4 ms·
I've got to disagree here. For one, Klout is a step in the direction of creating a metric to help brand marketers determine who are the most valuable people to
by mattangriffel 15y ago
I've got to disagree here. For one, Klout is a step in the direction of creating a metric to help brand marketers determine who are the most valuable people to target (i.e. "influencers"). It's not perfect but it's better than nothing from a marketing perspective.
On the other hand, if people just happen to get wrapped up in what their Klout is because they are ego-driven, then so be it.
- sethbannon 15y agoI'm not saying there isn't value being created for marketers (though others might), I'm merely saying Klout as the go-to source for reputation on the web could have negative societal implications.
- endtime 15y agoIn which case someone will come along and do it better.
- _delirium 15y ago> It's not perfect but it's better than nothing from a marketing perspective. From some spot-checking of Klout scores of people I know, I'm not sure it's better than just a raw follow count. The number is really bizarre. For example, one of my friends who never uses Twitter, has a dozen or so tweets and 2 followers, and generally isn't active elsewhere in social media either, inexplicably has a fairly high Klout score. I'm guessing some sort of issue with normalization or small data sets.