Lists are the Best way to get Opinion Graph Data: Comparing Ranker to State & Squerb
I was recently forwarded an article about Squerb, which shares an opinion we have long agreed with. Specifically…
““Most sites rely on simple heuristics like thumbs-up, ‘like’ or 1-5 stars,” stated Squerb founder and CEO Chris Biscoe. He added that while those tools offer a quick overview of opinion, they don’t offer much in the way of meaningful data.
It reminds me a bit of State, another company building an opinion graph that connects more specific opinions to specific objects in the world. They too are built upon the idea that existing sources of big data opinions, e.g. mining tweets and facebook likes, have inherent limitations. From this Wired UK article:
Doesn’t Twitter already provide a pretty good ‘opinion network’? Alex thinks not. “The opinions out there in the world today represent a very thin slice. Most people are not motivated to express their opinion and the opinions out there for the most part are very chaotic and siloed. 98 percent of people never get heard,” he told Wired.co.uk.
I think more and more people who try to parse Facebook and Twitter data for deeper Netflix AltGenre-like opinions will realize the limitations of such data, and attempt to collect better opinion data. In the end, I think collecting better opinion data will inevitably involve the list format that Ranker specializes in. Lists have a few important advantages over the methods that Squerb and State are using, which include slick interfaces for tagging semantic objects with adjectives. The advantages of lists include:
- Lists are popular and easily digestible. There is a reason why every article on Cracked is a list. Lists appeal to the masses, which is precisely the audience that Alex Asseily is trying to reach on State. To collect mass opinions, one needs a site that appeals to the masses, which is why Ranker has focused on growth as a consumer destination site, that currently collects millions of opinions.
- Lists provide the context of other items. It’s one thing to think that Army of Darkness is a good movie. But how does it compare to other Zombie Movies? Without context, it’s hard to compare people’s opinions as we all have different thresholds for different adjectives. The presence of other items lets people consider alternatives they may not have considered in a vacuum and allows better interpretation of non-response.
- Lists provide limits to what is being considered. For example, consider the question of whether Tom Cruise is a good actor? Is he one of the Best Actors of All-time? one of the Best Action Stars? One of the Best Actors Working Today? Ranker data shows that people’s answers usually depend on the context (e.g. Tom Cruise gets a lot of downvotes as one of the best actors of all-time, but is indeed considered one of the best action stars.)
- Lists are useful, especially in a mobile friendly world.
In short, collecting opinions using lists produces both more data and better data. I welcome companies that seek to collect semantic opinion data as the opportunity is large and there are network effects such that each of our datasets is more valuable when other datasets with different biases are available for mashups. As others realize the importance of opinion graphs, we likely will see more companies in this space and my guess is that many of these companies will evolve along the path that Ranker has taken, toward the list format.
- Ravi Iyer