Enter a search term such as “mobile analytics” or browse our content using the filters above.
That’s not only a poor Scrabble score but we also couldn’t find any results matching
Check your spelling or try broadening your search.
Sorry about this, there is a problem with our search at the moment.
Please try again later.
Yesterday, we looked at what some industry professionals think are the big trends in big data for the upcoming year. I had the chance to talk to Dr. Michael Wu, Chief Scientist at Lithium Technologies, about what he is looking at for his research in 2013.
For him, it's about smart data instead of the generics often spoken about around "big data."
Moving from conversations dominated by mobile to data, some marketers never want to hear the term 'Big Data' again. But with more and more companies in social and tag management utilizing the surge of data available to them, the big data conversation is not one that ended with the end of 2012.
We've already touched on big data with a post earlier this month by Patricio Robles on the challenges of big data in 2013, but this time we're hearing from some of the experts.
Since inception, online influencer targeting has been a fraught activity.
In the early 2000s, brands had to fight the temptation to simply create their own fake influencers. Perfection of mommy blog targeting (one product for you and one to give away to your fans) was often achieved at the cost of polarizing their community over issues of authenticity. If individuals can’t trust their community leaders to not be unduly influenced by what are perceived as bribes, who can they trust?
Klout, which familiarized a mass of consumers with influence measurement, has regularly been the subject of withering criticism. “Kill me if I Klout,” wrote the gadget-catchall Gizmodo. “If I've ever interacted with Klout... punch me in the face,” said the net-comic XKCD.
Econsultancy's latest report, Influencer Channels: From Klout to Klouchebag, takes a look at these issues, asks why, and explores ways for marketers to effectively work around these antipathies.
Last month at Lithium's Network Conference, Lyle Fong, Lithium's co-founder, reiterated how we have to start to look differently at how businesses use social media for marketing and support.
In order to be successful, the four "gears" of acquisition, engagement, enlistment, and monetization have to all spin equally. But in order to get there, you have to get them moving in a specific order depending on your purpose.
It's hard to predict a lasting and sustaining innovation. How do we determine what will become a platform and what we will build our lives around?
Companies are all facing this issue right now. How can brands build a social customer strategy with the continual creation of new technology and new social platforms?
At today's Lithium Network Conference, Lithium CEO Rob Tarkoff kicked off his keynote discussing innovation and how we have not always realized the moments that will change how we behave as consumers, communities and businesses. So, he stressed, we need to take time to step back and be objective.
Some people say we’re just at the beginning of this vast business transformation caused by the web. Others say we’re almost at the end.
The truth is, we’re almost exactly in the middle.
Let me explain.
A study from the Chief Marketing Officer (CMO) Council and social technology business Lithium reveals a disconnect between what senior marketers think consumers want from social media, and the reality.
According to the 1,300-plus consumers surveyed online globally, there was found to be an expectation that a brand follow, like, post or preference in a social media environment would enable a person to; be eligible for exclusive offers (67%), have the opportunity to interact with other customers who share the same experiences (60%) and gain access to games or contests (65 %).
When the same question was asked to over 120 CMOs, the results were very different.