<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" media="screen" href="/~d/styles/atom10full.xsl"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css"?><feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:thr="http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0" xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0">
    <title>Desirable Roasted Coffee</title>
    
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/" />
    <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:weblog-92481</id>
    <updated>2009-09-09T17:23:36+02:00</updated>
    <subtitle>An oasis at the exciting intersection of communication, society and technology</subtitle>
    <generator uri="http://www.typepad.com/">TypePad</generator>
    <atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/typepad/uxBJ" /><feedburner:info uri="typepad/uxbj" /><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" /><feedburner:browserFriendly>This is an XML content feed. It is intended to be viewed in a newsreader or syndicated to another site.</feedburner:browserFriendly><entry>
        <title>David Denby's 8 Principles of Snark</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/typepad/uxBJ/~3/zRpl3C6fGf8/david-denbys-8-principles-of-snark.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/09/david-denbys-8-principles-of-snark.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d8341c215853ef0120a55c7924970b</id>
        <published>2009-09-09T17:23:36+02:00</published>
        <updated>2009-09-09T17:23:36+02:00</updated>
        <summary>It's not big and it's not clever It is sly, knowing and often downright nasty. Politicians and celebrities are its prey. And it attacks, under the guise of wit, without proof or reason. David Denby goes on the hunt for...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>Allan Jenkins</name>
        </author>
        
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-US" xml:base="http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><div class="posterous_bookmarklet_entry"> <blockquote class="posterous_long_quote"><h1>It's not big and it's not clever</h1>  					  					<p class="stand-first-alone">It is sly, knowing and often downright nasty. Politicians and celebrities are its prey. And it attacks, under the guise of wit, without proof or reason. David Denby goes on the hunt for snark, which is invading all modern discourse from gossip sites to newspapers</p></blockquote>    <div class="posterous_quote_citation">via <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2009/aug/29/digital-media-celebrity-snark">guardian.co.uk</a></div> <p>Timely article given the state of political discourse in the US.</p></div>      <p style="font-size: 10px;">  <a href="http://posterous.com">Posted via web</a>   from <a href="http://allanjenkins.posterous.com/david-denbys-8-principles-of-snark">Allan Jenkins</a>  </p>  </div>
</content>


    <feedburner:origLink>http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/09/david-denbys-8-principles-of-snark.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>US Army's love-hate relationship with social media</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/typepad/uxBJ/~3/opirykVd0GU/us-armys-love-hate-relationship-with-social-media.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/09/us-armys-love-hate-relationship-with-social-media.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d8341c215853ef0120a55c4996970b</id>
        <published>2009-09-09T16:43:09+02:00</published>
        <updated>2009-09-09T16:43:09+02:00</updated>
        <summary>here are two sides to the military’s foray into the freewheeling world of the interactive Web. At the highest echelons of the Pentagon, civilian officials and four-star generals are newly hailing the power of social networking to make members of...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>Allan Jenkins</name>
        </author>
        
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-US" xml:base="http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><div class="posterous_bookmarklet_entry"> <blockquote class="posterous_long_quote"><p>here are two sides to the military’s foray into the freewheeling world of the interactive Web. At the highest echelons of the Pentagon, civilian officials and four-star generals are newly hailing the power of social networking to make members of the American military more empathetic, entice recruits and shape public opinion on the war. </p><p>Gen. <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/o/ray_odierno/index.html?inline=nyt-per" title="More articles about Ray Odierno.">Ray Odierno</a>, commander of American forces in Iraq, is on <a href="http://www.facebook.com/RayOdierno?ref=search&amp;sid=539667418.1373489115..1" title="General Odierno’s Facebook page." /><a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/facebook_inc/index.html?inline=nyt-org" title="More articles about Facebook.">Facebook</a>. The chairman of the <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/j/joint_chiefs_of_staff/index.html?inline=nyt-org" title="More articles about Joint Chiefs of Staff">Joint Chiefs of Staff</a>, Adm. <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/michael_g_mullen/index.html?inline=nyt-per" title="More articles about Michael G. Mullen.">Mike Mullen</a>, has a YouTube channel and posts <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/twitter/index.html?inline=nyt-org" title="More articles about Twitter.">Twitter</a> updates almost <a href="http://twitter.com/TheJointStaff" title="Admiral Mullen’s Twitter page.">daily</a>.</p><p> The Army is encouraging personnel of all ranks to go online and collaboratively rewrite seven of its field <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/14/business/14army.html?_r=1&amp;scp=1&amp;sq=cohen%20field%20manuals%20leavenworth&amp;st=cse" title="New York Times article on the “wikified“ rewriting of field manuals.">manuals</a>. And on Aug. 17, the Department of Defense unveiled a <a href="http://www.defense.gov/" title="Department of Defense Web site."> Web site</a> promoting links to its blogs and its  Flickr, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube sites.</p><p>The Web, however, is a big place. And the many thousands of troops who use blogs, Facebook, Twitter and other social media sites to communicate with the outside world are not always in tune with the Pentagon’s official voice. Policing their daily flood of posts, videos and photographs is virtually impossible — but that has not stopped some in the military from trying.</p></blockquote>    <div class="posterous_quote_citation">via <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/09/us/09milblogs.html?pagewanted=1&amp;_r=2&amp;hp">nytimes.com</a></div> <p>On balance, I find this article cause for optimism. Yes, the Marines are out-and-out "blockers" of social media, and I don't doubt many older officers view social media just as many senior managers view it: a waste of time at best, a threat to the organization at worst. </p><p>Yet, the students (officers) of the Command and General Staff College are required to publish blogs in which they debate policy. Nice!</p></div>      <p style="font-size: 10px;">  <a href="http://posterous.com">Posted via web</a>   from <a href="http://allanjenkins.posterous.com/us-armys-love-hate-relationship-with-social-m">Allan Jenkins</a>  </p>  </div>
</content>


    <feedburner:origLink>http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/09/us-armys-love-hate-relationship-with-social-media.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>New approaches for analyzing influence on Twitter</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/typepad/uxBJ/~3/79X1e5T2DAc/new-approaches-for-analyzing-influence-on-twitter.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/09/new-approaches-for-analyzing-influence-on-twitter.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d8341c215853ef0120a547c3e8970b</id>
        <published>2009-09-04T13:21:06+02:00</published>
        <updated>2009-09-04T13:21:06+02:00</updated>
        <summary>New Approaches for Analyzing Influence on Twitter By Alex Leavitt with Evan Burchard, David Fisher, &amp; Sam Gilbert Using a new methodology based on the content and responses of 12 popular users, we determined measurements of relative influence on Twitter....</summary>
        <author>
            <name>Allan Jenkins</name>
        </author>
        
        
<content type="html" xml:lang="en-US" xml:base="http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/">
&lt;div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"&gt;&lt;div class="posterous_bookmarklet_entry"&gt; &lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;div&gt;  &lt;div&gt;New Approaches for Analyzing Influence on Twitter&lt;/div&gt;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.webecologyproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/influence-report-final.pdf"&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.webecologyproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/frontpage-influence.jpg" height="243" alt="Analyzing Influence on Twitter" width="188" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;span&gt;By Alex Leavitt&lt;br /&gt;with Evan Burchard, David Fisher, &amp;amp; Sam Gilbert&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;Using a new methodology based on the content and responses of 12 popular users, we determined measurements of relative influence on Twitter. We examined an ecosystem of 134,654 tweets, 15,866,629 followers, and 899,773 followees, and in response to the 2,143 tweets generated by these 12 users over a 10-day period, we collected 90,130 responses published by other users.&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;            &lt;em&gt;Summary of Findings&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;An analysis of our methodology and statistics suggests that on Twitter, among various configurable conclusions:&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;ul type="disc"&gt;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;i&gt;mashable&lt;/i&gt; is more influential than &lt;i&gt;CNN&lt;/i&gt;.&lt;/li&gt;  &lt;li&gt;&lt;i&gt;sockington&lt;/i&gt; is more influential than &lt;i&gt;MCHammer&lt;/i&gt;, while &lt;i&gt;MCHammer&lt;/i&gt; is more influential than three major social media analysts (&lt;i&gt;garyvee&lt;/i&gt;, &lt;i&gt;Scobleizer&lt;/i&gt;, and &lt;i&gt;chrisbrogan&lt;/i&gt;). &lt;/li&gt;  &lt;li&gt;Celebrities with higher follower totals (eg., &lt;i&gt;THE_REAL_SHAQ&lt;/i&gt; and &lt;i&gt;ijustine&lt;/i&gt;) foster more conversation than provide retweetable content. &lt;/li&gt;  &lt;li&gt;News outlets, regardless of follower count, influence large amounts of followers to republish their content to other users.&lt;/li&gt;  &lt;/ul&gt;  &lt;p&gt;            &lt;a href="http://www.webecologyproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/bigdata-small-final.jpg"&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.webecologyproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/bigdata-small-final.jpg" height="340" alt="Density of Influence per User" width="500" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;i&gt;Click to expand image. A larger version with more temporal depth is linked at the bottom of this report.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;span&gt;We would also like to thank Jon Beilin, Mac Cowell, and Tim Hwang for their invaluable contributions, feedback, and support.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;h5&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.webecologyproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/influence-report-final.pdf"&gt;The Influentials (pdf)&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h5&gt;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.webecologyproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/bigdata-large-final.jpg"&gt;&lt;b&gt;10 Days of Influence Tracked by Density of Responses (&lt;i&gt;2993.27 KB&lt;/i&gt; jpg)&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;h4&gt;The Folly of Following Followers: Judging Influence on Twitter&lt;/h4&gt;  &lt;p&gt;As a simple online platform for conversation, Twitter is an ideal  an ecological system through which we can understand the relationship between users and their environments on the Web. Especially compared to other social networks, Twitter simplifies most of the extraneous features and boils down its environment to people and content. The unusual simplicity of Twitter, though, continues to warp perception of how the relationship between user and platform operates. Many of the popularized studies examining influence on Twitter fail to identify the nuances of social interaction in the system. While attempts have been made (eg., &lt;a href="http://twinfluence.com/about.php%20" target="_blank"&gt;http://twinfluence.com/about.php&lt;/a&gt;), the analyses tend to focus on the connections between users rather than the relationship of users, content, and platform. This report therefore aims to supplement previous investigations of the Twitter environment with more comprehensive data sets to enhance new approaches to understanding the concept of “influence” on social networks.&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;A focus solely on the connections between users skews an understanding of how influence operates and flows on Twitter. A popular metric of &lt;i&gt;perceived&lt;/i&gt; influence on Twitter measures the quantity of a user’s followers. In general, the more followers a user possess, the more impact he appears to make in the Twitter environment, because he seems more popular (namely, that users follow him). This statement makes sense assuming that Twitter acts as a successful broadcast medium, where a user publishes a tweet and it is read by every follower. However, this view of Twitter as a broadcast medium ignores the potential for users to interact with the content on the platform.&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;A similar and equally popular metric to measure influence on Twitter relies on the ratio between the number of a user’s followers and the number of other people that the user follows (his audience, or as we designate in this report, followees). This ratio, while better than the former method of counting followers, is still imprecise. Again, a ratio based on audience ignores the ability for a user to interact with content on the platform. However, the ratio of followers to followees does inform a better understanding of how influence can operate in Twitter’s environment.&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;The ratio of followers to followees may communicate the intended purpose or emergent practices of a user. For example, if the ratio approaches infinity (high follower total versus low followee total), the user account might be described as focusing on the material aspect of Twitter. By material, we mean a compulsion toward moving content to other users in the environment. In another instance, if the ratio approaches 1 (an equal or near-equal amount of followers and followees), the user might be categorized as a conversationalist. The user most likely follows back a majority of his followers, to retain familiarity with more personal conversations. Contrarily, the materialistic user aims to collect followers as contacts to whom the user may push content (who may then share the same content with other users). Finally, if the ratio approaches zero (low follower total versus high followee total), we might categorize the user as a spammer. As an emergent behavior, the stereotypical spammer attempts to collect users with the intent to push content to as many people as possible after achieving a high follower tally. However, most contemporary users can spot the stereotypical behavior of a spammer or bot, resulting in the low follower total on the spammer’s account.&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;While the follower to followee ratio does not represent an accurate measurement of influence on Twitter, the ratio does inform the community to types of users. Before we apply these types to our understanding of online influence, we must first define influence.&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;h4&gt;Defining Influence on Twitter&lt;/h4&gt;  &lt;p&gt;An attempt to define a universal concept of influence on the Web remains difficult, because we must account for the variations of platforms, fluidity of environments, and evolving behaviors of users online. Because each platform is different, this report will rely on a definition of online influence specific to the environment of Twitter. Therefore, we define influence on Twitter as &lt;i&gt;the potential of an action of a user to initiate a further action by another user&lt;/i&gt;. The term user is defined by Twitter’s platform. The term action deserves further explanation.&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;Understanding the term action as it relates to influence on Twitter depends on the fundamental structure of ideas in the environment and how these ideas move. The fundamental unit of content on Twitter is the tweet (a user may type up to 140 characters and publish them to the web interface), so an action on Twitter comprises all interactions of a user and that unit of content (tweet). While we can analyze various types of influential actions (eg., a view on YouTube or a like on Facebook), this report will primarily focus on actions specific to Twitter. Our analysis of influence on Twitter, then, relies on the understanding of how actions shape behavior on the platform.&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;h4&gt;Influence as Actions; Actions as Responses&lt;/h4&gt;  &lt;p&gt;While actions on Twitter comprise both those interactions recognized by the platform as well as unexpected emergent behaviors that become widely used by users, Twitter recognizes two actions intrinsic to the system that can occur: the reply and the retweet.&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Reply&lt;/em&gt;: @username {content}&lt;br /&gt;Example:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;@chrisbrogan Thanks for this.  I’m new to twitter and it was really helpful&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Digitaltonto (on 2009-08-15 at 00:47:17)&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Retweet&lt;/em&gt;: RT @username {content}&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;RT @aplusk great article thank U RT @Morgan_Johnston: this great article on health care by Whole Foods cofounder/CEO&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;cheerok (on 2009-08-15 at 00:31:10)&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;The reply and retweet are categorized as actions because they are applied by a user to a piece of content. The reply acts as a response to another user’s tweet using new content, while the retweet operates as a citation or paraphrase of another user’s previous content. While both actions have different purposes, both are meant to move content to other users (albeit in differing ways). If a reply or retweet exists with respect to a given tweet, the actions are evidence for influence that has occurred. A reply occurs because a user is influenced to reply to the content; a retweet occurs because a user is influenced to reproduce the content. Literally, the actions are markers of influence.&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;Two other actions that appear frequently on Twitter, extrinsic to the system yet popular enough to have become adopted by users, require explanation: the mention and the attribution.&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Mention&lt;/em&gt;: {content} @username ({content})&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;Watching @BarackObama speak in Colorado on @CNN&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;RareAir24 (on 2009-08-15 at 19:08:51)&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Attribution&lt;/em&gt;: {content} via @username ({content})&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;Fire at Kuwaiti wedding kills dozens, official media says &lt;a href="http://bit.ly/wn95A"&gt;http://bit.ly/wn95A&lt;/a&gt; (via @cnnbrk)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;ChilliGaz (on 2009-08-15 at 19:40:18)&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;Similar to the reply and the retweet, the mention and the attribution are categorized as actions because they too are applied by a user to a piece of content. We have separated the mention and the attribution from the more fundamental reply and retweet because the former two actions are not officially recognized by the Twitter platform. In fact, a mention is similar to a reply, except a mention occurs at some point in the tweet other than at the beginning. Comparably, an attribution is similar to a retweet, except an attribution borrows the symbology of the reply to provide a citation for previously published content. We must also note here that, first, while we distinguish the attribution from the mention, we have calculated them from the same database query. Any measurement in this report of mentions also encapsulates attributions; however, we will distinguish the attribution as separate from the mention later in the paper (by tallying it alongside retweets in certain equations). Second, since mentions theoretically serve the purpose of replies, and attributions the purpose of retweets, we have not expounded upon their use in the explanation of influence in the following paragraphs. However, we can hypothesize that the applications of replies include mentions and the applications of retweets include attributions.&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;h4&gt;Categorizing Actions: Conversation &amp;amp; Content&lt;/h4&gt;  &lt;p&gt;In the second-to-previous paragraph, we hint at a similar categorization for actions that we previously applied to users. Given two probable types of users, one focused on conversation and another on content, we can map these classifications to actions — replies and retweets, respectively — to explain how the relationship between users of and the actions on a platform shapes influence on Twitter. The purpose of replies assumes that a conversation is the intended goal of the action. In writing a reply, the user has been influenced to respond to a previous unit of content published by another user. Similarly, with a retweet (the objective of which is to push content), the user has been influenced by a previous user’s content to reproduce the content for other users to view. In basic terms, we can see the reply as talking back to the first user and the retweet as passing on content to a third user. However, when assigning values of influence to these types of actions, we do not give preference to one or the other.&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;Previously, we examined two possible approaches to measuring influence on Twitter: 1) counting the total number of followers a user possesses, and 2) calculating the ratio of a user’s followers to a user’s followees. These two approaches still ignore the relationship between the user, the content, and the platform. The goal of this report is to move beyond these basic assertions about influence by analyzing a comprehensive set of replies, retweets, and other actions on Twitter that act as evidence for the influential potential of users.&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;h4&gt;Understanding Influence with New Data&lt;/h4&gt;  &lt;p&gt;For this report, we gathered relevant data from 12 Twitter users for 10 days, between 12:00 am 15 August 2009 and 12:00 am 25 August 2009. We focused on a small number of celebrities, news outlets, and social media analysts widely perceived to be among the more influential users on Twitter. Based on the content and connections of these 12 users, we examined a total of 134,654 tweets, 15,866,629 followers, and 899,773 followees. In response to the 2,143 tweets generated by these 12 users of the 10 day period, we collected 90,130 responses (actions) published by other users (which equates to 87,987 more messages than total original tweets, or a total average of 42 responses per tweet).&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;We have listed the 12 users below, categorized into three distinct groups that we feel ultimately represent the user types previously discussed. We have also calculated the total number of tweets published by each user, the total number of each users’ followers, and the total number of users that each of our 12 users follows. These statistics were updated between 28 August 2009 and 30 August 2009, so they may not necessarily reflect the exact number of tweets, followers, and followees present during the 10-day window that our data encompasses.&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;table border="0"&gt;  &lt;tr&gt;  &lt;td width="130"&gt;&lt;b&gt;Celebrities&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="120"&gt;&lt;b&gt;Username&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="70"&gt;&lt;b&gt;Tweets&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="100"&gt;&lt;b&gt;Followers&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="80"&gt;&lt;b&gt;Followees&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;/tr&gt;  &lt;tr&gt;  &lt;td&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;/tr&gt;  &lt;tr&gt;  &lt;td width="130"&gt;Ashton Kutcher&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="120"&gt;&lt;i&gt;aplusk&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="70"&gt;3,205&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="100"&gt;3,407,385&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="80"&gt;209&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;/tr&gt;  &lt;tr&gt;  &lt;td width="130"&gt;Shaquille O’Neil&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="120"&gt;&lt;i&gt;THE_REAL_SHAQ&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="70"&gt;2,072&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="100"&gt;2,092,541&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="80"&gt;562&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;/tr&gt;  &lt;tr&gt;  &lt;td width="130"&gt;Stanley Kirk Burrell&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="120"&gt;&lt;i&gt;MCHammer&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="70"&gt;6,016&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="100"&gt;1,331,797&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="80"&gt;31,202&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;/tr&gt;  &lt;tr&gt;  &lt;td width="130"&gt;Sockington&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="120"&gt;&lt;i&gt;sockington&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="70"&gt;5,711&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="100"&gt;1,089,984&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="80"&gt;380&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;/tr&gt;  &lt;tr&gt;  &lt;td width="130"&gt;Justine Ezarik&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="120"&gt;ijustine&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="70"&gt;7,718&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="100"&gt;605,441&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="80"&gt;3,039&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;/tr&gt;  &lt;tr&gt;  &lt;td&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;/tr&gt;  &lt;tr&gt;  &lt;td width="130"&gt;&lt;b&gt;News Outlets&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="120"&gt;&lt;b&gt;Username&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="70"&gt;&lt;b&gt;Tweets&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="100"&gt;&lt;b&gt;Followers&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="80"&gt;&lt;b&gt;Followees&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;/tr&gt;  &lt;tr&gt;  &lt;td&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;/tr&gt;  &lt;tr&gt;  &lt;td width="130"&gt;CNN Breaking News&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="120"&gt;&lt;i&gt;cnnbrk&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="70"&gt;1,096&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="100"&gt;2,712,530&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="80"&gt;18&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;/tr&gt;  &lt;tr&gt;  &lt;td width="130"&gt;BarackObama.com&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="120"&gt;&lt;i&gt;BarackObama&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="70"&gt;330&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="100"&gt;2,018,016&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="80"&gt;761,851&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;/tr&gt;  &lt;tr&gt;  &lt;td width="130"&gt;Mashable.com&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="120"&gt;&lt;i&gt;mashable&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="70"&gt;17,914&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="100"&gt;1,363,510&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="80"&gt;1,925&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;/tr&gt;  &lt;tr&gt;  &lt;td width="130"&gt;CNN&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="120"&gt;&lt;i&gt;cnn&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="70"&gt;11,607&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="100"&gt;193,625&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="80"&gt;50&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;/tr&gt;  &lt;tr&gt;  &lt;td&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;/tr&gt;  &lt;tr&gt;  &lt;td width="130"&gt;&lt;b&gt;Social Media Analysts&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="120"&gt;&lt;b&gt;Username&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="70"&gt;&lt;b&gt;Tweets&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="100"&gt;&lt;b&gt;Followers&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="80"&gt;&lt;b&gt;Followees&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;/tr&gt;  &lt;tr&gt;  &lt;td&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;/tr&gt;  &lt;tr&gt;  &lt;td width="130"&gt;Gary Vaynerchuk&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="120"&gt;&lt;i&gt;garyvee&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="70"&gt;7,532&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="100"&gt;862,790&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="80"&gt;9,683&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;/tr&gt;  &lt;tr&gt;  &lt;td width="130"&gt;Chris Brogan&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="120"&gt;&lt;i&gt;chrisbrogan&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="70"&gt;48,341&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="100"&gt;94,715&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="80"&gt;88,431&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;/tr&gt;  &lt;tr&gt;  &lt;td width="130"&gt;Robert Scoble&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="120"&gt;&lt;i&gt;Scobleizer&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="70"&gt;23,112&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="100"&gt;94,295&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;td width="80"&gt;2,423&lt;/td&gt;  &lt;/tr&gt;  &lt;/table&gt;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;The above table has been arranged in decreasing order by total followers, based on the three distinct categories of users. These categories reveal certain resemblances to aspects of content user types and conversation user types. Generally, news outlets aim to push content, social media analysts strive to perpetuate conversations, and celebrities tend to do both (dependent on their personal practices and the community who follow them). While there are some anomalies (eg., BarackObama), most news outlets have a higher follower to followee ratio (materialistic) while most analysts have a more-equal follower-to-followee ratio (conversationalist). For celebrities, the ratio appears to favor a materialistic purpose on Twitter, but the responses generated by celebrities favor the conversationalist type.&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;In the graph below, we present a comprehensive diagram of total follow count, to reemphasize the perceived influence that each user projects. Keep in mind that although Robert Scoble (Scobleizer, ranked 12th) appears unimportant compared to Ashton Kutcher (aplusk, ranked 1st), Scoble still retains a high level of perceived influence across the entirety of Twitter, since his total number of followers amounts to over 94,000 (compared to many users that have between 50 and 1,000 followers).&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;            &lt;a href="http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?chma=50,50,50,50&amp;amp;chbh=a&amp;amp;chd=t:3407385,2712530,2092541,2018016,1363510,1331797,1089984,862790,605441,193625,94715,94295&amp;amp;chds=0,3500000&amp;amp;chco=E00000&amp;amp;cht=bhs&amp;amp;chtt=%7CTotal+Followers+Per+User&amp;amp;chxt=x,y&amp;amp;chxl=0:%7C0%7C.5m%7C1m%7C1.5m%7C2m%7C2.5m%7C3m%7C3.5m%7C1:%7CScobleizer%7Cchrisbrogan%7CCNN%7Cijustine%7Cgaryvee%7Csockington%7CMCHammer%7Cmashable%7CBarackObama%7CTHE_REAL_SHAQ%7Ccnnbrk%7Caplusk&amp;amp;chs=500x400%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20"&gt;&lt;img src="http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?chma=50,50,50,50&amp;amp;chbh=a&amp;amp;chd=t:3407385,2712530,2092541,2018016,1363510,1331797,1089984,862790,605441,193625,94715,94295&amp;amp;chds=0,3500000&amp;amp;chco=E00000&amp;amp;cht=bhs&amp;amp;chtt=%7CTotal+Followers+Per+User&amp;amp;chxt=x,y&amp;amp;chxl=0:%7C0%7C.5m%7C1m%7C1.5m%7C2m%7C2.5m%7C3m%7C3.5m%7C1:%7CScobleizer%7Cchrisbrogan%7CCNN%7Cijustine%7Cgaryvee%7Csockington%7CMCHammer%7Cmashable%7CBarackObama%7CTHE_REAL_SHAQ%7Ccnnbrk%7Caplusk&amp;amp;chs=500x400" height="400" alt="Total Followers per User" width="500" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;h4&gt;Influence According to Audience Response&lt;/h4&gt;  &lt;p&gt;Followers, as stated before, cannot account for a reliable measurement of influence on Twitter. Instead, we must take into account the markers of influence — replies, retweets, mentions, and attributions — to inform which user holds more sway over his followers. The graph below measures the percentage of replies, retweets, and mentions per user, based on the total number of responses respective to each user. &lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;            &lt;a href="http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=bhs&amp;amp;chd=t:59.62,20.95,64.69,27.34,4.13,55.72,38.01,61.79,64.60,17.40,28.22,39.07%7C5.97,31.56,5.24,32.39,28.72,12.20,11.50,6.11,2.67,27.71,13.79,17.11%7C34.41,47.48,30.07,40.28,67.15,32.08,50.48,32.10,32.73,54.89,57.98,43.82&amp;amp;chco=660000,CD0000,FF3030&amp;amp;chxt=x,y,r&amp;amp;chxl=0:%7C0%%7C20%%7C40%%7C60%%7C80%%7C100%%7C1:%7CScobleizer%7Cchrisbrogan%7CCNN%7Cijustine%7Cgaryvee%7Csockington%7CMCHammer%7Cmashable%7CTHE_REAL_SHAQ%7CBarackObama%7Ccnnbrk%7Caplusk%7C2:%7C2,040%7C7,671%7C4,057%7C5,057%7C4,993%7C826%7C2,082%7C27,388%7C1,445%7C6,579%7C2,224%7C25,768&amp;amp;chtt=Replies,+Retweets,+and+Mentions%7C%28by+percentage+of+total+responses%29&amp;amp;chdl=@reply%7CRT+@retweet%7C@mention&amp;amp;chco=660000,CD0000,FF3030&amp;amp;chs=500x400%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20"&gt;&lt;img src="http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=bhs&amp;amp;chd=t:59.62,20.95,64.69,27.34,4.13,55.72,38.01,61.79,64.60,17.40,28.22,39.07%7C5.97,31.56,5.24,32.39,28.72,12.20,11.50,6.11,2.67,27.71,13.79,17.11%7C34.41,47.48,30.07,40.28,67.15,32.08,50.48,32.10,32.73,54.89,57.98,43.82&amp;amp;chco=660000,CD0000,FF3030&amp;amp;chxt=x,y,r&amp;amp;chxl=0:%7C0%%7C20%%7C40%%7C60%%7C80%%7C100%%7C1:%7CScobleizer%7Cchrisbrogan%7CCNN%7Cijustine%7Cgaryvee%7Csockington%7CMCHammer%7Cmashable%7CTHE_REAL_SHAQ%7CBarackObama%7Ccnnbrk%7Caplusk%7C2:%7C2,040%7C7,671%7C4,057%7C5,057%7C4,993%7C826%7C2,082%7C27,388%7C1,445%7C6,579%7C2,224%7C25,768&amp;amp;chtt=Replies,+Retweets,+and+Mentions%7C%28by+percentage+of+total+responses%29&amp;amp;chdl=@reply%7CRT+@retweet%7C@mention&amp;amp;chco=660000,CD0000,FF3030&amp;amp;chs=500x400" height="400" alt="Replies, Retweets and Mentions by Total Number of Responses" width="500" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;Of course, the graph above does not visually portray an accurate instance of influence, because the values are not weighted. Instead, the graph illustrates the relationship between responses by each user’s follower network. Therefore, to further examine the effects that followers have on influence, we present the following two graphs that measure the average number of responses in relation to followers.&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;In the following diagrams, we have utilized the concepts of content and conversation to create equations for calculating new measurements of influence. We have defined conversation-related responses as the total number of replies added to the total number of mentions (@r+@m), and we have defined content-related responses as the total number of retweets added to the total number of attributions (@RT+@via). The graphs below utilize the equations “content/followers” and “conversation/followers” to illustrate the average number of responses per follower of each of the 12 designated users.&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;            &lt;a href="http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?chma=50,50,50,50&amp;amp;chbh=a&amp;amp;chd=t:69.81998627,17.93308235,15.14783731,14.31819349,8.129611308,7.110731543,5.433535391,2.979153097,1.372581557,0.670652046,0.561099785,0.484138877&amp;amp;chds=0,70&amp;amp;chco=E00000&amp;amp;cht=bhs&amp;amp;chtt=%7CAverage+Conversational+Activity+Per+1,000+Followers&amp;amp;chxt=x,y&amp;amp;chxl=0:%7C0%7C10%7C20%7C30%7C40%7C50%7C60%7C70%7C1:%7CBarackObama%7Ccnnbrk%7Csockington%7CMCHammer%7CTHE_REAL_SHAQ%7Cgaryvee%7Caplusk%7Cijustine%7Cmashable%7CCNN%7CScobleizer%7Cchrisbrogan%7C&amp;amp;chs=500x400%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20"&gt;&lt;img src="http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?chma=50,50,50,50&amp;amp;chbh=a&amp;amp;chd=t:69.81998627,17.93308235,15.14783731,14.31819349,8.129611308,7.110731543,5.433535391,2.979153097,1.372581557,0.670652046,0.561099785,0.484138877&amp;amp;chds=0,70&amp;amp;chco=E00000&amp;amp;cht=bhs&amp;amp;chtt=%7CAverage+Conversational+Activity+Per+1,000+Followers&amp;amp;chxt=x,y&amp;amp;chxl=0:%7C0%7C10%7C20%7C30%7C40%7C50%7C60%7C70%7C1:%7CBarackObama%7Ccnnbrk%7Csockington%7CMCHammer%7CTHE_REAL_SHAQ%7Cgaryvee%7Caplusk%7Cijustine%7Cmashable%7CCNN%7CScobleizer%7Cchrisbrogan%7C&amp;amp;chs=500x400" height="400" alt="Average Conversational Activity Per 1000 Followers" width="500" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;  &lt;a href="http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?chma=50,50,50,50&amp;amp;chbh=a&amp;amp;chd=t:13.14469725,7.009849579,6.73983215,4.602577019,0.4918728,0.411455858,0.293821635,0.265921865,0.255201148,0.198979274,0.180641622,0.0944968&amp;amp;chds=0,14&amp;amp;chco=E00000&amp;amp;cht=bhs&amp;amp;chtt=%7CAverage+Content+Spread+Per+1,000+Followers&amp;amp;chxt=x,y&amp;amp;chxl=0:%7C0%7C2%7C4%7C6%7C8%7C10%7C12%7C14%7C1:%7Csockington%7CTHE_REAL_SHAQ%7CMCHammer%7CBarackObama%7Cijustine%7Ccnnbrk%7Cgaryvee%7Caplusk%7CScobleizer%7CCNN%7Cmashable%7Cchrisbrogan%7C&amp;amp;chs=500x400%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20"&gt;&lt;img src="http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?chma=50,50,50,50&amp;amp;chbh=a&amp;amp;chd=t:13.14469725,7.009849579,6.73983215,4.602577019,0.4918728,0.411455858,0.293821635,0.265921865,0.255201148,0.198979274,0.180641622,0.0944968&amp;amp;chds=0,14&amp;amp;chco=E00000&amp;amp;cht=bhs&amp;amp;chtt=%7CAverage+Content+Spread+Per+1,000+Followers&amp;amp;chxt=x,y&amp;amp;chxl=0:%7C0%7C2%7C4%7C6%7C8%7C10%7C12%7C14%7C1:%7Csockington%7CTHE_REAL_SHAQ%7CMCHammer%7CBarackObama%7Cijustine%7Ccnnbrk%7Cgaryvee%7Caplusk%7CScobleizer%7CCNN%7Cmashable%7Cchrisbrogan%7C&amp;amp;chs=500x400" height="400" alt="Average Content Spread per 1000 Followers" width="500" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;The two graphs above present an interesting theory, in that the social media analysts appear to dominate both realms of content and conversation, thanks to their follower network. CNN and Mashable.com also appear high on the list of users that are able to interact well with their followers as well as push content easily to others.&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;While the above diagrams suggest that a user’s audience impacts how ideas move around said user to a large extent, these graphs do not take into account the tweets created by our 12 users, especially in relation to the responses the tweets generate. Returning to the graph representing the percentage of all responses, this illustration of influence is not entirely accurate because it does not account for the relative amount of content produced. This is especially important since the original tweets are the influencers that inspire replies, retweets, etc. Below, we present the same percentages of responses in a graph that weighs the comparison of responses against the total number of responses of other users.&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;            &lt;a href="http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=bhs&amp;amp;chd=t:56.09,1.70,15.54,1.44,4.13,4.24,1.15,11.26,11.93,2.58,7.90,2.91%7C5.62,2.56,1.26,1.71,28.72,0.93,0.35,1.11,0.49,4.10,3.86,1.27%7C32.38,3.86,7.22,2.13,67.15,2.44,1.52,5.85,6.04,8.13,16.24,3.26&amp;amp;chco=660000,CD0000,FF3030&amp;amp;chxt=x,y,r&amp;amp;chxl=0:%7C0%7C27,388%7C1:%7CScobleizer%7Cchrisbrogan%7CCNN%7Cijustine%7Cgaryvee%7Csockington%7CMCHammer%7Cmashable%7CTHE_REAL_SHAQ%7CBarackObama%7Ccnnbrk%7Caplusk%7C2:%7C2,040%7C7,671%7C4,057%7C5,057%7C4,993%7C826%7C2,082%7C27,388%7C1,445%7C6,579%7C2,224%7C25,768&amp;amp;chtt=Replies,+Retweets,+and+Mentions%7C%28by+number+of+total+responses%29&amp;amp;chdl=@reply%7CRT+@retweet%7C@mention&amp;amp;chco=660000,CD0000,FF3030&amp;amp;chs=500x400"&gt;&lt;img src="http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=bhs&amp;amp;chd=t:56.09,1.70,15.54,1.44,4.13,4.24,1.15,11.26,11.93,2.58,7.90,2.91%7C5.62,2.56,1.26,1.71,28.72,0.93,0.35,1.11,0.49,4.10,3.86,1.27%7C32.38,3.86,7.22,2.13,67.15,2.44,1.52,5.85,6.04,8.13,16.24,3.26&amp;amp;chco=660000,CD0000,FF3030&amp;amp;chxt=x,y,r&amp;amp;chxl=0:%7C0%7C27,388%7C1:%7CScobleizer%7Cchrisbrogan%7CCNN%7Cijustine%7Cgaryvee%7Csockington%7CMCHammer%7Cmashable%7CTHE_REAL_SHAQ%7CBarackObama%7Ccnnbrk%7Caplusk%7C2:%7C2,040%7C7,671%7C4,057%7C5,057%7C4,993%7C826%7C2,082%7C27,388%7C1,445%7C6,579%7C2,224%7C25,768&amp;amp;chtt=Replies,+Retweets,+and+Mentions%7C%28by+number+of+total+responses%29&amp;amp;chdl=@reply%7CRT+@retweet%7C@mention&amp;amp;chco=660000,CD0000,FF3030&amp;amp;chs=500x400" height="400" alt="Replies Retweets and Mentions by total number of responses" width="500" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;The weighted graph above illustrates a significantly different measurement of influence than the previous diagram. If we were to state that influence is dictated by how many responses are generated, then we could certainly argue that Mashable.com is more influential than CNN Breaking News — a bold statement, especially when more than twice as many users follow cnnbrk than follow mashable. However, the weighted response statistics above must be compared to the amount of original tweets that inspired response. We have provided these statistics in the graph below:&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;            &lt;a href="http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=bhs&amp;amp;chd=t:8.22,1.22,1.56,1.89,22.33,12.78,2.78,47.56,7.67,7.11,96.67,28.33&amp;amp;chxt=x,y,r&amp;amp;chxl=0:%7C0%7C900%7C1:%7CScobleizer%7Cchrisbrogan%7CCNN+%7Cijustine%7Cgaryvee%7Csockington%7CMCHammer%7Cmashable%7CTHE_REAL_SHAQ%7CBarackObama%7Ccnnbrk%7Caplusk%7C2:%7C255%7C870%7C64%7C69%7C428%7C25%7C115%7C201%7C17%7C14%7C11%7C74&amp;amp;chtt=Total+Number+of+Original+Tweets+Per+User&amp;amp;chco=E00000&amp;amp;chs=500x400%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20"&gt;&lt;img src="http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=bhs&amp;amp;chd=t:8.22,1.22,1.56,1.89,22.33,12.78,2.78,47.56,7.67,7.11,96.67,28.33&amp;amp;chxt=x,y,r&amp;amp;chxl=0:%7C0%7C900%7C1:%7CScobleizer%7Cchrisbrogan%7CCNN+%7Cijustine%7Cgaryvee%7Csockington%7CMCHammer%7Cmashable%7CTHE_REAL_SHAQ%7CBarackObama%7Ccnnbrk%7Caplusk%7C2:%7C255%7C870%7C64%7C69%7C428%7C25%7C115%7C201%7C17%7C14%7C11%7C74&amp;amp;chtt=Total+Number+of+Original+Tweets+Per+User&amp;amp;chco=E00000&amp;amp;chs=500x400" height="400" alt="Total Number of Original Tweets per User" width="500" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;The relationship between the original tweet and any subsequent responses certainly matters. For example, even though mashable and aplusk boast similar amounts of reactions (with a difference of 1620 in favor of mashable), mashable originated more than 2.5 times as many original tweets to influence those responses. Therefore, aplusk exerted less effort to achieve near-similar success. Similarly, BarackObama genereated more than 3 times as many responses in the ten-day period than did MCHammer; however, MCHammer originated over 8 times as many original tweets, meaning that the much larger effort he exerted was ultimately not as influential as the effort by BarackObama.&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;We have addressed the problematic relationship of original tweets and responses by averaging the statistics in the graphs below. The graphs utilize the equations “conversation/tweets” (@r+@m/tweets) and “content/tweets” (@RT+@via/tweets):&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;            &lt;a href="http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?chma=50,50,50,50&amp;amp;chbh=a&amp;amp;chd=t:72.45454545,47.55223881,36.78571429,22.64864865,22.23529412,20.390625,4.12,2.333333333,2.304347826,1.701960784,1.431034483,0.829439252&amp;amp;chds=0,80&amp;amp;chco=E00000&amp;amp;cht=bhs&amp;amp;chtt=%7CAverage+Content+Spread+Per+Tweet&amp;amp;chxt=x,y&amp;amp;chxl=0:%7C0%7C10%7C20%7C30%7C40%7C50%7C60%7C70%7C80%7C1:%7Cgaryvee%7Cchrisbrogan%7CScobleizer%7CMCHammer%7Cijustine%7Csockington%7CCNN%7CTHE_REAL_SHAQ%7Caplusk%7CBarackObama%7Cmashable%7Ccnnbrk%7C&amp;amp;chs=500x400%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20"&gt;&lt;img src="http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?chma=50,50,50,50&amp;amp;chbh=a&amp;amp;chd=t:72.45454545,47.55223881,36.78571429,22.64864865,22.23529412,20.390625,4.12,2.333333333,2.304347826,1.701960784,1.431034483,0.829439252&amp;amp;chds=0,80&amp;amp;chco=E00000&amp;amp;cht=bhs&amp;amp;chtt=%7CAverage+Content+Spread+Per+Tweet&amp;amp;chxt=x,y&amp;amp;chxl=0:%7C0%7C10%7C20%7C30%7C40%7C50%7C60%7C70%7C80%7C1:%7Cgaryvee%7Cchrisbrogan%7CScobleizer%7CMCHammer%7Cijustine%7Csockington%7CCNN%7CTHE_REAL_SHAQ%7Caplusk%7CBarackObama%7Cmashable%7Ccnnbrk%7C&amp;amp;chs=500x400" height="400" alt="Average Content Spread per Tweet" width="500" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;  &lt;a href="http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?chma=50,50,50,50&amp;amp;chbh=a&amp;amp;chd=t:252.2941176,209.4459459,51,47.72463768,31.57142857,14.04975124,13.859375,12.88,10.1826087,7.324766355,3.458823529,2.703448276&amp;amp;chds=0,280&amp;amp;chco=E00000&amp;amp;cht=bhs&amp;amp;chtt=%7CAverage+Conversational+Activity+Per+Tweet&amp;amp;chxt=x,y&amp;amp;chxl=0:%7C0%7C35%7C70%7C105%7C140%7C175%7C210%7C245%7C280%7C1:%7Cchrisbrogan%7CScobleizer%7Cgaryvee%7CMCHammer%7Csockington%7CCNN%7Cmashable%7CBarackObama%7Cijustine%7Ccnnbrk%7Caplusk%7CTHE_REAL_SHAQ&amp;amp;chs=500x400%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20"&gt;&lt;img src="http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?chma=50,50,50,50&amp;amp;chbh=a&amp;amp;chd=t:252.2941176,209.4459459,51,47.72463768,31.57142857,14.04975124,13.859375,12.88,10.1826087,7.324766355,3.458823529,2.703448276&amp;amp;chds=0,280&amp;amp;chco=E00000&amp;amp;cht=bhs&amp;amp;chtt=%7CAverage+Conversational+Activity+Per+Tweet&amp;amp;chxt=x,y&amp;amp;chxl=0:%7C0%7C35%7C70%7C105%7C140%7C175%7C210%7C245%7C280%7C1:%7Cchrisbrogan%7CScobleizer%7Cgaryvee%7CMCHammer%7Csockington%7CCNN%7Cmashable%7CBarackObama%7Cijustine%7Ccnnbrk%7Caplusk%7CTHE_REAL_SHAQ&amp;amp;chs=500x400" height="400" alt="Average Conversational Activity per Tweet" width="500" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;The measurement of influence reflected in these graphs most likely approaches the most accurate estimation of influence detailed in this report. To affirm this statement, we must return to our Twitter-specific definition of influence online: the potential of an action of a user to initiate a further action by another user. The two graphs above account for the responses (further actions) in relation to original tweets (actions with potential), while still theoretically accounting for the size of each user’s audience. Still, these graphs do not account for the network of the 12 users’ followers, and as such remain significantly different from the previous graphs depicting average response per 1,000 followers. The optimal situation of maximum influence would account for the most followers possible executing the most actions. However, it is entirely possible that one follower published all of the responses for a given user. &lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;What, therefore, do the discrepencies between original tweets and followers tell us about the data? In the previous follower graphs, social media analysts held most of the top ranks. Contrarily, in the tweet graphs, they make up the last three spots in both graphs. On average, the data suggest that social media analysts receive minimal reward for the effort they exert in maintaining a conversation with their followers. For those users that succeed, most news outlets were more successful at having their content pushed to other users. Celebrities, on the other hand, appear to inspire conversational responses with their followers, yet with more success than the analysts.&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;These graphs suggest many statements based on various relationships of users, data, and platform. However, although the graphs above represent relative influence among the 12 users, by no means do these diagrams suggest that those ranked last are not influential. For the most part, a general user on Twitter tends to depend heavily on perceived influence, whether it be total number of followers or the ratio of followers to followees. This report, though, attempts to move beyond simple assertions of influence to create a better study of influence on Twitter, supported by new approaches and quantitative data.&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;h4&gt;Future Approaches for Influence Analysis&lt;/h4&gt;  &lt;p&gt;This report strives to influence other researchers to pursue influence analysis based not solely on followers but also on the relationship between followers and content, and the interaction of both in Twitter’s system. Although we analyze how actions (responses to a user) represent the influence of a user, our study is limited by sample size, time range, and the ability to collect data. For instance, we hope in the future to develop a more complex algorithm that accounts for the combined influence of both followers and responses. We were not able to calculate user growth rate nor measure the number of responses per exact original tweet. Also, given that this report studies influence on Twitter, we cannot account for any external influence with respect to each user in our sample.&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;Though we admit our limitations, along with this report we are publishing a comprehensive visualization that marks each original tweet and each response (reply, retweet, and mention) along our 10-day timeline. The graph specifically shows density as a factor of influence over time for the 2,143 original tweets and 90,130 responses related to our dozen users. While our graph does not provides labels for tweet, time, etc., we encourage individual exploration of the data presented in the visualization. &lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;            &lt;a href="http://www.webecologyproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/sparkline1.jpeg"&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.webecologyproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/sparkline1.jpeg" height="61" alt="Sparkline One" width="500" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;  &lt;a href="http://www.webecologyproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/Sparkline2.jpeg"&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.webecologyproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/Sparkline2.jpeg" height="62" alt="Sparkline Two" width="189" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;The density of data varies considerably per user and per tweet. While we cannot assign each reply, retweet, and mention to a specific original tweet, we can at least determine certain patterns of density per any given tweet. The two excerpts above reflect the difference in density of responses that a certain tweet might generate. By tracking the density of responses over time, we hope to inspire further research into models of influence and web ecology as a whole.&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.webecologyproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/bigdata-large-final.jpg"&gt;&lt;img src="http://www.webecologyproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/bigdata-big-scale-final.jpg" height="521" alt="Density of Influence per User" width="500" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;i&gt;Click to expand.&lt;/i&gt; Warning: &lt;i&gt;image is 2993.27 KB in size&lt;/i&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;  &lt;/div&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;div class="posterous_quote_citation"&gt;via &lt;a href="http://www.webecologyproject.org/2009/09/analyzing-influence-on-twitter/"&gt;webecologyproject.org&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt; &lt;p&gt;Interesting read. What it does not take into account, though, are links followed from tweets by people like Chris Brogan, Scoble, etc. If you are going to measure influence, that's an important dimension.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;      &lt;p style="font-size: 10px;"&gt;  &lt;a href="http://posterous.com"&gt;Posted via web&lt;/a&gt;   from &lt;a href="http://allanjenkins.posterous.com/new-approaches-for-analyzing-influence-on-twi-1"&gt;Allan Jenkins&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;  &lt;/div&gt;
</content>


    <feedburner:origLink>http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/09/new-approaches-for-analyzing-influence-on-twitter.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Facebook takes over the world</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/typepad/uxBJ/~3/FbX-qOQXotY/facebook-takes-over-the-world.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/09/facebook-takes-over-the-world.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d8341c215853ef0120a592b51e970c</id>
        <published>2009-09-01T12:43:08+02:00</published>
        <updated>2009-09-01T12:43:08+02:00</updated>
        <summary>via img41.yfrog.com Indeed! Posted via web from Allan Jenkins</summary>
        <author>
            <name>Allan Jenkins</name>
        </author>
        
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-US" xml:base="http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><div class="posterous_bookmarklet_entry"> <img src="http://posterous.com/getfile/files.posterous.com/allanjenkins/xnhsvxBkqaEiznAgfxhimrpvwqxAsoaCavJboujGAbAirqtecaAlznAxdlaA/media_httpimg41yfrogcomimg412347facebookwqijpg_GHExlJyhmoahJry.jpg.scaled500.jpg" width="500" height="1219" />     <div class="posterous_quote_citation">via <a href="http://img41.yfrog.com/img41/2347/facebookwqi.jpg">img41.yfrog.com</a></div> <p>Indeed!</p></div>      <p style="font-size: 10px;">  <a href="http://posterous.com">Posted via web</a>   from <a href="http://allanjenkins.posterous.com/facebook-takes-over-the-world-2">Allan Jenkins</a>  </p>  </div>
</content>


    <feedburner:origLink>http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/09/facebook-takes-over-the-world.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>How much CO2 do computers emit? As much as airline industry...</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/typepad/uxBJ/~3/4J3iQhYGhuA/how-much-co2-do-computers-emit-as-much-as-airline-industry.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/09/how-much-co2-do-computers-emit-as-much-as-airline-industry.html" thr:count="1" thr:updated="2009-09-01T18:04:01+02:00" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d8341c215853ef0120a592b41f970c</id>
        <published>2009-09-01T12:39:35+02:00</published>
        <updated>2009-09-01T12:39:35+02:00</updated>
        <summary>How much carbon dioxide do computers emit? AVIATION has long been blamed for its share of anthropogenic global warming. Indeed, some travellers now ask themselves whether their flight is strictly necessary and, if they decide it is, salve their consciences...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>Allan Jenkins</name>
        </author>
        
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-US" xml:base="http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><div class="posterous_bookmarklet_entry"> <blockquote class="posterous_long_quote"><h2>How much carbon dioxide do computers emit?</h2>  <br />      <p>AVIATION has long been blamed for its share of anthropogenic global warming. Indeed, some travellers now ask themselves whether their flight is strictly necessary and, if they decide it is, salve their consciences by paying for the planting of trees. These, so they hope, will absorb the equivalent of their sinful emissions. But you, dear reader, are indulging right now in activity that is equally as polluting as air travel: using a computer. </p></blockquote>    <div class="posterous_quote_citation">via <a href="http://www.economist.com/research/articlesBySubject/displaystory.cfm?subjectid=348909&amp;story_id=14297036">economist.com</a></div> <p>And while I cannot find the link any more, a Swedish research group found that reading newspapers online is actually worse for the environment than reading the dead-tree version.</p></div>      <p style="font-size: 10px;">  <a href="http://posterous.com">Posted via web</a>   from <a href="http://allanjenkins.posterous.com/how-much-co2-do-computers-emit-as-much-as-air">Allan Jenkins</a>  </p>  </div>
</content>


    <feedburner:origLink>http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/09/how-much-co2-do-computers-emit-as-much-as-airline-industry.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Why Facebook "friends" should stop taking quizzes and watering fairy gardens</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/typepad/uxBJ/~3/quvwXWA5qng/why-facebook-friends-should-stop-taking-quizzes-and-watering-fairy-gardens.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/08/why-facebook-friends-should-stop-taking-quizzes-and-watering-fairy-gardens.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d8341c215853ef0120a58ab703970c</id>
        <published>2009-08-30T19:32:08+02:00</published>
        <updated>2009-08-30T19:32:08+02:00</updated>
        <summary>Quiz Facebook: Will We Have Control over Our Own Information? Today, in response to an inquiry by the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Facebook announced plans to enhance user privacy over the next year. Some of these plans address third party...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>Allan Jenkins</name>
        </author>
        
        
<content type="html" xml:lang="en-US" xml:base="http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/">
&lt;div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"&gt;&lt;div class="posterous_bookmarklet_entry"&gt; &lt;blockquote class="posterous_long_quote"&gt;&lt;h4&gt;&lt;a href="http://blog.aclu.org/2009/08/27/quiz-facebook-will-we-have-control-over-our-own-information/" title="Permanent Link: Quiz Facebook: Will We Have Control over Our Own Information?" rel="bookmark"&gt;Quiz Facebook: Will We Have Control over Our Own Information?        &lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h4&gt;    &lt;p&gt;Today, in response to an &lt;a href="http://www.priv.gc.ca/media/nr-c/2009/nr-c_090716_e.cfm"&gt;inquiry by the Privacy Commissioner of Canada&lt;/a&gt;, Facebook &lt;a href="http://www.priv.gc.ca/media/nr-c/2009/nr-c_090827_e.cfm"&gt;announced plans&lt;/a&gt; to enhance user privacy over the next year. Some of these plans address third party applications, like quizzes and games, that have access to a lot of your personal information.&lt;/p&gt;    &lt;p&gt;Wondering what this is all about? Concerned about your privacy on Facebook?&lt;/p&gt;    &lt;p&gt;If you’re a Facebook user, check out the ACLU of Northern California’s &lt;a href="http://apps.facebook.com/aclunc_privacy_quiz/"&gt;very own quiz&lt;/a&gt;.&amp;nbsp; It’s a behind-the-scenes look at all the personal details a Facebook app can collect about you and your friends – and some steps you can take to keep your private information from landing in the wrong hands (including &lt;a href="http://www.facebook.com/privacy/?view=platform&amp;amp;tab=other"&gt;changing your own privacy settings&lt;/a&gt;)!&lt;/p&gt;    &lt;p&gt;(And, yes, we know it’s a little weird to warn you about Facebook quizzes by asking you to take a Facebook quiz – but at least you know who we are and that we are committed to living up to our &lt;a href="http://aclunc.org/about/privacy_policy/index.shtml"&gt;privacy policy&lt;/a&gt;, unlike many quiz authors who &lt;a href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/does_that_facebook_app_have_a_privacy_policy_probably_not.php"&gt;haven’t posted a privacy policy at all&lt;/a&gt;!)&lt;/p&gt;    &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Today’s Facebook Quizzes Get a Failing Grade for Privacy&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;    &lt;p&gt;Even if your Facebook profile is “private,” when you take a quiz, an unknown quiz developer could be getting access to almost everything in your profile: &amp;nbsp;your&amp;nbsp;religious views, sexual orientation, political affiliation, pictures, and groups. Facebook quizzes&amp;nbsp;also have access to most of the info on your &lt;em&gt;friends’&lt;/em&gt; profiles. This means that if your friend takes a quiz, they could be giving away &lt;em&gt;your&lt;/em&gt; personal information too. (But, again, don’t just take our word for it: &lt;a href="http://apps.facebook.com/aclunc_privacy_quiz/"&gt;take our quiz and see for yourself&lt;/a&gt;!)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div class="posterous_quote_citation"&gt;via &lt;a href="http://blog.aclu.org/2009/08/27/quiz-facebook-will-we-have-control-over-our-own-information/"&gt;blog.aclu.org&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt; &lt;p&gt;Think before you take that "What Movie Character Are You?" quiz or report to your Facebook friends how many Magic Butterflies you found in the Fairy Garden. You may be passing private information about your friends -- without their permission -- to 3rd parties. And you are certainly compromising your own privacy. &lt;p&gt;I took the quiz noted above -- and that will be the last quiz I ever take on Facebook.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;      &lt;p style="font-size: 10px;"&gt;  &lt;a href="http://posterous.com"&gt;Posted via web&lt;/a&gt;   from &lt;a href="http://allanjenkins.posterous.com/why-facebook-friends-should-stop-taking-quizz"&gt;Allan Jenkins&lt;/a&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;  &lt;/div&gt;
</content>


    <feedburner:origLink>http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/08/why-facebook-friends-should-stop-taking-quizzes-and-watering-fairy-gardens.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>50 Extraordinary and Attractive Billboards</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/typepad/uxBJ/~3/s4a2L-dDbcA/50-extraordinary-and-attractive-billboards.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/08/50-extraordinary-and-attractive-billboards.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d8341c215853ef0120a5332bd2970b</id>
        <published>2009-08-30T15:20:43+02:00</published>
        <updated>2009-08-30T15:20:43+02:00</updated>
        <summary>via 10steps.sg Some excellent uses of a usually unlovable medium. Posted via web from Allan Jenkins</summary>
        <author>
            <name>Allan Jenkins</name>
        </author>
        
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-US" xml:base="http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><div class="posterous_bookmarklet_entry"> <a href="http://10steps.sg/artworks/50-extraordinary-and-attractive-billboards/"><img src="http://posterous.com/getfile/files.posterous.com/allanjenkins/duvgAgGFynbpBdogkwEjqljoteBksrtebfrzBHbznbgJHCuvfIbbqChFFCpD/media_http10stepssgwpcontentuploadsarticle722jpg_ofBmzzlybCBnnfF.jpg.scaled500.jpg" width="500" height="300" /> </a><div class="posterous_quote_citation">via <a href="http://10steps.sg/artworks/50-extraordinary-and-attractive-billboards/">10steps.sg</a></div> <p>Some excellent uses of a usually unlovable medium.</p></div>      <p style="font-size: 10px;">  <a href="http://posterous.com">Posted via web</a>   from <a href="http://allanjenkins.posterous.com/50-extraordinary-and-attractive-billboards-3">Allan Jenkins</a>  </p>  </div>
</content>


    <feedburner:origLink>http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/08/50-extraordinary-and-attractive-billboards.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Looking forward to the Stege Herring Festival!</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/typepad/uxBJ/~3/NegR7uMS9YM/looking-forward-to-the-stege-herring-festival.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/08/looking-forward-to-the-stege-herring-festival.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d8341c215853ef0120a52fc8f6970b</id>
        <published>2009-08-29T19:25:02+02:00</published>
        <updated>2009-08-29T19:25:02+02:00</updated>
        <summary>via cfbelt.eu. During the Middle Ages, our town of Stege was a center of herring fishing, which financed the development of the town. Next Friday, we celebrate that with the Stege Herring Festival -- a celebration of boats, fishing and,...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>Allan Jenkins</name>
        </author>
        
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-US" xml:base="http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><div class="posterous_bookmarklet_entry"> <a href="http://cfbelt.eu./?show=news_read&amp;news_id=45"><img src="http://posterous.com/getfile/files.posterous.com/allanjenkins/ohxydJHonIeDGFoCiafnxdFJbdjuuubEzFnhiEFBdzpycjxolJEnpzwAiief/media_httpcfbelteupictureautoresizephppictureurlfckeditoruploadimagesildemarkedistege720copyjpgheight550width400_kuJwrFapeCdntAC.php.scaled500.jpg" width="400" height="550" /> </a>    <div class="posterous_quote_citation">via <a href="http://cfbelt.eu./?show=news_read&amp;news_id=45">cfbelt.eu.</a></div> <p>During the Middle Ages, our town of Stege was a center of herring fishing, which financed the development of the town. </p><p>Next Friday, we celebrate that with the Stege Herring Festival -- a celebration of boats, fishing and, of course, the humble herring (one of my favorites)!</p></div>      <p style="font-size: 10px;">  <a href="http://posterous.com">Posted via web</a>   from <a href="http://allanjenkins.posterous.com/looking-forward-to-the-stege-herring-festival">Allan Jenkins</a>  </p>  </div>
</content>


    <feedburner:origLink>http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/08/looking-forward-to-the-stege-herring-festival.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Study Measures the Chatter of the News Cycle</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/typepad/uxBJ/~3/jsMJA11VUeY/study-measures-the-chatter-of-the-news-cycle.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/08/study-measures-the-chatter-of-the-news-cycle.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d8341c215853ef0120a58475e2970c</id>
        <published>2009-08-29T08:40:44+02:00</published>
        <updated>2009-08-29T08:40:44+02:00</updated>
        <summary>For the most part, the traditional news outlets lead and the blogs follow, typically by 2.5 hours, according to a new computer analysis of news articles and commentary on the Web during the last three months of the 2008 presidential...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>Allan Jenkins</name>
        </author>
        
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-US" xml:base="http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><div class="posterous_bookmarklet_entry"> <blockquote><div>                    <p>For the most part, the traditional news outlets lead and the blogs follow, typically by 2.5 hours, according to a new computer analysis of news articles and commentary on the Web during the last three months of the 2008 presidential campaign.</p>   <div>  <div><a href="#secondParagraph">Skip to next paragraph</a>      <div>  <h4>Multimedia</h4>  <div>                <a>  <img src="http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2009/07/13/business/13influence-graf01-190.jpg" border="0" height="126" alt="Picturing the News Cycle" width="190" /></a><p><span>Graphic</span>        </p><h3>    <a>Picturing the News Cycle</a>     </h3>  <div />  </div>  </div>    </div>  </div><a name="secondParagraph" />  <p>The finding was one of several in a study that Internet experts say is the first time the Web has been used to track — and try to measure — the news cycle, the process by which information becomes news, competes for attention and fades.</p><p>Researchers at Cornell, using powerful computers and clever algorithms, studied the news cycle by looking for repeated phrases and tracking their appearances on 1.6 million mainstream media sites and blogs. Some 90 million articles and blog posts, which appeared from August through October, were scrutinized with their phrase-finding software.</p><p>Frequently repeated short phrases, according to the researchers, are the equivalent of “genetic signatures” for ideas, or memes, and story lines. The biggest text-snippet surge in the study was generated by “lipstick on a pig.” That originated in <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/o/barack_obama/index.html?inline=nyt-per" title="More articles about Barack Obama">Barack Obama</a>’s colorful put-down of the claim by Senator <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/john_mccain/index.html?inline=nyt-per" title="More articles about John McCain.">John McCain</a> and Gov. <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/p/sarah_palin/index.html?inline=nyt-per" title="More articles about Sarah Palin.">Sarah Palin</a> that they were the genuine voices for change in the campaign. Associates of Mr. McCain  suggested that the remark was meant as an insult to Ms. Palin. </p><p>The researchers’ data points to an evolving model of news media. While most news flowed from the traditional media to the blogs, the study found that 3.5 percent of story lines originated in the blogs and later made their way to traditional media. For example, when Mr. Obama said that the question of when life begins after conception was “above my pay grade,” the remark was first reported extensively in blogs. </p><p>And though the blogosphere as a whole lags behind, a relative handful of blog sites are the quickest to pick up on things that later gain wide attention on the Web, led by <a href="http://hotair.com/">Hot Air</a> and <a href="http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/">Talking Points Memo</a>. </p><p>The Cornell research, like so much of the data mining on the Web, does raise the issue of whether  something is necessarily significant just because it can be measured by a computer — especially when mouse clicks are assumed to represent broad patterns of human behavior. </p><p>“You can see this kind of research as further elevating the role of sound bites,” said Jon Kleinberg, a professor of computer science at Cornell and a co-author of a paper on the research that was presented two weeks ago at a conference in Paris. “But what we’re doing is more using them as the approximation for ideas and story lines.”</p><p>“We don’t view quotes as the most important object, but algorithms can capture quotes,” Mr. Kleinberg said. “And we see this research as using a rich data set as a step toward understanding why certain points of view and story lines win out, and others don’t.”</p><p>The paper, <a href="http://www.cs.cornell.edu/home/kleinber/kdd09-quotes.pdf" title="Research paper in PDF format">“Meme-tracking and the Dynamics of the News Cycle,”</a>  was also written by Jure Leskovec, a postgraduate researcher at Cornell, who this summer will become an assistant professor at Stanford, and Lars Backstrom, a Ph.D. student at Cornell, who is going to work for <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/facebook_inc/index.html?inline=nyt-org" title="More articles about Facebook.">Facebook</a>. The team has set up interactive displays of their findings at <a href="http://memetracker.org" target="_">memetracker.org</a>.</p><p>Social scientists and media analysts have long examined news cycles, though focusing mainly on case studies instead of working with large Web data sets. And computer scientists have developed tools for clustering and tracking articles and blog posts, typically by subject or political leaning.</p><p>But the Cornell research, experts say, goes further in trying to track the phenomenon of news ideas rising and falling. “This is a landmark piece of work on the flow of news through the world,” said Eric Horvitz, a researcher at <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/microsoft_corporation/index.html?inline=nyt-org" title="More information about Microsoft Corp">Microsoft</a> and president of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence. “And the study shows how Web-scale analytics can serve as powerful sociological laboratories.”</p><p>Sreenath Sreenivasan, a professor specializing in new media at the Columbia Journalism School, said the research was an ambitious effort to measure a social phenomenon that is not easily quantified. “To the extent this kind of approach could open the door to a new understanding of the news cycle, that is very interesting,” he said.</p><p>A challenge in this kind of research, Mr. Sreenivasan said, will be to account for and model how quickly online news sources and distribution networks are changing. Mr. Sreenivasan pointed to social media, especially the rapidly rising <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/twitter/index.html?inline=nyt-org" title="More articles about Twitter.">Twitter</a>, as an informal but highly influential news recommendation and distribution network.</p><p>“Even from last fall to today, the dynamics of the news cycle are very different, because of Twitter,” he said. </p>      <div><span style="float: right;"><a href="#" style="padding: 0pt 0pt 3px 20px; font-size: 1em;">Sign in to Recommend</a></span>  <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/pages/technology/index.html">More Articles in   				Technology »</a>  <span>A version of this article appeared in print on July 13, 2009, on page B1 of the New York edition.</span>										  </div>		  </div></blockquote><div class="posterous_quote_citation">via <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/13/technology/internet/13influence.html?_r=1">nytimes.com</a></div> <p>Some bloggers won't like this, but mainstream media still breaks stories before bloggers most of the time.</p></div>      <p style="font-size: 10px;">  <a href="http://posterous.com">Posted via web</a>   from <a href="http://allanjenkins.posterous.com/study-measures-the-chatter-of-the-news-cycle-1">Allan Jenkins</a>  </p>  </div>
</content>


    <feedburner:origLink>http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/08/study-measures-the-chatter-of-the-news-cycle.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>
    <entry>
        <title>Teabaggers are better  propagandists than Progressives</title>
        <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/typepad/uxBJ/~3/F0WDoZd_qB8/teabaggers-are-better-propagandists-than-progressives.html" />
        <link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/08/teabaggers-are-better-propagandists-than-progressives.html" thr:count="0" />
        <id>tag:typepad.com,2003:post-6a00d8341c215853ef0120a57e0a46970c</id>
        <published>2009-08-28T00:21:05+02:00</published>
        <updated>2009-08-28T00:21:05+02:00</updated>
        <summary>Many observing these [healthcare reform] debates from abroad have probably concluded that we, as a nation, have finally gone completely mad. And it's hard to argue otherwise. How sane could be a polity that sits by with relative complacence when...</summary>
        <author>
            <name>Allan Jenkins</name>
        </author>
        
        
<content type="xhtml" xml:lang="en-US" xml:base="http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/">
<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><div class="posterous_bookmarklet_entry"> <blockquote class="posterous_long_quote"><p>Many observing these [healthcare reform]  debates from abroad have probably concluded that we, as a nation, have finally gone completely mad. And it's hard to argue otherwise.</p>  <p>How sane could be a polity that sits by with relative complacence when its leaders launch devastating and groundless invasions of foreign lands but approach a full-on rebellion when those leaders make some modest moves to deliver decent health care at a price people can afford?</p>  <p>And how could these people be so divorced from the dynamics of their own health care that they don't appear to understand that the Medicare they value so highly is very much a government-run health care program?</p></blockquote><div class="posterous_quote_citation">via <a href="http://www.alternet.org/healthwellness/142174/town_hall_lunacy_includes_outraged_calls_to_%27keep_government_out_of_medicare%2C%27_when_medicare_is_government/">alternet.org</a></div> <p>One answer is that the people who orchestrate Teabaggers are skilled, cynical communicators who realize many red-state conservatives are scared gutless of the world around them. (And these communicators need not be erudite or even literate -- witness Palin and Hannity). Cater to their natural xenophobia, lack of curiosity and assumption that, in all things, "'Murrica's nummer one" and you have your debate pretty much over.   </p><p>Can Progressives ever hope to reach effectively to undecideds? If they want to, they need to be far more vocal and informative.</p></div>      <p style="font-size: 10px;">  <a href="http://posterous.com">Posted via web</a>   from <a href="http://allanjenkins.posterous.com/teabaggers-are-better-propagandists-than-prog">Allan Jenkins</a>  </p>  </div>
</content>


    <feedburner:origLink>http://allanjenkins.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/08/teabaggers-are-better-propagandists-than-progressives.html</feedburner:origLink></entry>

</feed><!-- ph=1 -->

