• http://twitter.com/slueck slueck

    Gotta say, this is a pretty lame infographic.

  • http://twitter.com/MCorasanti Matt

    Lame? What’s lame about an infographic based on an undisclosed sample size that shows neutral tweets increased by not 4 but 5%?

  • Anonymous

    It’s not our infographic. I do take a close look at which third party ones we choose to spotlight, however — and qualify as makes sense.
    I actually thought the difference in what people were tweeting on Friday versus Monday was most interesting, not the sentiment analysis. That’s why I focused on that part of this.

    Matt, good point on the sample size not being disclosed. As this is from a Nielsen product (you know, the TV ratings people), I tended to think it wasn’t some tiny sample and that there was some good reason to believe the overall topics made sense.

    Here’s more about the BuzzMetrics service:
    http://www.nielsen-online.com/products_buzz.jsp?section=pro_buzz 

    My impression is that its looking across thousands if not hundreds of thousands of tweets or more to analyze this. But it’s a good point that they could explain it more.

    Another issue is that it’s not a true infographic but rather three charts they published at once. If they’d made them into a true infographic, perhaps they’ve have explained it all more.