Funmurphys: the Blog

The Triumph of Hope over Experience

Posts Tagged sock puppet

On The Other Hand, A Sock

Oct 23

Posted by Kevin Murphy in Economics | No Comments

This could be an interesting article, if it were written in english, and not academicese:

There is growing evidence that consumers are influenced by Internet-based opinion forums before making a variety of purchase decisions. Firms whose products are being discussed in such forums are therefore tempted to manipulate consumer perceptions by posting costly anonymous messages that praise their products. This paper offers a theoretical analysis of the impact of such behavior on firm profits and consumer surplus. There are three main results. First, if every firm’s manipulation strategy is a monotonically increasing (decreasing) function of that firm’s true quality, strategic manipulation of online forums increases (decreases) the information value of a forum to consumers. This result implies the existence of settings where online forum manipulation benefits consumers. Second, equilibria where strategies are monotonically increasing (decreasing) functions of a firm’s true quality exist in settings where the firm’s net payoff function, inclusive of the cost of manipulation, is supermodular (submodular) in the firm’s quality and manipulation action. Third, in a broad class of settings, if the precision of honest consumer opinions that firms manipulate is sufficiently high, firms of all types, as well as society, would be strictly better off if manipulation of online forums was not possible. Nonetheless, firms are locked into a “rat race” and forced to spend resources on such profit-reducing activities; if they don’t, consumer perceptions will be biased against them. The social cost of online manipulation can be reduced by developing “filtering” technologies that make it costlier for firms to manipulate. Interestingly, as the amount of user-contributed online content increases, it is firms, and not consumers, that have most to gain from the development of such technologies.

Did you catch that? Yea, me neither. Other than that part about companies using sock puppets to better their reputations. I just have to ask the Dr. Phil question of other people who have used sock puppets — how’s that working out for you? I wonder if the model took into consideration the effect on consumer opinion when the sock is publicly removed from the company’s hand.

I also catch more than a wiff of the two handed economist here – on the one hand, company sock puppets could decrease the information value of a forum to consumers, and the other hand, they could benefit consumers. OK Einstein, just what are the “settings” that benefit consumers.

I think companies would be better off the old fashioned way, that is, (1) focus on doing a good job over the entire lifecycle of their product/service, and (2) use clearly identified spokespeople in forums who are (a) honest and (b) engaging. Sock puppets are for losers.

Tags:

Glenn Greenwald, Sock Puppet?

Jul 25

Posted by Kevin Murphy in Inside Blogging | No Comments

I feel special, since the latest two blog two blog kerfuffles involved two people who have commented here, Deb Frisch and Glenn Greenwald. Given how few people comment here, I’m just pleased as punch that a couple of titans of the left side of the blogosphere commented here. Or it could be that those two just leave a lot of comments – one used to stalk Professor Bainbridge whom I linked to, and the other seems to keep an eagle eye on links to his site or mentions of his name and responded to those from my site.

While Ms. Frisch made comments that clearly crossed the line of acceptability, Mr. Greenwald is accused of sock puppetry, which I don’t think is all that big a deal – just kind of sad, really. While some bloggers are absolutely convinced, I’m not so sure, for a couple of reasons.

While the IP address Mr. Greenwald used here was from Brazil, it isn’t the same as the one I’ve seen at Ace of Spades. So does that mean the Real Mr. Greenwald didn’t comment here? Or could it be that Kevin Aylward is correct, and anybody commenting from Brazil runs the risk of being though of as a Greenwald sockpuppet? If IP addresses really were like fingerprints, how easy would my job of eliminating comment and trackback spam be!

The other reason is that this seems out of character for Mr. Greenwald who seems to have no trouble speaking his mind under his own name. I could well be wrong, but it does sound more like friends arguing from authority than Mr. Greenwald himself.

I don’t agree with many of Glenn Greenwald’s views on politics, but when he did comment here we were in agreement on the idea of federalism, and he expressed himself clearly and civilly. What blogs need is more of that, and less ad hominem, which is really what the sock puppet charge amounts to — an attempt to make Mr. Greenwald lose all the arguments because he’s a pathetic loser sock puppeter.

Tags: , , ,

Sockpuppets Of The World, Unite!

Apr 21

Posted by Kevin Murphy in Inside Blogging | No Comments

Today’s subject is all about blogging. It started when I read Daniel Henninger’s column in the Wall Street Journal: Disinhibition Nation. The short version is simply Sturgeon’s Law: 90% of everything is crap. And O’Toole’s commentary applies to Sturgeon as much as Murphy: Sturgeon was an optimist. But Mr. Henninger is right in my experience: people are far less inhibited on the internet than real life (or what they should be. Please, don’t let it all hang out).

And now we turn to sockpuppets. Michael Hiltzik was caught employing sockpuppets by Patrick Frey, AKA Patterico, and had his LA Times blog suspended while the paper investigates. Of course, he’s not the only person caught with his hands in a couple of socks: John Lott (AKA Mary Radosh) comes to mind. The lure of disinhibition is hard to resist for people who must maintain a certain decorum because we (that’s an internet we, not a royal we) know who they are when what they’d really like is the freedom to let loose with their real feelings. What stands out about Mr. Hiltzick is his utter lack of class or shame when caught. Of course, Patterico is all over that sorry excuse of reasoning and ties it into the larger trend we see in the media – they lie every day and have no shame about it either.

So have I ever used a sockpuppet? No, I’ve always posted under my own name in blogs and on forums. Sometimes I’ve come late to a conversation and discovered another Kevin Murphy there, in which case I called my self Kevin “the other” Murphy. Isn’t the true test of character what you do when you think nobody is looking? Sure it would be nice to anonymously blast people and say everything I think, but then isn’t that a test on what and how you should say things? So I aways try to talk and write as if my name were attached, and the easiest way to do that is to actually attach my name. I understand that for certain people in certain situations that isn’t possible, but I’m not in that kind of situation.

And yes, I think I have had a couple of commenters here use sock puppets based on IP addresses and quality of the remarks. I understand that IP address isn’t enough alone because if you dial up into a large provider like AOL you get whatever IP address they have available. Will I out you? Hey this is my place, so if I think I should I will. Generally, I don’t care.

Back to John Lott for a minute. His sock puppetry was exposed by an aussie named Tim Lambert who is obsessed with sockpuppetry, seeing them on the hand of anyone who disagrees with him. He may even have a couple of socks on his own hands.

I can actually see a valid reason for sockpuppets – if you want your ideas considered for themselves and not dissmiss or accepted because you are well known to the community. But in this case, I think when the dust settles it would be best to reveal your deception. Otherwise, it’s just lying by another name, because you are trying to deceive people.  Unlike simply saying something inaccurate, the point of lying is deception.

Just remember, be careful out there.

Tags: , ,