1. Klout.com:
The
problem
of
pseudo-­‐descriptive
metrics
By
Martin
Svetlík
[socialnimedia.blogspot.com]
It's
been
a
month
since
I
first
checked
my
klout
score,
a
sort
of
standard
for
value
in
social
networks.
After
shooting
to
54
in
the
first
week,
it
has
been
falling
down
steadily
since.
Well,
it
does
not
bother
me
that
much
–
until
someone
uses
my
klout
score
to,
for
example,
see
if
I
have
enough
network
value
for
a
social
media
specialist
job.
This
is
what
Bonnie
Stewart1,
my
today`s
inspiration,
is
writing
about
in
her
post.
I
would
like
to
go
a
little
further
in
my
thoughts.
The
reason
why
klout
is
the
evil
of
social
networks
is
far
more
pragmatic
than
Bonnie
thinks.
The
reason
is,
of
course,
money.
In
the
old
times,
when
the
main
goal
of
social
networks
was
to
connect
its
users,
give
them
means
of
communication
they
had
not
had
before
and
bring
some
benefit
to
the
online
community,
everything
was
fine.
But
most
social
networks
did
not
last
long
in
this
stage
and
the
“user-­‐owned”
platforms
started
to
become
stock
market
traded
corporations,
whose
main
objective
is
to
maximize
their
profit.
Monetization
of
the
social
capital
However,
their
only
way
of
generating
profit
comes
from
the
sheer
number
of
users
and
the
depth
of
their
interactions.
In
seek
of
profit
growth
the
networks
have
to
push
for
greater
user
activity.
A
user
with
40
friends,
who
visits
his
account
once
in
a
week
and
avoids
brands,
is
basically
“user
trash”
for
Facebook.
His/her
social
capital
is
very
small
and
the
potential
for
monetization
approaches
zero.
Therefore,
efforts
of
these
social
networks
(i.e.
corporations
behind
them)
are
to
maximize
each
user's
social
capital
and
thus
maximize
own
profit.
Once
a
neutral
platform
now
forces
us
to
use
the
network
according
to
its
rules.
Klout
score
will
never
be
a
relevant
indicator
of
our
impact
in
any
social
network,
but
rather
an
indicator
of
our
exploitability,
as
it
forces
us
to
conform
to
the
ideal
user
who
is
present
in
all
social
networks,
influences
everybody
else,
and
most
of
all
–
serves
as
a
perfect
source
of
money
when
sold
over
to
the
marketing
departments
of
companies.
Why
is
high
klout
score
good
for
you?
The
maliciousness
of
the
system
is
that
it
looks
neutral
and
descriptive,
when
in
fact
it
is
profoundly
normative
–
it
motivates
us
to
maximize
our
exploitability
with
a
clear
evaluation
criterion:
the
higher
the
score,
the
better
we
are.
The
point
is
that
user
involvement
in
social
networks
is
usually
not
a
race
with
others.
But
for
corporations
operating
social
networks,
this
precise
race
among
users
over
who
will
be
more
social,
is
the
very
optimum,
since
it
increases
the
profit
from
each
user
(more
social
capital
of
the
user
=
more
profit
for
the
platform).
Is
there
a
solution?
Well,
as
long
as
Wikipedia
resists
to
have
sponsored
stories,
product
placement
and
for-­‐sale
positions
in
its
search
engine,
there
is
hope
that
social
networks
can
operate
on
non-­‐profit
basis,
without
the
malignant
desire
to
maximize
(whatever
they
want
to
maximize).
But
as
long
as
Justin
Bieber
has
the
highest
klout
score,
we
have
to
beware,
because
it
means
that
there
is
something
rotten
within
the
current
pseudo-­‐descriptive
metrics.
1
http://www.salon.com/2011/11/13/klout_is_bad_for_your_soul/singleton/
written
for
[socialnimedia.blogspot.com]