“Qs” to help evaluate social media monitoring aggregators

April 5, 2011 at 2:19 pm Leave a comment

Posted by Chad

Transparency and track record are extremely important criteria for selecting and staying with a social media monitoring and aggregation company. Anyone can make any claims about anything at any time, but how do they document them?

It’s a very slippery slope, as social media monitoring aggregator’s work 24/7 to find and promote their latest competitive edge. As everyone knows, the more you’re scrambling for the top spot, the greater the likelihood of exaggerated or downright false claims.

That said, there are three “Qs” that will help define the best social media monitoring solution  partner for you. They are: Quantity, Quality, Questioning.

Quantity & Quality

This is much trickier than it seems at first glance. For example, Moreover Technologies, just achieved a milestone of actively monitoring 2.5 million-plus independent social media feeds. That’s more than triple the 750,000 active feeds just a year ago, and positions Moreover Technologies as a strong force in the social media monitoring space.

But quantity without quality means nothing. You can have the highest quantity in the world, but if a substantial portion of the feeds are spam, dead blogs and adult blogs, you’re working at cross-purposes. It makes it that much harder to find real-time relevant information.

So, while we are adding to the total feed base, we’re also deleting material that doesn’t meet our spam-free White List standards. In fact, we just eliminated 125,000 feeds that had not posted in the last six months or were not posting original content.

Questioning.

Don’t take our claims or anyone else’s at face value. This is where transparency and track record become very important. A legitimate claim should be factually provable via some type of transparent data. For example, we can document our total number of feeds, and show you the ones that we’ve taken off the White List.

Track record brings historical performance data into view. If a company has a long history of providing accurate and verifiable information, it enhances the likelihood of a continuing tradition. On the other hand, if a company hasn’t been around long enough to have amassed a substantial track record, or has been called out for providing inflated data, it’s more likely to continue this process. After all, habits—both good and bad—are hard to break.

By seeking to understand quantity and quality of the social media monitoring data provided, then asking lots of questions to verify legitimacy and long-term consistency, you will get a social media monitoring solution that will perform today, tomorrow, and long beyond.

Entry filed under: media monitoring, social media, Social Media Metabase. Tags: , , , , .

Monitoring the Brand Finance Global 500 Gotaweekend? Getafriend and get away with Getamap

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed



Moreover Technologies is a 2011 SIIA CODiE Awards Finalist



RSS Editor’s Pick…

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.


  Bookmark and Share
wordpress counter

Latest Tweets

Archives


%d bloggers like this: