It is easy to predict that we will be talking a lot more about social media measurement and ROI in 2009. The question of ROI becomes more important when there is a market transition from an established form or investment (i.e. traditional media) to an emerging form like social media. Even though the ROI of current or traditional investments may be no less certain, the test is always a higher one to justify a change.
In this article I’ll use the SEO filter, made by Andé Scholten, to make some new interesting SEO reports in Google Analytics. I realized that the data, provided by the filter, had given me some new opportunities. It wasn’t possible in Google Analytics to get good SEO related reports. The reports I did get were these:
* An overview of keywords during a specific period and (after clicking) the landings page on which visitors landed after clicking on the Google result.
* An overview of the ‘Entrance Keywords’ of a specific page.
On Twitter like several other online mediums, success matrix is not merely about page impressions but how engaging your Tweets really are. Traditionally measuring success of blog posts, article in journals or far worse, print media has been tricky. A lot of assumptions have been made, generally more traffic = more engagement. Although with Twitter the process can be more scientific.
Below I’m presenting a way (almost an algorithm) to quantify engagement on Twitter:
Lesson 1 – Momentum disappears damn quickly.
Lesson 2 – It’s not all about the traffic.
With these two lessons in mind, I think that as a blogger begins to evolve they have have to make a decision: you can work overtime to keep up traffic to continuously build momentum or you can stop worrying about the traffic and shift your focus to converting the traffic that you receive into subscribers. Some people focus on both, which can be a daunting task. Getting people to visit your site in the beginning of your blogging career is no easy task, unless you have great connections.My decision was to worry more about subscribers than traffic.
There have been a whole series of stories lately, often from newspaper industry insiders, bemoaning the sorry state of their industry. Obviously, we’ve been seeing (and pointing to) similar stories for a few years now, but their pace has accelerated in the last few months — with a pretty clear trend: blame others for the newspaper industry ills (the internet! Google! Craiglist! those darn kids! etc.), and then work out some totally hypothetical model that will somehow force someone else to pay, rather than give people a reason to buy. This distinction is pretty important.