I’ve seen a lot of brand monitoring solutions that claim to do a lot of things. Many vendors say they can predict future events based on chatter levels. Most often, the backup happens in hindsight, which you and I both know is 20/20.
But this brand monitoring vendor Collective Intellect is doing something different – they are publicly releasing projections of US Presidential primary outcomes, based on analysis using their technology. Why does this matter? Because the outcome is publicly available so you’ll know whether they were right or wrong.
So how did they do on Super Tuesday?
- California. Prediction: Obama. Outcome: Clinton. Result: Incorrect.
- Colorado. Clinton (close). Obama. Incorrect.
- Georgia. Obama. Obama. Correct.
- Massachusetts. Obama (close). Clinton. Incorrect. [Oddly enough, I haven’t seen much Clinton support around Wellesley, the town that shares a name with Hillary’s alma mater.]
- Missouri. Obama (close). Obama. Correct. Very close race.
- California. McCain (landslide). McCain. Correct.
- Colorado. Romney (landslide). Romney. Correct.
- Georgia. McCain (landslide). Huckabee. Incorrect.
- Massachusetts. McCain (landslide). Romney. Incorrect. I guess we still like Mitt here.
- Missouri. McCain. McCain. Correct.
Overall, the predictions went 5/10 (results based on CNN projections). Could have been better, but marketer decisions typically aren’t as black & white as this and more directional. Credit for putting your neck out there, Collective Intellect.
Contrast this with brand monitoring predictions around the Super Bowl. All hindsight. Will anyone else prove their system publicly? Next American Idol winner? New hit TV shows? The next President? Or does this show that these systems aren’t ready for prime time?