Network Effects and Viral Loops in LinkedIn and Medium
Recently, I published a couple of posts on both LinkedIn and Medium in parallel. The process was as follows:
- Post an identical text on LinkedIn and Medium within minutes of each other (with public viewing permission).
- Create a single Facebook post letting people know about both posts and containing links to the posts on the two platforms.
- Sit back and observe the number of views, likes, and comments and how they change over time.
Since both platforms have an analytics dashboard it was possible to compare the statistics from both systems and draw conclusions. Below, I include some observations regarding my most recent parallel post and discuss some conclusions. This investigation is certainly anecdotal, but I did see similar trends looking at an older parallel post.
The parallel post in question is "The Unintended Consequences and Negative Impact of New Machine Learning Applications", and the links to the posts on both platforms are here and here. Both posts were published on July 15 and were followed by a Facebook post on the same day that provided initial traffic.
Between July 15 and August 6 (date of writing this post) Medium reported 103 views, a single recommendation (equivalent to like), and no comments. The graph below shows daily views by date.
During the same period, LinkedIn reported 3517 views, 180 likes, and 21 comments. The graph below shows daily views by date, counting backwards from August 6th.
Here are a few observations.
- The LinkedIn post had many more views than the Medium post (about 30 times more). It also had many more likes and comments than the medium post (180 times more likes and an increase for comments from 0 to 21).
- The number of likes per view was much higher in the case of LinkedIn (a 5 times increase from 1% to 5%).
- Both graphs show two modes early on with the first larger mode following the publication date and the second smaller mode trailing by about 7 days afterwards.
- Medium's two modes have a strong monotonic decay after an initial big spike. For example, the highest number of views was achieved on the day of publication (50% of the total views!), followed by a much smaller view count on the next page, followed by an even smaller view count on the next day. LinkedIn's modes are more symmetric: the views increase gradually to a maximum value and then gradually decrease.
- The Medium post was pretty much dead after 9 days reaching 0 or 1 daily views, while the LinkedIn post was alive for three weeks with considerable views (the y axis is hard to read, but the days between -12d and -2d had about 10 daily views).
- The LinkedIn post shows a huge spike on the last day (Aug 6) to 780 views.
Why do we see these striking differences given that both posts were identical and both were directed the same initial traffic using the Facebook post? There are several reasons, but they all revolve around network effects and viral loops effects.
When a post is shared on either LinkedIn or Medium, it is shown in the news feeds of other users and in particular of other users who follow or connect to the author. In my case, I have close to 2000 followers and connections on LinkedIn, but only about 22 followers on Medium. This network effect will cause my post to appear in news feeds belonging to many more users in LinkedIn than in Medium.
Furthermore, when a post is liked or re-shared (or commented on), an update is created to describe this activity of the form: "your connection X liked this post". This viral update appears in news feeds of other users that are connected to the person creating the viral update and that may not be in the network of the original poster. Such viral updates can cause additional exposure beyond the author's network that will lead to additional likes or comments that will in turn lead to additional viral loop updates and more exposure. This cascade of viral updates may take time to fully develop, explaining the gradual increase in page views in LinkedIn until hitting the mode. The small network effect and lack of viral updates on Medium caused the page views there to have a shape of a spike followed by monotonic decay.
The sharp increase in page views on the last day in the LinkedIn graph is due to a highly connected and influential user (Jeff Weiner) mentioning the article in a status update. This is an extreme demonstration of how a single viral loop can bring a 3 weeks old post back to life, generating 700+ daily views - more than 7 times Medium's overall number of page views.
Since LinkedIn has a much bigger and denser network, its network effect and viral loops are much more efficient than Medium's. It is not a surprising or new observation, and in fact it is at the heart of Medium's new strategy to focus more on building a social network rather than continue to be a classical blogging platform. Medium's CEO noted in May 2015 that "We’ve shifted more of our attention on the product side from creating tool value to creating network value" and "It's all about the network". Indeed, Without good network effects and viral loops Medium is going to have a hard time competing.
By the way, this post is also a parallel post that I am posting on both LinkedIn and Medium (you are reading one of these versions - you probably know which one). I will monitor the analytics for this post on both platforms and post as a comment what happened to both the "unintended consequences" blog post and this post after its publication.
Founder & CEO at the Creating Dental Excellence Group
8 年Guy, you have hit the nail on the head with this observation. I have written over 161 posts (mainly blogs, essays or articles) on LinkedIn Pulse in the last 6 months and post a blog almost every day. About three months back I also started posting the same blogs on Medium a few minutes after I had first posted on LinkedIN. I would then provide a "heads up" to my larger FB Page (33k+) and Twitter (70k+) followings via one post featuring both Medium and LinkedIN URLs. I had 55 odd followers on Medium itself to start with compared to the 5,000 at the time on LinkedIN. This was also a period when many of my posts were frequently being featured on one or multiple LinkedIn Pulse sections including a couple that made the Editor's Picks, so were doing relatively well on LinkedIN. What was staggering for me to see was the graveyard that Medium ended up becoming where the posts would go completely dead with near zero views even over a longer period of time. It seemed that other than my own LinkedIN followers or Pulse-featured-post viewers, my FB-Page and Twitter followers were coming to read the posts on LinkedIN but not on Medium. Further, I would frequently be approached by "brokers" on Medium who were small blog publishers themselves with slightly larger Medium channels (but still fewer followers than what I had on LinkedIN at the time), requesting to "repost" my more popular LinkedIN blogs on their Medium channels. It seemed like they would wait till they found a blog that did well on LinkedIN before they approached me with a request to repost in their channel. I declined them all. Eventually Medium proved to be a graveyard which is perhaps the most optimum word I can chose to define it based on my experience. I very recently deleted my Medium account completely. I think for now Medium is a good platform for those bloggers that are already mini celebs and public figures, or have well established public popularity. With time, I am sure Medium will also evolve its "network" component of the equation but for now, it has got a long way to go.
ML Engineer/Data Scientist
8 年I once had someone who worked at Twitter retweet at tweet of mine -- it was pretty awesome. I've never had another tweet retweeted more than a few times. The point is that when you work at one of these companies the experience is totally different than it is for a typical user, and we need to remind ourselves of that daily.
Director of Engineering, Databricks ML Platform - I'm hiring!
8 年It would be interesting to compare the viral effects for people who have similar effects across both. It's possible that on a "per-connection" level one or the other has a higher viral coefficient.
Building Oolka
8 年Agree with the viral effects of a network. We do the same experiment with each blog of ours and measure the same metrics as you did. And of course, as others have also mentioned, the TG on Linkedin and Medium are different. However, here are my views about it. LinkedIn is a great place to discover people and get visibility. However I don't give number of views much importance and I believe so are others not giving it. If it were so, Pulse would be a great way to generate leads. (It has the potential because of the network effect! OR maybe someone is already exploiting it.) On the other hand, the count of views and count of reads are different metrics on medium. The count of reads is more valuable than number of views on any given day. Ways of engaging: One can only gauge engagement on Linkedin through comments on your blog. However, Medium has two ways: one of which is comments and other is highlighting. Though not everyone might have something to comment, but the engagement metric gets a good fillip when the user is empowered to do a lazy activity of just highlighting what is interesting. I believe medium has a long way to go, it's just the beginning. Let me know what are your views about it.
Co Founder/Director and Project Manager at CAP Engineering Ltd
9 年Thanks Guy.. I hadn't heard of Medium before this article, but I think that this statement on it's own shows how LinkedIn is a new force where blogging is concerned. I'm glad they've opened up the feature to members, not just influencers