Adding the Life to Klout

One of the most common criticisms about Klout is that they do not incorporate one's real life influence into one's score; Klout is currently only a measure of one's social media influence. Due to this, some extremely influential people who are not very active on social media have a very low Klout score. While some of these people are so influential and known that they do not care, others find it insulting and are therefore dismissive of the new platform. While Klout is an awesome, innovative idea - creating social influence scores for individuals and not just press organizations and/or companies - they could easily generate both metrics.

Take Sergey Brin for example. Klout shows that he only has a 47 Klout while I currently have a score of 65. One of the additional reasons for this is that +Sergey Brin not only probably didn't create this Klout page (since Klout now automatically generates Klout pages for every Twitter profile), but because it is only linked to his Twitter profile (though I just noticed this link is broken and that he doesn't even have a verified Twitter account). For the most accurate Klout metrics and the highest score one must link up all their social media accounts.

Klout should have three separate scores - social, life and an aggregate of them both. To accomplish this Klout could extract one's education and work experience from LinkedIn, determine the Klout score of the company/university, multiplied by two variables - position and time. For example, continuing with Sergey Brin (though he doesn't have a LinkedIn profile either), we all know that he is one of the founders of Google, Google has a Klout score of 97. Therefore, 97 would be multiplied by one of the highest variables due to his founding position, multiplied by 16 years, To tally his educational life influence score, one would include his education at University of Maryland, which Klout indicates has an 89 Klout score times four years and some points for his bachelors degree in science, plus his brief graduate study at Stanford in computer science. Stanford has a Klout score of 96, times the few months there. All of this would then come up with some tally in between 97-89 for his life experience. This would at least be a start to problem solving the lack of life clout in Klout's metrics.

Slant by Kurtis Alexander and the SFGate

The more I re-read this piece - "Sarah Slocum: the infamous face of Google Glass" - by +Kurtis Alexander in the +SFGate, the more I find the tone snide and the content misleading and slanted. How about I "pick it apart." The first paragraphs are always the most important because people who skim stories will seldom read more than that. One positive thing that came out of speaking with Kurtis and this article was having a nice photo-shoot with the talented Lea Suzuki.

Picture by Lea Suzuki, +SFGate 

- "A month has passed since the social media consultant became a social media phenomenon. She did so by saying she was harassed and attacked.." This indirectly insinuates that this was some personal PR campaign, and further suggests that I was not assaulted and robbed but merely "said" that I was. To clarify, I never went to the press, one of my Facebook friends who was outraged about the assault, originally contacted +gabriel slate and +Kurtis Alexander. Additionally, I understand that the cops have not arrested anyone yet, but the word "said" casts doubt on the whole incident.

- "she had been carrying out a mission to promote the boundary-pushing product." I was just going out on a Friday evening in San Francisco, Silicon Valley, where I have always lived, where tech and innovation were born, and where I have never expected to or experienced any hatred for being a techy or for wearing +Google Glass. I wasn't on any "mission," covert, religious or company sponsored.

- "This week, new video spread of the bar feud - footage that Slocum filmed using Glass and posted to her +YouTube channel over the weekend. It shows her cursing at the people who she said had accosted her." It shows me cursing back at people who had initially flipped me off and shouted "F*** Google" at me (though this part wasn't caught on film), called me a B**ch, told me to get out of an establishment that I had the perfect right to be in, having had people invade my personal space, and a man trying to rip them off my face and assault me, and after having dirty bar rags thrown at me, yes I cursed at them at this point. Then I was told that I, little and only me, was "killing the city." It shows a parlay of insults after this point, not just me cursing at them. And again, in saying "people who she said had accosted her," is a total misrepresentation and inaccuracy. You can clearly see and hear in the first video the former off duty bartender verbally insulting me and calling me the B word, telling me to get out and see the guy trying to rip them off my face and me trying to block him. In the second video, you can clearly hear insults being directed at me by the former off duty bartender, and not just me "cursing at the people who she said had accosted her."

These three quotes in the first four paragraphs are slanted, misleading and snarky.

Nice letter from +Google Glass 

- "Slocum, 34, has become the outspoken face of Google's face computer, for better or for worse." "For better or for worse," For worse according to whom? Google has made no such public remark and sent me a very nice letter on March 12th stating "Its been awesome to hear about your enthusiasm for being involved and we look forward to seeing you in the Explorers Community. Don't hesitate to get in touch if you have any questions or need any help!"

- "[Sarah Slocum] is reveling in the role of unofficial ambassador of Glass" - I would have been "reveling" if I would have been being paid for all my time dealing with this whole media blitz following the incident.

- "...she was quick to parlay the skirmish into appearances on +CNN and "+Inside Edition" - fielding questions while wearing Glass, of course." First of all, I am the victim of the crime, then it is my fault because the press (whom I never contacted in the beginning) wants to speak with me about it? First, I get criticized by them for not accepting their interviews and then I get criticized for doing so.

-"She won Facebook and Twitter followings with comments glorifying the product and suggesting critics of the technology are Luddites." I already had just shy of 4k followers on Facebook before this incident and around 600 on Twitter, and that has barely changed. I have hardly gained any serious following, following this incident. Additionally, has +Kurtis Alexander ever even seen +Google Glass or used it? And if not where is he coming from to say that the new technology is unjustifiable or undeserved of praise?

- "Her advocacy, though, hasn't worked out as planned." Nothing was planned. I was a victim of a crime while going out on a Friday night.

- "Slocum's account of the bar dispute was picked apart." Picked at sure, not picked apart. Nothing has changed about my story, though many media outlets have published inaccuracies without speaking to me first. See my full account and the full unedited videos, transcription and testimony of what really happened on my Blogspot.

If nothing else, at least this incident has given some gender equity to the old joke "So a man walks into a bar..." Lol. Horay!