×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Obama Finally Beats Bieber Fever According To Klout

samzenpus posted about a year and a half ago | from the I-got-the-cure dept.

Social Networks 67

Thanks to a change in the way their algorithm works, Klout says that President Obama is finally more influential the Justin Bieber. The company now examines more "real world" factors such as the information in your LinkedIn profile and data from Wikipedia entries. From the article: "The overhaul, which began in January, was part of the company's effort to address critics who pointed to Bieber as a prime example of why quantifying online influence was, at best, irrelevant. The teenage pop singer, with his army of 26 million Twitter followers who retweet his every word, had a Klout score that dwarfed that of the U.S. president."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

67 comments

Should probably fix (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41007593)

The misspelling in the first link..

Meanwhile in London (2)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | about a year and a half ago | (#41007903)

... as the embassy storming is cooking up an international storm, I'm afraid that Julian Assange gonna be ahead of both Obama and that young chap who criticized Prince William's hair, or rather, the lack of it
 

Re:Should probably fix (1)

Eponymous Hero (2090636) | about a year and a half ago | (#41012493)

a little too excited to get this story out. as soon as "justin bieber" entered his mental typing buffer the whole machinery took a giant crap.

Bieber on ./? Really? (2)

fleeped (1945926) | about a year and a half ago | (#41007611)

What were you *thinking*?

Re:Bieber on ./? Really? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41007809)

It's slashdot as in /. Retard.

Re:Bieber on ./? Really? (1)

fleeped (1945926) | about a year and a half ago | (#41007857)

Oops, meant to say /. - damn dyslexia

Re:Bieber on ./? Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41013803)

Dyslexics of the world, unite. (that wasn't was easy as it seems)

Re:Bieber on ./? Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41008199)

./a.out

Re:Bieber on ./? Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41008809)

"Thanks to a change in the way their algorithm works, "

it's like climate change, only more pop

Re:Bieber on ./? Really? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41011895)

Bieber is not in my current directory.

Missing audience profiles (4, Interesting)

mozumder (178398) | about a year and a half ago | (#41007663)

A generic number is a horrible measure.

Ultimately, the information Klout is trying to analyze all comes down to marketing, and for that, Klout needs a specific audience to measure influence with.

If I was running a fashion magazine targeted towards females, I would want to tell advertisers I have influence among women ages 24-45, with a certain amount of income, who are interested in shoes and bags. That's going to be different than the influence I have among male libertarian tech nerds, but unfortunately, Klout doesn't know the influence specific separate audiences (probably a billion combinations of different audience profiles), which is important now that marketers are targeting more specific niches.

Statistics (5, Insightful)

mestar (121800) | about a year and a half ago | (#41007761)

Looks like they already knew the result they wanted, then they changed the algorithm until they got that result.

Re:Statistics (5, Insightful)

Theophany (2519296) | about a year and a half ago | (#41007777)

Well, in fairness having a millions of tweens hanging on your every word is hardly 'influence' compared to, oh I don't know, being POTUS.

Influence is as much to do with the nature of your 'followers' as the influential person themselves.

Re:Statistics (1)

Trepidity (597) | about a year and a half ago | (#41007967)

I assumed Klout was just trying to measure influence on Twitter rather than any kind of "real" influence. The latter isn't even that well-defined, but you could probably use money as a better proxy.

Re:Statistics (1)

gmack (197796) | about a year and a half ago | (#41008041)

Klout has a very broken algorithm for defining followers on facebook. The one and only time I ever looked at Klout it had my top two "influencers" and one of them was a girl I used to know but had annoyed me so much with her red square student protest (all education should be free) posts that I had disabled her updates from showing up on my news feed. The other was a friend whose posts I don't even pay attention to.

Meanwhile it ignored the people who I do pay attention to and whose posts I tend to comment on or forward.

Re:Statistics (1)

RazzleFrog (537054) | about a year and a half ago | (#41009463)

Curious - why shouldn't education be free? Right now it is up through High School. Why not extend it to undergraduate degrees or trade school since it has become so hard to get a job without one and getting one saddles people with so much debt that they are struggling to get out from underwater 10 years later. Do you really have that much of an issue with educating people?

Re:Statistics (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41009685)

Maybe he has an issue with paying for 5 arts degrees for every one useful degree...

Re:Statistics (2)

SecurityGuy (217807) | about a year and a half ago | (#41009863)

I'll answer that one. Because education requires educators. Educators have to eat, which means someone has to pay them. Education requires materials, whether of the books and pencils variety, or IT infrastructure and course materials. These also cost money to make. Traditional education requires buildings holding classrooms and dorms. Those cost money, too. As a result, education is not and never will be free.

Incidentally, public education is also not free. You pay for it through your taxes.

I have a degree from a top tier US university. I paid for it with loans that had a payment less than my car payment. My salary went up 10x more than the loan cost upon graduation. Education IS worthwhile if you get one that actually has a career future, and don't massively overpay for it. Yes, it's entirely possible to pay way more for your education than you should, and there are people who are happy to sell you an education for a lot of money that has no hope of getting you a decent return on it.

Education can and should be cheaper. As long as there's massive demand to get into the big name, high price universities, it won't get cheaper.

Re:Statistics (1)

Dishevel (1105119) | about a year and a half ago | (#41011119)

As long as there's massive demand to get into the big name, high price universities, it won't get cheaper.

Try not to forget that there are huge subsidies paid to hide the true cost of the education from the consumer.
This tends to modify consumer behavior and drive costs up as well.

Re:Statistics (1)

SecurityGuy (217807) | about a year and a half ago | (#41011171)

I haven't forgotten. My university education was 75% taxpayer funded. Were that not true, my loan payments would have been 4x higher. Still well worth it for me.

Re:Statistics (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41013081)

This tends to modify consumer

Which is precisely the desired effect of public "free" subsidized education. The common behavior in a pure free market is that only the wealthy are educated. You may not like the "distortions" of public education, but that one in particular is a feature, not a bug.

Re:Statistics (1)

gmack (197796) | about a year and a half ago | (#41009879)

I don't have a problem with educating people and, in an ideal world it would be possible to pay for everyone's education but governments need to be more sensible then they have been. Right now the government of Quebec is dealing with the fact that the cost of borrowing has gone up so at some point in the not to distant future they will hit a wall where they simply cannot afford to borrow money anymore so the money must be prioritized or everyone including the students will end up with no services at all.

On top of that, the ideas the protesting students have put forward for saving money have been vague (cut waste in the administration) and are great in theory but they don't solve the problem now and the one concrete suggestion they have come up to save money is to simply ban all university research. Banning research would seem logical to them because the protests are made up of predominately arts students but would screw over the health and sciences students and that brings me to my next point: most of the protestors call education an investment in the future but then go on to say you can't measure the value of an education based on future income. The main reason they are protesting? Their educations will give them *no* job advantage once (if) they graduate so any increase on their cost of education will have to be payed by their low salaried jobs stocking shelves or working at restaurants and of course their resulting incomes would be below the income that would be covered by their other bright idea "simply raise taxes to pay for it"

The girl I cut from my news feed was the worst possible example of that. She is simply re-pasting her husband's political rants and he has spent over a decade as an arts student and the government has covered that cost + their two children and at this rate their children will be teenagers before he manages to graduate.

Re:Statistics (1)

SecurityGuy (217807) | about a year and a half ago | (#41010635)

the one concrete suggestion they have come up to save money is to simply ban all university research.

When I worked for a university, research was not paid for by the university, it was paid for by external grants. The university tacked a hefty percentage on top of that to cover their costs, so overall, university research was a cash cow, not a cost.

Re:Statistics (1)

qu33ksilver (2567983) | about a year and a half ago | (#41009331)

Stupid algo, stupid topic. Obviously you can't "calculate" influence by your online presence. I am surprised sites like klout even exist. And even more we are comparing Obama with Bieber, I mean come on guys..

Re:Statistics (2)

bondsbw (888959) | about a year and a half ago | (#41009503)

But this is a democracy/republic. I thought we were supposed to be influencing the President, not the other way around.

Re:Statistics (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41010931)

Only because you idolize Obama. If one of the Bushies was POTUS, you would not be arguing they are the most influential person online.

This does explain why the economy is in the shitter. BHO is too busy updating his linkedin and facebook pages and tweeting 'OMG, is it me or does Ryan look like Horseshack...LOL!"

Re:Statistics (1)

Theophany (2519296) | about a year and a half ago | (#41011327)

What has Obama got to do with it? I said POTUS is a more influential person than some Disney channel popstar. It doesn't matter who POTUS is. Get back under your bridge, troll.

Re:Statistics (1)

Dishevel (1105119) | about a year and a half ago | (#41011075)

But Obama follows the every tweet of Bieber.

So Bieber not only influences Obama (As can be inferred by his handling of issues.) but also has the millions of teens.

Re:Statistics (1)

s_p_oneil (795792) | about a year and a half ago | (#41009287)

That's how all AI algorithms work. They all have to be "trained" and then tested using specific sets of training data. There are always limitations in the algorithms used as well as in the sets of training data. When a large short-coming like this is spotted, the algorithm and/or set of training data has to be fixed, and then the system has to be re-trained and tested carefully to make sure the chances didn't cause even bigger problems. I've worked with web site categorization AI routines, and they come up with unusual associations all the time if you don't watch them closely (e.g. motorcycle helmets = weapons).

Just ask Google how much time and money they've spent tweaking their page ranking algorithms to try to fix problems like this. It's the same thing, really.

This story is bad and you should feel bad. (5, Informative)

icebraining (1313345) | about a year and a half ago | (#41007771)

I can understand posting important political stories. But Obama vs Bieber on Klout? Are you serious?

Klout is a terrible company, nothing more than a money machine from extending high school style popularity to the web, based on idiotic metrics and raking profiles without people's consent.

Charlie Stross called them "the Internet equivalent of herpes [antipope.org] " and that's exactly what they are. Lets not extend their influence further.

Re:This story is bad and you should feel bad. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41008115)

But Obama vs Bieber on Klout? Are you serious?

Are you serious? Bieber's going to be so pissed that he's now less popular than an irrelevant US President.

Re:This story is bad and you should feel bad. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41008703)

Bieber is worth $112 million.. maybe he's just taking his rightful place as puppetmaster

Re:This story is bad and you should feel bad. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41008155)

"Clout" is Brit slang for a lady's underparts. But this is probably irrelevant.

Re:This story is bad and you should feel bad. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41008253)

I can't believe I just read that. Obama and Bieber...in the same topic....ON SLASHDOT!

It BELONGS on /. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41008335)

Klout is a terrible company, nothing more than a money machine from extending high school style popularity to the web, based on idiotic metrics and raking profiles without people's consent.

You see, there are quite a few of us who are out of work and completely unemployable in our chosen fields because of the many many reasons that have been stated ad nauseum here on Slashdot.

Anyway, my point is, seeing horseshit like this may spur one of us to do something like this to make a living and pay off our student loans - yes, folks with CS degrees also have student loans that they are having to live with.

So, what I'm saying is, if I thought of this myself, I would have done it in a heartbeat. And I would LOVE to come up with a "money machine" that is made fun of on Slashdot. And I would read the criticisms here on Slashdot and cry all the way to the bank and then interview some other poor bastard that's been out of work for a while and see if I can use my new found wealth to give him a break and get him back into the workforce. You see, unlike everyone else it seems who want "geniuses" for even the grunt work, I could find a place for average coders/designers and at the same time keep costs down because I don't have to pay 6 figures for every position - which happens when you insist on hiring the best for every position. And I wouldn't have to bitch and moan about not being able to get anyone "qualified".

But that's me - I'd be a socially responsible businessman.

WTF (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41007805)

I feel like I am an alien from another planet trying to understand this strange human society.
1. I had no idea who "Bieber" was until I read this article. (He seems only to be popular in primarily English speaking Countries, I guess mainly only the US. This is supposed to be an international site, I thought, so they should at least put his first and last name together.)
2. I never heard of Klout, and I guess even most people in the US never have, even slashdot visitors, so maybe perhaps someone should explain that in the summary.
3. I know who Obama is, but I don't know how or why he would beat "Bieber" and since I didn't know what Klout was, I didn't know if "According to" meant "as announced by..." or "following the rules of...", etc. Assuming it was sports, I would assume the second one and be wrong.
4. Trying to sound cool by using words like "fever" in the headline just makes it more confusing. "Beiber Fever" could be a disease, for all I know. It sounds like it is. But Obama beat it, so I guess he's in recovery now.

So at best, this header read to me as:
Obama finally beats xxxxxx Fever according to yyyyyy.

Jesus christ. Back to Slashdot.jp for me! At least the headers make sense...

Re:WTF (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41008153)

You're just slow, moronic, and behind the times. Get with the program. Everyone knows what all this shit means you're just an idiot.

Re:WTF (3, Informative)

Beyond_GoodandEvil (769135) | about a year and a half ago | (#41009053)

This is supposed to be an international site, I thought, so they should at least put his first and last name together
Just b/c they dropped this from the faq "Slashdot is U.S.-centric. We readily admit this, and really don't see it as a problem. Slashdot is run by Americans, after all, and the vast majority of our readership is in the U.S. We're certainly not opposed to doing more international stories, but we don't have any formal plans for making that happen. " Doesn't mean this site is all of the sudden an international site.

Re:WTF (1)

s_p_oneil (795792) | about a year and a half ago | (#41009655)

I got a really good laugh out of this post because I imagine the AI program Klout uses to try to figure us out would say the same thing if it could talk. Maybe it's because I'm a programmer who's worked with AI a bit, but that struck me as hilarious. When humans can't understand each other without context, how can you expect programs written by humans to understand us? ;-)

sh17 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41008281)

Departures of grandstanders, the dim. If *BSD is 0nder the GPL. charnel house. the project to To avoid so as to

Lemme get this straight (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about a year and a half ago | (#41008299)

Some teeny popularity contest site (because, frankly, the internet and "popularity" on the internet has much of a highschool) thinks that some pop singer is more influential than the leader of the pretty much single superpower in the world, and how said leader (who may or may not have the "hearts" of some people but sure has the firepower to break some of them or convince them, depending on what happens first...) is "finally" more popular than said whistle buoy.

This is news?

Well, this just in: Matt goes out with Amy and her boyfriend Tim is really pissed about it and plans to ask Mary to go to the prom with him! More about this after the film at 11.

Resume (0)

thegarbz (1787294) | about a year and a half ago | (#41008423)

Id like to apply for a job as edtior of Slashdot. Ive pissed primary school english so im perfectly qualified.

Or maybe I should apply as a continuous improvement specialist. I'll join Slashdot and fire all the editors. It's not like we were paying them to do anything anyway.

Deer thegarbz (1787294), (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41008919)

Deer thegarbz (1787294),

Yew mispeled "skool."

Sincerly, the Slasdot staff

The fifth horseman of the apocalypse (1)

Grayhand (2610049) | about a year and a half ago | (#41008463)

The Bible left out the annoying twerp horseman but the rise of Justin Bieber just proves the Mayans were right and it's the end of times. How that boy band reject could be considered more popular than the President is a sign of how decadent we have become. Come on even Bush Jr and our current Congress should be thought of higher and our Congress is rated lower than the guys that club baby seals. We should all be afraid, I'm not talking zombie apocalypse afraid, much, much worse. At least zombies just make you want to shoot them in the head. Bieber and our Congress make us want to shoot ourselves in the head.

bits of data = pieces or 1/8 byte? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41008671)

The social media analytics company now sucks in 12 billion bits of data every day from social networks including Facebook, Google Plus and Tumblr, up from 1 billion just months ago.

What a bad place to use 'bits'. So either they only collect 1430.51 MB of data per day, up from 120 MB...or they actually collect several billion pieces of information.

Pathetic (1)

Tridus (79566) | about a year and a half ago | (#41008699)

It's downright sad what passes for a /. story these days. Klout is bullshit. Nobody on this site cares about Beiber. This is little more then an online pissing contest.

Slow news day has been taken to new epic highs with this garbage.

Slashdot has become Digg.2 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41008783)

If you receive a buyout offer, take it. Your value is only going down.

What a disappointment. Hacker News has more of the stories that should be on Slashdot.

Dynamic scoring (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41008869)

If your scoring system doesn't show Our Dear Leader as the best, change the scoring until it does, because obviously Our Dear Leader is the best.

Bieber Endorsements (1)

cgfsd (1238866) | about a year and a half ago | (#41009419)

It will be a sad day when politicians pander Bieber for a political endorsement. It will be even a sadder day Bieber endorsement makes a difference.

below Slashdot (1)

lophophore (4087) | about a year and a half ago | (#41009509)

who gives a shit about Klout except Klout?

This is plain an simple marketing, and it is below the former editorial standards of Slashdot.

Boo! Hiss!

Re:below Slashdot (1)

LeadSongDog (1120683) | about a year and a half ago | (#41010019)

This is plain an simple marketing, and it is below the former editorial standards of Slashdot.

Standards? There are standards? Where?

Klout...seriously? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41009617)

Klout is nothing more than a shitty measurement of an idiots' e-peen. As a rule I unfollow anyone on Twitter that sends out a Klout-based tweet.

Klouchbags!

klout score (0)

macbeth66 (204889) | about a year and a half ago | (#41014271)

The first thing we do around here, when we get a new resume, is to check the klout score. The closer it is to 0, the more likely we are to keep the darn thing. If this wanker spends the time needed to improve his internet influence, then he is can go waste someone else's time.

Will not live... (1)

AlienIntelligence (1184493) | about a year and a half ago | (#41018727)

I will not live in a country where the president has more moxy than a random mop-headed stage performer.

Oh wait, no... never mind.

-AI

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...