Resharing Differences Between LinkedIn and Radar

I recently posted a long thought piece entitled “How I Failed” on LinkedIn, and then a few days later, republished it here on my own Radar blog. (I published it on LinkedIn first because I wanted to reach the more business-oriented audience on LinkedIn, and not just the technical audience that we reach here with Radar.)

This morning, I decided to check on the resharing stats that are published at the top of  posts on both LinkedIn and here on Radar (a WordPress based blog).  I normally look at these stats to see the relative impact of Twitter, Facebook, Google+, and LinkedIn on the readership of my posts.  But this time, I realized I had another data point available – the differences in the use of these services by my Radar readers and my LinkedIn readers.

When I compared the stats this morning, a couple of things surprised me.

SocialSharing.001
As you can see, there was a lot more Twitter activity resulting from the Radar post than from the LinkedIn post, and as expected, a lot more LinkedIn resharing on LinkedIn itself. That wasn’t surprising (although I suspect the amount of engagement LinkedIn has achieved through its Influencer program is a surprise to many people.)

As is usually the case for my posts, I find that Twitter tops Facebook and Google+ for resharing, and that Google+ is a significant fraction of both Twitter and Facebook – showing far more engagement than many critics allow. That is interesting, but wasn’t surprising either.

But what did surprise me a bit is that the share count is identical for both Google+ and Facebook. They both seem to have detected that the two posts were the same, despite the different URLs. Twitter and LinkedIn did not.  I expected that of Google. I didn’t expect it of Facebook.

 

Get the O’Reilly Data Newsletter

Stay informed. Receive weekly insight from industry insiders.

Get the O’Reilly Web Ops and Performance Newsletter

Weekly insight from industry insiders. Plus exclusive content and offers.

Get the O’Reilly Programming Newsletter

Weekly insight from industry insiders. Plus exclusive content and offers.

Get the O’Reilly Hardware Newsletter

Get weekly insight and knowledge on how to design, prototype, manufacture, and market great connected devices.

Get Four Short Links in Your Inbox

Sign up to receive Nat’s eclectic collection of curated links every weekday.

Get the O’Reilly Design Newsletter

Stay informed. Receive weekly insight from industry insiders.

Get the O’Reilly Web Platform Newsletter

Stay informed. Receive weekly insight from industry insiders—plus exclusive content and offers.

  • baxley

    Data intelligence from Facebook surprises you? (Thanks for sharing, I love picking through user data.)

  • If Google and Facebook have this knowledge, wouldn’t it be great if they could also centralize the discussion in the comments?

  • View source on the post on oreilly.com shows the answer. Both Facebook and Google+ must be looking at rel=canonical to tie the two together.

    • Right. But notice that Twitter and LinkedIn are ignoring this attribute. I expected Google to pay attention. I thought FB would be like Twitter and LinkedIn. At any rate, good for them.