This is page 2 of:

Bing And Facebook Start Down A Very Frightening Social Media Analytics Path

May 18th, 2011

For social data-mining, there are three relevant categories. One: All Aggregate. This approach, which is similar to the one Wal-Mart paid some $300 million for when it bought Kosmix last week, offers various reviews about how well Kosmix can handle massive social media data-crunching accuracy. It is the safest approach for avoiding privacy backlash, and it also gives good overall emotional reactions to products. Think of it as the world’s largest focus group, with all the pluses and minuses of that research magnified by several orders of magnitude.

Two: Automatic Opt-In. This includes communications that customers and prospects engage in with your brand willingly and deliberately, such as direct E-mails, text messages, help-desk calls, tracked Web site usage, etc. A little bit of privacy pushback, but most consumers today assume this is already happening. (Ahhhh, they have far too much faith in retail corporate IT budget generosity.) It is a very accurate technique, but it’s not really social data-crunching.

Three: USELT, which stands for Unlimited Scope, Extremely Limited Target. This is the nuclear-powered privacy powder-keg. It’s also the ultimate in CRM. This approach is where spiders search everywhere in social media, reading every blog post and comment, Facebook notation, Twitter tweet, LinkedIn update, iTunes song selection and YouTube video diary entry. And those spiders are on a mission to find entries relating to specific existing customers and specific customer prospects.

What if a chain wanted to limit its coupons to customers who wouldn’t otherwise make a purchase? What if it searched for customers who had just been laid-off, so they could be sent the coupons? Even worse, what if it sought customers who had just gotten raises or big bonuses to make sure that those customers did not get a coupon?

The idea of trying to detect a consumer’s mood for pricing strategy is not new, but this type of social network data-mining could make it practical in a way that it never really was. A spokesperson for Attensity said the software absolutely can jump into the sensitive USELT arena. Should retailers go there? That’s a much more complex question than it seems.

Ultimately—say, in about eight years—this won’t be much of an issue. Consumers will accept it. If they want to remain anonymous, there are ways today to do so and there will be far more such options in the coming years. But near-term, that’s very different. The information would be fabulous, and it could address improving margins beyond just improving revenue. If customers in 2011 even think that their favorite chain is doing this to them, the damage could be irreversible.


Comments are closed.


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.