Comments on: Researcher Claims “Attention Spirals” Hold Key To Predicting Success Of YouTube Videos

By: 3 day diet

3 day diet — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 11:06:49 +0000

Attention spiral downward spiral of civilization as we know it.

By: creativetampabay.com &#124 12.01.08 &#124 Archive

creativetampabay.com &#124 12.01.08 &#124 Archive — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 18:15:37 +0000

[...] By Serkan Toto, Techcrunch.com, Nov. 18, 2008 Why do certain videos on YouTube become mass phenomena while the vast majority of videos just get a handful of views, if any? Riley Crane, an American post doctoral fellow currently researching at the Chair of Entrepreneurial Risks at ETH university in Zurich/Switzerland, says he has the answer: According to him, the success of online videos can be explained with physics. Read more>> [...]

By: Spirals - awalsh

Spirals - awalsh — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 11:09:07 +0000

[...] traditional Hmong needlework called paj ntaub. Hence, I’m traveling in spiral back to . Researcher Claims “Attention Spirals” Hold Key To Predicting . Why do certain videos on YouTube become mass phenomena while the vast majority of videos just get a [...]

By: Social Media Blog » Blog Archive » When Will Marketers Stop Reinventing The Wheel?

Thu, 11 Dec 2008 19:30:09 +0000

[...] Monday. No one knows whether it will pick up steam, or fall flat. (One researcher does think he can predict video virality early, [...]

By: giorgos

giorgos — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 17:32:56 +0000

seferis-giorgos-gipsosanides.gr

By: Ginman

Ginman — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 14:11:29 +0000

@Governor: While your enthusiasm is great, your website does not really capture much about the research.

By: Governor

Governor — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 10:17:49 +0000

Check out my website where you can calculate how many videos your YouTube videos will get. It’s based on this research.

By: Mark Rotblat

Mark Rotblat — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 17:49:33 +0000

Great article, Serkan, thanks for the write-up. I’m on the TubeMogul team and love this stuff. KennyCrane beat me to noting our own research on the topic of video views over time.

It’s worth noting that we now have technology to measure second-by-second audience behavior, so we see drop off rates, rewinds, how people arrived at the video, and more. Perhaps we should be in touch with Riley to see if there are interesting studies to conduct.

By: Researcher Claims 「Attention Spirals」 Hold Key To Predicting Success Of YouTube Videos at PRADA

Thu, 20 Nov 2008 05:14:30 +0000

[...] TechCrunch [...]

By: NadaMasFan

NadaMasFan — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 00:17:23 +0000

Nice write up, Riley.

http://www.yout...h?v=dF7cbKMJ-rg

By: KennyCrane

KennyCrane — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 18:22:43 +0000

I’ve been collecting data on daily views of YouTube videos as well as weekly subscriber data for over 2 years now. I do see plot curves like Mr. Crane describes. I think that certain Types of videos by certain Channels can be predicted to fall into one of the four catagories, rather than just looking at any video picked at random. Analysing data can help spot which kinds of videos might be popular and which videomakers might become future YouTubeStars! Another company that tracks video views is TubeMogul and they have some good papers on their Research page related to view curves over time and what makes a video popular. http://www.tube...earch/index.php

By: Tony Cliffton

Tony Cliffton — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:53:18 +0000

Funny how anything people can’t comprehend easily, e.g. mathematics, is considered to be ‘useless’. US ignorance will take down the US.

By: Rob

Rob — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 15:17:59 +0000

Here a Dutch entrepreneur predicts the US election outcome based on the YouTube sites of Barack Obama and John McCain: http://www.chan...&id=2762357. He uses the keywords on the pages, type of video’s and music of the video’s.

By: Daniel Eder

Daniel Eder — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 14:12:04 +0000

whether his findings are true or not is not important.
The idea of trying to find a pattern in viral videos is in itself genius

By: R. Crane

R. Crane — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 08:46:07 +0000

You can get PDFs of the article from my homepage so that you do not have to pay. Thanks for all the comments, both positive and negative. Send me an email if you’d like to know more.

By: Serkan Toto

Serkan Toto — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 07:25:35 +0000

Even though “practical data” is needed to be able to make statements (which means videos have to gain some traction first), he says his model can help marketers decide whether to throw marketing resources at a certain video/book/etc. at an early stage, for example to reach the tipping point.

Like Daiver says above, if the model works, companies can be ready when a certain video goes viral, for example by preparing a follow-up video in time.

By: Charles

Charles — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 07:24:12 +0000

I agree with Jon, there isn’t much that is useful here.

It’s like studying the falling of raindrops, and finding that once in a (long) while a raindrop will produce a certain waveform when it strikes the surface. Well, whoop-de-doo.

What is important is to be able to predict before a particular raindrop falls, what kind of waveform it will produce. File his research under “U” for Useless.

By: johnny

johnny — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 07:18:53 +0000

where did he get the data from?
interesting well done.

By: Pud

Pud — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 05:57:44 +0000

Those scientists and their so-called “science” — the reason this video of mine got almost 3 million pageviews is because it just rocks.

http://www.yout...h?v=MJJHk4hSFB4

By: Yasser

Yasser — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 04:51:03 +0000

Informative. Great research.

Oh btw.
Check out http://www.jobstaxi.com
New Jobs. Razorfish. Art.com. Edge of Reality.

By: Marc Ostrick

Marc Ostrick — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 23:29:54 +0000

Great post. Fascinating how physics are applied to the age-old questions: “What makes a video popular.” It makes sense, but I’m sure there are some anomalies in there. Thanks for the post!

By: Marc Vermut

Marc Vermut — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 23:17:53 +0000

@Daiver That’s the point. There is no benchmark formula for creating a viral video. You get lucky with a confluence of internal and external factors and it clicks with a mass audience. The key here is a tool that helps the author, distributor, etc. capitalize on that effect and more quickly mobilize to maximize monetization. Looking forward to reading more in depth.

By: MLS

MLS — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 22:53:31 +0000

@Jon: It’s a theory, not a hypothesis. It’s called statistics, and 5 million videos over 8 months is evidently enough to be statistically significant. Do you know what PNAS is? It’s the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science. You can’t get a “hypothesis” published in it.
Don’t understand what statistically significant means? Let’s say I want to know how many people in LA are men and how many are women. Let’s say I pick a random group of 10,000 people and I find that 5500 (55%) are women. Do I need to poll everyone else? No, 55% of the whole will be women too, +/- a few percent. This has a rigorous scientific definition if you’re still skeptical.
He based his study on past data, and like any theory based on social phenomena, doesn’t hold true EVERY time. Nobody claimed it did. Relating something to physics doesn’t make it physics, but it sure works better than having no theory at all.
I’m glad I don’t work for you– I would have been fired a long time ago for being smart.

By: Daiver Pedemonte

Daiver Pedemonte — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 22:27:54 +0000

I’d think that it is a lot more useful to predict the success of the video by being able to compare characteristics before they’re launched. You can only asses its potential once it has hit the web.

If I understood correctly and this is what the article says, how does it help prevent flops? What good does that kind of prediction offer if you have to invest in creating the video and/or product? You basically need to have everything ready in case it goes viral.

By: Jon

Jon — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 22:20:30 +0000

“After researching the usage of about 5 million YouTube videos over 8 months”

I think somebody is looking for an excuse NOT to work if you ask me, any other employer would have fired him long ago. I don’t see any science here, just “claims” and “hopes”. I ain’t buying any of it. It’s equivalent to somebody finding the physics behind lottery winning and developing a model to support their idea.

How do I know this is true? Well, where are the tests proving his theory using actual videos that he tracked before they became a “viral hit”? In other words, if this theory holds water, he can predict with relative accuracy what will and not become “viral”, which he has failed to do. This is a hypothesis, not a theory.

Jon
http://WoodMarvels.com – Create Unique Memories