Il n’y a pas de corrélation entre le partage social et les lecteurs d’un article

upworthy_attention_minutes_and_sharing_560Je fais rarement un simple copier coller d’un article sur ce blog. Je fais une entorse à cette règle à la vue de l’importance (toute relative, y a pas mort d’homme) de cette information : « WE’VE FOUND EFFECTIVELY NO CORRELATION BETWEEN SOCIAL SHARES AND PEOPLE ACTUALLY READING. »

Extrait :
If you work in media, or have a blog, or are the sort of person who pays any attention to things like how many tweets an article has, this statement probably comes as a surprise. There is an implied relationship between the number of people who choose to blast a link to a piece of content and the interestingness of that content. The media industry has fully digested the idea that likes and retweets are marks of merit and that the viral effect of social media is the ultimate affirmation of relevance, which is why every major news organization now has at least one social media editor. To suddenly say that a story is just as likely to have been read by a million people and tweeted by none of them, as it is to have been tweeted a million times and yet never read, seems impossible. And yet, that’s what Chartbeat has found.

Autrement dit : soit tu lis l’article, soit tu le partages. Rarement les 2 en même temps !

L’article complet sur The Verge