<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Epio Solutions</title>
	<atom:link href="http://epiosolutions.com/comments/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://epiosolutions.com</link>
	<description>A boutique Word of Mouth and Social Media Marketing agency</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2011 00:06:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Measuring Online Influence by Ian Bruce</title>
		<link>http://epiosolutions.com/archives/333#comment-21</link>
		<dc:creator>Ian Bruce</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2011 00:06:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://epiosolutions.com/?p=333#comment-21</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t think Klout et al are a permanent fixture of the social media landscape. Klout thinks it is selling a solution when they really have a feature. Most social media monitoring tools of any worth have in them a way of determining salience, aka influence. Most search engines will get there soon too. This is where this &quot;feature&quot; belongs, in a context that has some value.

I agree too that the secret sauce algorithms are plainly faulty, but then the validity of all these systems is suspect -- when it comes down to it, what is &quot;influence&quot; anyway???

Finally, there&#039;s a bigger issue with Klout - they may be measuring the wrong things entirely. Individuals alone only rarely make a difference; social media is a collective phenomenon and it is the crowd -- or often the mob -- that matter:

http://ianbruce.blogspot.com/2011/11/klout-qwikster-and-mob-marketing.html

Thanks again, great post.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t think Klout et al are a permanent fixture of the social media landscape. Klout thinks it is selling a solution when they really have a feature. Most social media monitoring tools of any worth have in them a way of determining salience, aka influence. Most search engines will get there soon too. This is where this &#8220;feature&#8221; belongs, in a context that has some value.</p>
<p>I agree too that the secret sauce algorithms are plainly faulty, but then the validity of all these systems is suspect &#8212; when it comes down to it, what is &#8220;influence&#8221; anyway???</p>
<p>Finally, there&#8217;s a bigger issue with Klout &#8211; they may be measuring the wrong things entirely. Individuals alone only rarely make a difference; social media is a collective phenomenon and it is the crowd &#8212; or often the mob &#8212; that matter:</p>
<p><a href="http://ianbruce.blogspot.com/2011/11/klout-qwikster-and-mob-marketing.html" rel="nofollow">http://ianbruce.blogspot.com/2011/11/klout-qwikster-and-mob-marketing.html</a></p>
<p>Thanks again, great post.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

