Posts Tagged ‘sentiment’

The Oil Leak Has Been Plugged, But The Talk Continues

On April 20th an explosion occurred on British Petroleum’s (BP) oil drilling rig known as Deepwater Horizon. The explosion caused Deepwater Horizon to sink into the ocean, which in turn broke a pipe causing oil to leak into The Gulf of Mexico. This leak went on for about three months and is being dubbed one of the worst man-made disasters ever. Last Thursday BP finally managed to plug the pipe and stop the oil from flowing out into the ocean.

If you saw any kind of media around this oil spill you may have noticed BP was taking a lot of criticism from everywhere. We thought it would be interesting to see how this event affected their public image in the online social space using our social media monitoring and analytics platform, MAP.

In order to get a fair assessment, we broke our study into three separate time periods; the beginning of the year up to the date of the oil rig explosion (April 20th), the period the leak went on for (April 20 – July 15) and the past week since they plugged the leak.

From the beginning of the year until April 20th there was no shortage of talk going on around BP. Looking at this time period we can see that BP was mentioned in almost 93,000 blog posts, over 202,000 forum posts and in about 244,000 tweets. In this time period we also can see that BP was in good favour of those discussing them with a 76% overall favourable sentiment rating.


Then the day of the explosion came. On April 20th Deepwater Horizon sank and oil started to pour out of the well into the Gulf of Mexico until it was finally plugged up almost three months later. During this time the world couldn’t stop talking about the British oil giant. In the course of this period there were around 602,000 blog posts, 860,000 forum messages and a whopping 4.6 million tweets. This time period also saw their favourable sentiment percentage drop more than 20%. The most drastic change here comes from the negative sentiment around BP rising from 22% to 46%.


Now that the leak has been capped and the oil has stopped flowing into the ocean, there might be speculation that talk and criticism of British Petroleum may have calmed down. Our analysis shows that this not the case. Granted, the leak was only capped a week ago, but talk about it has not seemed to slow down. In the past week there has been over 55,000 blog posts, 42,000 forum mentions and almost 528,000 tweets about BP. Most interesting is that there were more tweets about the company in this last week than there were in the first four months of the year. Also, despite the worst being over (the actual leaking), the overall sentiment of BP has not changed much. The overall sentiment rating still stands at 54% favourable. However, while negative sentiment has not gone down, we did see a slight rise in their positive sentiment from 16% to 19%.


With their positive sentiment on the rise it will be interesting to look again at these numbers in a few months to give a roughly equal time period of measurement and to let the clean up of the spill take it’s affect on both the Gulf of Mexico and the general public talking about it. If BP handles the next few months properly, they may be able to swing the public’s opinion back in their favour. Only time will tell.

Social Media is a Partnership Between Man and Machine

Over the past few weeks, a common thread in many of the more enthusiastic conversations about social media has been the role that people play compared with the technology.

These discussions have been focused on issues such as sentiment, particularly whether automated sentiment technology is accurate, and whether people can do a better job of assessing whether a conversation is positive, negative or neutral.

In particular, Jason Falls’ blog post on “Why You Shouldn’t Trusted Automated Sentiment Scoring” attracted a lot of attention.

There’s also been talk about social media monitoring and discovery versus curation done manually by people.

The emergence of these discussions is not a surprise. In fact, it’s a positive development because it reflects how the social media industry is evolving and maturing.

As social media monitoring usage becomes more widespread, there’s bound to more talk about the “what”, “who” and “why”, as well as the inevitable “man vs. machine” debate.

I think some of this discussion is motivated by the fact technology is taking over a role played by people for many years.

Before the Web and social media emerged to search and aggregate information, many companies used clipping services that used people to manually go through newspapers and magazines, as well as radio and television broadcasts. It was an intensive and expensive process.

Now, technology has pushed people into the background. Social media monitoring and analytics technology can handle a lot of the grunt work by quickly collecting, aggregating, processing and presenting millions of conversations – something that people are not capable of doing.

But – and here’s the big “but” – technology can’t completely replace people, and technology shouldn’t completely replace people.

Despite the advantage of social media monitoring and analytics services, people will continue to play a key role in taking the information collected, and then providing insight, advice, context and recommendations about what the data means and what should be done with it strategically and tactically.

For example, technology can make it easy to identify key influencers and opinion leaders but people need to step into the fray to engage with these people and develop relationships.

People can also play an active role in helping perfect the technology. For example, all the talk about automated sentiment fails to take into account that perfection can be elusive because of things such as sarcasm and nuance.

Still, I’d take a system any day that processes millions of conversations to offer information and intelligence about what’s happening within the social media landscape, AND gives provides the ability to easily adjust sentiment when needed.

The bottom line is that social media is a partnership between people and technology. They serve different roles and, in many ways, couldn’t operate as well without each other.

The “man vs. machine” discussions are healthy but it’s really a “man AND machine” world that we’re living in.

Tiger Woods’ Reputation Rebounds Big-Time

Nothing like a good old-fashioned apology to make people forgive and forget.

It’s an approach that appears to be working for Tigers Woods, who gave an extensive press conference on Monday as he prepares for his first golf tournament, The Masters, after taking a self-imposed hiatus in the wake a salacious sex scandal.

Since Woods’ press conference, positive sentiment within the blogopshere has jumped to 45% from 32% during the time between his now-infamous car accident in late-November and the press conference. Meanwhile, negative sentiment has dropped to 17% from 22%.

Sentiment – After Press Conference

Sentiment – Before Press Conference

Here’s are the top keywords within conversations about Woods within the social and traditional media.

The World’s Leading Brands by Social Media Presence

Interbrand recently published their annual “Best Global Brands List” for 2009, which includes 100 companies ranked on criteria such as financial data, the scope of international operations and their economic value added. The top five brands are: Coca-Cola, IBM, Microsoft, General Electric and Nokia.

Interbrand’s ranking methodology does not include social media activity or online sentiment, so we decided to take look at how the top-20 companies on Interbrand’s list stack up. After running an analysis using our flagship MAP service, we discovered there is not a direct correlation between the two lists. In fact, the only company that occupies the same ranking on both lists is Microsoft (#3). Here’s the complete report

Below are the top-10 companies on Sysomos’ list, and how they ranked on the Interbrand list.

Picture 4

If You’re Happy and You Know It….

happyHow happy are you, and how happy is everyone else?

With the rise of social media, it is becoming a lot easier to quickly see what people are doing, what they’re thinking about, and how they feel by looking at their blog posts, comments and status updates.

To get a better sense of overall happiness, Facebook has launched a Gross National Happiness index that measures the “overall mood of people” based on whether they use positive or negative words (aka sentiment) in status updates. (Note: Facebook is only looking at U.S. users but will move into other countries soon.)

In a blog post, Facebook said its GNH will provide insight into how content people are, something that is currently only available using Gallup polls or national surveys in countries such as France and Bhutan.

So, what do you think? Can the GNH index accurately reflect the happiness of you and everyone else?

GMail’s Rep Takes a Huge Hit

GMail’s outage yesterday attracted a lot of attention, particularly from people who really rely on the e-mail service for their business and personal lives.

To get a better handle on how people reacted to GMail being unavaiable, we used MAP to focus on the sentiment before and after the outage.

On Monday (August 31), the social media conversations about GMail within 83% positive (44% positive and 39% neutral), while only 17% were negative.

GMail (August 31)

Not surprisingly, GMail’s reputation has taken a major hit today (Sept. 2) as only 71% of total social media activity was positive (35% positive and 36% neutral), while negative conversations soared to 29% from 17%.

GMail (Sept. 2)

What’s particularly interesting is there are significantly more negative conversations happening within the U.K. (33%), compared with the U.S. (20%).

We also looked at the most common keywords within social media conversations. At the core was “outage” with strong links to “Google” and “IMAP” -  Internet Message Access Protocol that lets you download messages from GMail’s servers to your computer to access e-mail.

gmail buzzgraph.jsp