Thanks to Jeff Jarvis and Buzzmachine, I've been turned on to a conversation about alternative ad metrics.
I like the idea of a "Cost Per Influence" model, but as Ross Mayfield points out...
The meme being transmitted isn't necessarily the message of the ad.
Additionally, I'd think that a Cost Per Influence model would raise a number of problems that both advertisers and bloggers would have trouble dealing with:
Personally, while I like the idea of somehow rewarding the most influential bloggers for their influence, I think the model might be more trouble than it's worth. May I suggest a different direction?
Since online branding came back into fashion, companies like Dynamic Logic, Millward Brown and Factor TG have conducted online brand studies to gauge the branding effects of online ads. They could conduct similar studies in the blogosphere, recruiting exposed and control groups from areas where the idea has permeated. Online surveys could then determine how influential the idea was through already-established attitudinal metrics. What I like about this is that the methodology is pretty well established (Forbes.com uses essentially the same method to measure its performance against The Wall Street Journal on brand metrics and they'll refund your money if your campaign on Forbes doesn't outperform WSJ.)
How about adding a new twist in the survey? - asking respondents to reveal where they first heard about the idea. That might give rise to an influence-based performance bonus to influential bloggers.
Whaddya think?
BTW, I'm pinging my partner Jim Meskauskas on this one. He usually eats this kind of stuff up and maybe he'll drop in to contribute some ideas.
Posted by THespos at July 13, 2004 06:53 PM | TrackBackGlad to see you blogging, Tom. I've always enjoyed your MediaPost columns. I'll add you to my blogroll.
Posted by: Terry Heaton at July 14, 2004 09:06 AM
All comments are property of the individual poster who left them. Everything else, copyright 2005, Tom Hespos