Project #Marius Social Media Analysis of Copenhagen Zoo Incident
•Descargar como PPTX, PDF•
1 recomendación•549 vistas
Revised version for the CBS Seminar with further findings in Sentiment Analysis leveraging automatic systems from Dan Hardt, manual coding from corporate communications students, and input Bernardo Huberman of HP Labs.
Recomendados
Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
La actualidad más candente
La actualidad más candente (17)
Similar a Project #Marius Social Media Analysis of Copenhagen Zoo Incident
Similar a Project #Marius Social Media Analysis of Copenhagen Zoo Incident (20)
Más de Christopher James Zimmerman
Más de Christopher James Zimmerman (13)
Último
Último (20)
Project #Marius Social Media Analysis of Copenhagen Zoo Incident
- 1. Project #Marius Chris Zimmerman Ravi Vatrapu Yuran Chen Dan Hardt
- 4. Overview 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. The Story: Timeline of Online/Offline Events Dataset, Tools and Visualization Research Angles Volume Comparison Community Language & Demographics Social Graph: Network, Actor Post-Level Analysis 7. Social Text: Language & Sentiment Analysis 8. Company Performance 9. Initial Findings
- 6. Research Avenues of Inquiry The online reflection - Why does this matter? • Volume – How did the conversation amplitude evolve over two weeks in February online? • Sentiment – Where did negative sentiment originate and how did it evolve/spread? (keywords, people, and topics) • Community – Who were the relevant actors? (Organizations, Customers, Users, Activists, Influencers, etc.) • Post-level Performance – What types of posts and specific events instigated the issue online? (artifacts involved such as videos, photos, Facebook posts, tweets, etc) How did the Copenhagen Zoo handle the event on social channels and how did the (social) media storm effect their presence? How did other organizations deal with the crisis? What made this incident different and how?
- 7. Toolset Tool Purpose Access Radian6 Collection License Nitrogram Collection License Tableau Desktop Visualization / Analysis License (edu) Datawrapper Visualization Public TimelineJS Visualization Public LIWC Language Analysis Public SODATO Collection / Vizualization Beta Topsy Pro Collection / Analysis Trial Scoailbakers Facebook Statistics COTS* Followerwonk Context COTS* Twtrland Context COTS* Quintly Context COTS* Wildfire Historical Performance COTS* Consumer of the shelf tool (COTS)
- 8. #Marius Overview Social Data Collected • 40 Online Channels (Jan 19 – Feb 19) • Over 315 K Posts Collected (75% Twitter) • 200 K Unique Posts (63%) • 681 Million Potential Impressions on Twitter • Highest Buzz Rate : 332 Posts / Minute Normal Monthly Volume : 300-500 Stories • 30K Petition Signatures • 45K Facebook Protesters
- 9. Visual Analysis & Full Dataset tinyurl.com/mariusvisual
- 10. Dataset
- 11. Distribution
- 13. Channel Comparison • • Twitter dominates 75% of total chatter, while 21% is from Facebook Discussions Amplification: 50% of Tweets are retweets Danish Subset • Media channels are more rich in diversity • Facebook and Twitter only share half the conversation • Only a quarter of all Tweets are retweets > Does mainstream media play a greater role for Danish society while, social media is dominant elsewhere in terms of quantity of discussion and breadth of dispersion?
- 14. Region and Language Detection • 95% of the total conversation was detected to be in English. • Almost two thirds of global activity came from the US (64%), followed by the UK (13%) and Netherlands (4%). • Danish was only detected in 2,220 posts.
- 15. #Marius Demographics Location estimates North America usage over 50% Twitter bio field reveals several dominant traits during the weekend: • • • • • • Liberal, Progressivism, Vegan, Activist, Animal rights, advocate, pets, wil dlife, etc
- 16. Network Analysis
- 18. Amplified Posts
- 19. Centrality Vertex copenhagenzoo InOutBetweenness Closeness Eigenvector Degree Degree Centrality Centrality Centrality Clustering PageRank Coefficient 513 0 767401.779 0.001 0.038 122.346 digitalcake2 1 62 89745.114 0.000 0.004 aprilchristen 27 5 41415.806 0.000 beaumiroir 14 7 39865.026 01bond 38 1 rtenews 37 ebizniz Custom Menu Item Action Tweete d Search Term? 0.002https://twitter.com/copenhagenzoo No 17.351 0.009https://twitter.com/digitalcake2 Yes 0.001 8.279 0.016https://twitter.com/aprilchristen Yes 0.000 0.001 5.353 0.023https://twitter.com/beaumiroir Yes 32366.167 0.000 0.000 9.443 0.000https://twitter.com/01bond Yes 0 28708.167 0.000 0.000 8.838 0.000https://twitter.com/rtenews No 1 9 23755.440 0.000 0.000 3.216 0.000https://twitter.com/ebizniz Yes mmpr_consultant 17 6 19567.043 0.000 0.003 4.570 0.082https://twitter.com/mmpr_consultant Yes earthtransition 12 1 19429.063 0.000 0.000 4.656 0.006https://twitter.com/earthtransition Yes
- 20. Social Text
- 24. Automatic Sentiment Results • Danish data tends to be much more neutral compared to the nonDanish data. • Most of the negativity detected in Twitter for non-Danish data while most of the negative data occurs in Facebook for Danish data. > Does this imply that Danes prefer Facebook to Twitter to express their ideas?
- 26. Facebook Fanpage
- 27. Copenhagen Zoo Facebook Performance • Largest surge in likes ever • Almost 100K People Talking About This (PTAT) on Facebook • 120.3% Normalized Buzz (PTAT/Likes) Global Fan Growth • Over 10K new fans this month (70% in Denmark) • 19 Countries more than doubled their fanbase • Countries such as the UK and Australia tripled and almost quadrupled their fanbases of CPH Zoo. Likes PTAT PTAT / Likes
- 29. Check-ins • Beforehand, 29K people added the Zoo’s location to a Facebook post • Now 110K people “Were Here” on Facebook • CPH Zoo is thus now the 7th most checkedinto place in Denmark
- 30. Initial Findings Overall • Twitter offered a more direct reflection of events, in terms of volume and sentiment • Twitter also demonstrated a more drastic reaction to network prestige factors from activists and celebreties • Automatic sentiment on Radian6 is neutral-heavy, often failing to detect negative sentiment, • The dominance of English-language countries and the Twitter channel went hand-in-hand (perhaps along with mainstream spin). • The mechanisms on Facebook allow a dichotomy from crisis situations by yielding negative sentiment in terms of comments and posts, while simultaneously experiencing unprecedented growth in positive signals (such as fans and likes, as well as buzz and check-ins).
- 31. Danish Comparison Contrast with Danish Subset • Mainstream media plays a larger role as opposed to higher proportions of online debate on social channels elsewhere • Re-tweets levels are relatively small and social media may be used social media more to express oneself rather than to share information. • Negative sentiment was detected more strongly on Facebook
Notas del editor
- Legacy of this Giraffe - Work in progressNext thing – another animal rights incident with a whale has come and gone, twitter has long since moved onNonetheless still tell the story of an explosion on social media with some pretty rich and large data
- - For both Danish and non-danish the major media providers are Twitter and Facebook, but the media channel is more diverse for non-danish data, without the predominance of Twitter- Given that retweet take a more important role for non-danish data while Facebook is more popular for Danish, does mainstream media play a greater role for Danish society while in non-danish data, social media is now dominant in terms of quantity of discussion and breadth of dispersion?- It is interesting to see that Retweets for Danish data are proportionally small. Does this imply that Danes use social media more to express themselves rather than to share information?
- People with large followers also play an essential role in spreading the information. For example @rickygervais ( English comedian) and @fielaursendk( Danish blogger)
- Sources : Sentiment140, Twtrland
- Lets talk about Facebook, after the twitter-heaviness of the overall online conversation