going on in Missouri (and across the U.S.) for that matter.
Below is the video that’s got everyone talking..
Setting aside the obvious power of his message and its presentation, I’m drawn into looking at how this ad has shaped public discussion of the stem cell debate.
I’m a firm believer in the importance of strong media analysis to accompany any strategic planning around PR/Communications activities. I’m also a firm believer that this analysis isn’t always done as well as it should be.
What is interesting in the area of social media is that we can very quickly, easily and for a low cost, come up with some interesting research findings. I’ll leave it to you to draw your own conclusions concerning how this relates to the stem cell debate. I’m more interested in what a social media analysis would contribute to strategic planning.
Some quick findings:
Rush Limbaugh’s statements suggesting that Mr. Fox’s symptoms weren’t genuine have featured very prominently in blog coverage, with his profile almost as high as Michael J. Fox’s. Click here for the chart comparing Mr. Limbaugh and Mr. Fox’s profiles
Food for thought, and a bit of a demo of what “social media analysis” starts to look like.
This is a really quick look at this type of analysis. What I’d add with more time and tools…
What are your thoughts on the findings, and on how one goes about doing social media analysis? How would you build on this analysis?
I’m a huge fan of Blogpulse and the site’s ability to generate some good stats on blogosphere conversations. This kind of quantitative monitoring of the conversations adds weight to what are otherwise anecdotal observations and conclusions.
Here’s the latest on Barack Obama. You can see the recent that Mr. Obama’s recent bounce has sent his profile well above Ms. Clinton’s for only the third time in the last six months.
You can run the same search here.
But, of course, you have to contextualize the above chart with this one:
Run the second live search here
Jan Pronk, the chief UN envoy to Sudan has been kicked out of the country, with the Sudanese government claiming it was because of writings on his blog.
On October 21, Mr. Pronk wrote:
The morale in the Government army in North Darfur has gone down. Some generals have been sacked; soldiers have refused to fight. The Government has responded by directing more troops and equipment from elsewhere to the region and by mobilizing Arab militia. This is a dangerous development.
More info from the NY Times and Guardian.
And that, my friends, is why I don’t blog about work. Attaching a disclaimer note that says your blog represents your personal opinions can only take you so far.
UPDATE: Mark Jones of Reuters AlertNet has a great take on the issue:
Pronk is experimenting with the limits of diplomacy by blogging. He’s doing so within an apparent UN vacuum — the organisation has rules on what can be published in books by its employees but no guidelines on blogs.
The fate of Pronk’s blog will be of interest not only to those watching the unfolding disaster of Darfur, but also to organisations struggling to balance the benefits of blogs’ openness with their ability to damage reputations and constrain the room for manoeuvre.
Mark rightly underscores the need for large organizations (and governments of any size) to set out guidelines for employees who wish to blog.
