My Photo

Measuring the Networked Nonprofit

How to introduce me

  • For those who bear the burden of introducing me at a conference...
    Katie Delahaye Paine (twitter: KDPaine) is the CEO and founder of KDPaine & Partners LLC and author of, Measuring Public Relationships, the data-driven communicators guide to measuring success. She also writes the first blog and the first newsletters dedicated entirely to measurement and accountability. In the last two decades, she and her firm have listened to millions of conversations, analyzed thousands of articles, and asked hundreds of question in order to help her clients better understand their relationships with their constituencies. People talk, we listen..

Become a Fan

« We actually did it first, but its still a nice service | Main | What we learned in Atlanta »

November 15, 2007

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451658a69e200e54f9752c68834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference A new wrinkle on the old AVE debate:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

KD Paine

The old ad equivalency only looked at the length of the article and the cost of buying equivalent space. It never looked at what messages were communicated and compared the cost of actually getting the messages into the media

ed

Thanks for posting and providing insight on this comment, Katie.

I think you are dead on with your analysis (and plan to blog on it). Boardrooms would never accept faulty or misleading data on any other financial/business area of their company. So, why in the world would these faulty numbers past mustard?

A very sad commentary on the worst type of measurement in our industry.

Geoff Livingston

Thanks, Mike. Seems pretty subjective, and I think throwing out negative stories actually works against reality, as does throwing out stories that don't have key messages.

Negative stories should count against, not be thrown out. Non key message stories may contribute to a positive or negative brand perception... Plus determining positive and negative is highly subjective... It's like trying to hold water in your hands without a bowl.

Mike Keliher

I think for starters, Geoff, AVE generally compares ad space to editorial space on a basis of ad cost. "Cost per opportunity" gets a little closer to the point of measuring messages communicated. Quantity (space) vs. quality (messages). It's not perfect, but it's one step closer toward the goal of truly relevant measurement.

Geoff Livingston

"If you must compare advertising and PR, look at the cost per message communicated." This sounds like ad equivalency to me as does the Cost per Opportunity measurement outlined here. Seems like a semantic issue. Can you explain how these are different?

Geoff Livingston

"If you must compare advertising and PR, look at the cost per message communicated." This sounds like ad equivalency to me as does the Cost per Opportunity measurement outlined here. Seems like a semantic issue. Can you explain how these are different?

The comments to this entry are closed.

Measure What Matters

  • “A tremendously good book… it’s a treasure... An absolute doozy of a read.”
    -- reviewer Bob LaDrew, FIR

    Katie Delahaye Paine's great little book Measure What Matters shows organizations of all sizes how to evaluate and improve their public relations and social media efforts. Order Measure What Matters now.

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    Tip Jar

    Change is good

    Tip Jar