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

Written by Evan Schuman
May 18th, 2011

Finding and analyzing the collective thoughts in all the conversations happening in social media today has been a retail goal for several years now. Not coincidentally, that’s exactly how long retail has failed in doing anything meaningful with that data. This week, though, an ISV and Microsoft’s Bing search engine are at least making noises as though they are making a little progress.

Bing on Monday (May 16) said it is working with Facebook to use a small portion of those social site discussions—limited to the ones on Facebook and further limited to the people in the friends list of that Web searcher—to help provide more valuable results to consumers.

“The best decisions are not just fueled by facts, they require the opinions and emotions of your friends,” said Yusuf Mehdi, senior vice president at Bing. “Search is now more than a fact finder. We’re marrying fact-based search results with your friends’ street smarts to combine the best data on the Web with the opinions of the people you trust the most and the collective IQ of the Web.”

The idea of aggregating the shopping and other experiences of a closed community is a good one, with lots of potential to boost the meaningfulness of such results.

There’s also a downside with this aggregation approach, namely that most consumers trust different friends to very different degrees. A single datapoint crafted from the combined actions of 50 people you absolutely trust and 50 people you personally know are dumber than a rock is likely to be no more valuable than the non-socially-aided original Bing results.

Then again, that’s a mathematically correct conclusion. Will a socially fueled engine strike most consumers as more valuable, even if it isn’t? And if it does strike them that way, will it make them more comfortable with purchasing whatever the groupthink recommends? It’s long been said that the real enemy of sales is not a competitor’s offering as much as the customer opting to make no purchase at all, often because the customer is confused or uncertain. It certainly seems plausible that this social approach from Bing could help there.

Meanwhile, a Tuesday (May 17) introduction from a software firm that touts Walgreens, Safeway, David’s Bridal and as customers threatens to make even deeper inroads into social data-mining. That vendor, Attensity, said it can now search all social communications—both private, such as customers E-mailing or otherwise interacting with a retailer, and public, which is a customer posting on her Facebook page that she just received a big raise—and find new information “hidden within the unstructured text of customer conversations.”

This claim is simultaneously exciting and deeply disturbing. Let’s step back for a moment. For social data-mining, there are three relevant categories.


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.