Yesterday there was an article on Mashable that just makes me angry.
Under the title “What Click-Through Rate Can You Expect From Twitter?,” Darren Barefoot uses a survey sample of 60 people WHO FOLLOW HIM to extrapolate that you can reasonably expect a click-through rate of 2.8%.
Forget confounding factors like spammers among your followers, re-tweeting, time of day, or the fact that the finale of “Lost” was on TV, if you have an eighth-grade education you would know this study is HOOOEY. Darren’s “reporting” breaks every rule of statistical validity and journalistic responsibility.
Worse, for this to appear in a forum like Mashable, which I love and highly respect, it’s irresponsible.
Here’s why. This article will now become part of the faux-fact lore of social media. Many people will only remember they saw this number and report it as fact.
It’s already happening: There were 42 comments following the article. Only one of them took Barefoot to task for reporting shoddy statistics. Most of the comments were along the lines of “Great information!” and “Interesting stats, thanks for sharing.”
The Mashable article had been tweeted 270 times, and assuredly re-tweeted many times more than that. Here’s a typical tweet: “Awesome article on Twitter click-thru rates …”
No. It’s not. But that’s the blessing and the curse of viral marketing. The manure gets spread just as evenly as the seeds.
Folks, please remember to use your head on this stuff. Don’t get caught up in the hype machine, and by all means help keep the airwaves clean of garbage like this.
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...