```json
{
    "title": "PageRank for Social Media is a Broken Metaphor",
    "url": "https://performancezen.com/2008/10/01/pagerank-for-social-media-is-a-broken-metaphor/",
    "datePublished": "2008-10-01",
    "dateModified": "2022-04-29",
    "language": "en-US",
    "description": "When I posted Advertising to the Community: Is PageRank a Good Model for Social Media? a couple of days ago, I was working in a vacuum. I was responding to…",
    "author": "spierzchala",
    "publisher": "Performance Zen"
}
```

# PageRank for Social Media is a Broken Metaphor

When I posted [Advertising to the Community: Is PageRank a Good Model for Social Media?](https://performancezen.com/2008/09/29/advertising-to-the-community-is-pagerank-a-good-model-for-social-media/) a couple of days ago, I was working in a vacuum. I was responding to some degree to the infamous *BusinessWeek article* [**NB:** Ancient link no longer active], and to the comments [Matt Rhodes](https://web.archive.org/web/20080927155435/https://blog.freshnetworks.com/2008/09/does-google-have-the-answer-to-measuring-roi-in-social-media/) made on the idea of PageRank being used to rate social media participation.

Turns out I am not alone in criticizing this simplistic approach rating the importance and relevance of conversations and community. Mark Earls comments on the power of super-users [[here](http://herd.typepad.com/herd_the_hidden_truth_abo/2008/10/influence-and-the-wrong-end-of-the-stick.html)], and how the focus on these *influencers* misses the entire point of community and conversation. [John Bell](https://web.archive.org/web/20080122034239/http://blog.ogilvypr.com/?page_id=114) of the [Digital Influence Mapping Project](http://johnbell.typepad.com/weblog/) and [Ogilvy](http://ogilvypr.com/)points out that the relationships in social media and online communities are inherently more complex than creating a value based on the number of interactions someone has with a community [[here](http://johnbell.typepad.com/weblog/2008/09/a-google-number.html)].

This conversation is becoming very interesting. There are a lot of very bright people who are considering many different approaches to ranking the importance of a conversation or a community based not only on **who** is participating, but how engaged people are.

If communities or conversations are run and directed by a select group of people, then they are called dictatorships or lectures. Breaking down, rather than erecting, barriers is why social media is such a powerful force.