dreamwidth_meta | Google Analytics

foxfirefey posting in

LiveJournal has never allowed any real web analytics to be added to personal journals, although sponsored communities were able to get them. Sure, you could add stat counters or web bugs from LJ Toys. But I'm unaware of any way on LiveJournal to get the referral URL of people who were linking to your post, save for the recently implemented and entirely optional pingbacks.

Dreamwidth, however, is going to give paid users Google Analytics as a feature. This means that paid users will be able to know who in DW is linking to them, leading to some interesting changes from the way things used to be. I think this has the potential to surprise and upset people.

For instance, let's say you link to someone's post in a friends only post in your journal or use <user name="user"> to link to their journal in a locked post. Some of your access given subscribers click on that link, and if the user you linked to is paid and using Google Analytics, they'll know you were talking about them in a post they don't have access to, and if you linked to a specific post, they'll know which post you're talking about. Stealth talking about people has become that much harder and unreliable.

There's a limited ability to avoid this. URLs are automatically turned into links; you can do formatting to make it unlinked, so people have to copy and paste, but some people have browser extensions that will autolink anything that looks close to a URL, so you can't always depend on that. You'll have to go above and beyond to obfuscate the link to make sure that doesn't happen and not use user tags to link to someone--but if you don't do that, someone is bound to make a Greasemonkey script that could go to a highlighted name, and they'll still get the referral. Edit:

charmian and

kaki point out that URL obfuscators might get used more, like TinyURL and anonym.to. I agree with this! However, there are even browse add ons that resolve those services to their actual URLs, so even that is not a failsafe.

What effects do you think this is going to have on social interactions on Dreamwidth? What other effects will Google Analytics have on users?

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From:

blackbird_song

Hmm... Just my opinion, but seems like this could set up kind of a nasty atmosphere, actually. Part of what's necessary in a community is the ability to vent safely about other people. It's infinitely healthier to do that than it is to either let things fester or to commit various acts of vengeance. It's also true that, in general, people become more able to cope with this idea as they get older and more secure in themselves. I rather hate the idea of someone discovering they've been talked about in a locked post and thinking the worst, possibly ruining friendships before discovering that the post in question was about planning a lovely surprise for them.

I'd be interested in knowing if, in all honesty, there is anyone who absolutely wouldn't experience any anxiety at all if they discovered they'd been discussed, and had no access to that discussion or ability to speak up for themselves. Hasn't that sort of thing been at the root of uncounted thousands of dramas and rifts through the millennia? Personally, I've never been any sort of fan of Big Brother, but Little Brother can be even worse, especially when fueled by tech produced by a conglomerate that basically wants to enable everyone to peer into each other's pores without permission.

I hope that Dreamwidth rethinks this, or at least gives everyone the ability to block GA's usefulness in finding their journals and posts. Making any part of a friends-locked post public against the will of the OP, even as indirectly as this, poses a serious ethical issue for me.

Catherine

From:

foxfirefey

No part of the friends locked post becomes public; only its existence is revealed. All the person who puts GA on their journal gets is:

* The URL that is linking to them.
* The page that is linked.

Note that anybody could have this ability if they were hosting content outside of LJ that gets linked. I know when my wikis get linked to, even when posts are friended/locked.

I don't really know if there is any good way to keep this from happening, as it's not Google Analytics on the friends post, it's the Google Analytics on the journal being linked to, and it would be very difficult to selectively disable it just for links coming from locked posts. Individuals can block Google Analytics pretty easily, but they can't rely on others having done so.

From:

spiralsheep

No part of the friends locked post becomes public; only its existence is revealed.

I disagree. Content is revealed even though it's only that the post contains a link. However, as you then go on to point out, this is already possible in some circumstances so the solution isn't to pretend it doesn't exist but, quite the opposite, give it as much publicity as possible (and adding it to dw as a feature would expedite that).

I'm biased though.

pingback_bot is my new boyfriend. ;-)

From:

foxfirefey

You're right--I was a bit shortsighted there. But, it won't necessarily mean that the link was in the post--it could be in the comments, as well.

Overall, though, I hope that the effects are good instead of bad. I love pingbacks, I love stats and graphs, I love seeing where I get linked to, and I generally don't get too overly concerned if people link to me in a post I can't see. I think this is going to give value to the silent lurkers to paid users, as well, as people realize their posts are read more than they thought.

From:

spiralsheep

it won't necessarily mean that the link was in the post--it could be in the comments

Interesting point.

From:

blackbird_song

I know that no overt part of the actual post becomes public. It's the revelation of its existence that gives me pause, and the fact that it reveals that a specific person was discussed, thereby revealing the tiniest bit of something contained in a locked post to someone who didn't have access to it. I've got loud scruples about that sort of thing.

I also do know about the issue of hosting content outside of LJ and linkage to it.

You're probably right about the feasibility (or lack thereof) of trying to selectively block Google Analytics in that way. I was afraid that was the case when I commented, even though I'm not a tech-head. This is one major reason I wish that Dreamwidth would rethink the whole idea.

All that said, though, if it only operates on links, then I'd assume that safe venting could still take place in a post that was text only, unless a more invasive version of it comes along. If this is true, and we're all aware of the presence and pitfalls of Google Analytics, maybe I shouldn't worry quite as much. I'm still not wild about it, though. Too much fodder for the rumor/whisper mill, if it gets used a lot 'intramurally', as it were.

Catherine

From:

foxfirefey

A more invasive version of it isn't coming and won't happen. This is only an artifact of link URL referrals and Google Analytics. Text only venting could take place just fine. And nonpaid users won't have Google Analytics, either, so the majority of people won't know when they're linked to, as I don't think the majority of people will pay. Of course, if people make links in the comments of your posts, then you might be back in the same boat, but.

In any case, I definitely wanted to start having this kind of discussion with people and get this out into the open before Google Analytics was enabled, so people won't be surprised or feel like they were submarined.

Overall, this is a good feature for a lot of our userbase. People making creative content love to know there is an audience watching, and giving paid accounts Google Analytics helps with that. It just has this one particular social caveat.

From:

blackbird_song

I'm glad to know that a more invasive version won't be happening.

I'm also grateful to you for starting this discussion. I think it is very important to know what we're in for. I also hope that DW will make it very clear to everyone signing up that paid users will have Google Analytics, and that links in locked posts could become visible to those who use the tool.

I'm on the fence about the benefits of Google Analytics, in my case. I do make creative content, and I love an audience, being a performer in RL, but I also block my inclusion in search engines at LJ, and take almost as many steps as possible to minimize the appearance of my fan-works to a wider audience. (I don't lock my stories.) I harbor no illusion that I'm invisible, but I'm not as visible as many, despite having a not-tiny flist and a fair bit of work out there. I suppose that Google Analytics may do more good than harm, but it does raise concerns both on the social front, and about how easy it might make it for makers of fan-fiction and fan-art to get targeted by deep-pocketed entities.

Again, though, I'm just worrying out loud. I'd rather do that and prove an idiot than keep it to myself and come to more serious grief. ;)

Catherine

From:

zorkian

Oh and I should point out that GA isn't just a one-hit wonder. You still have to go to Google, sign up for a GA account, come back to DW, put in your GA codes, and then set it up.

This isn't an "every paid user has it" sort of thing. Although I expect a lot of people and communities to take advantage of it.

(Just mentioning this in case it wasn't clear.)

From:

blackbird_song

Thank you for letting me know what one has to do to get it to work.

I had thought that each paid user probably had to pursue it a bit more actively than just by giving Dreamwidth money, so it's good to have that confirmed. :)

Catherine

From:

foxfirefey

Worrying out loud is fine! It is better for people to work out these issues before they happen, I think.

Google Analytics doesn't help anybody actually find your content, it just lets you know where people are coming to your content from. I don't think it will do anything to let deep pocket entities target makers of fan fiction and fan art, as nobody else but you and Google can view your stats without your say so. And if you don't like the idea of Google knowing the stats to your website, you don't have to set it up.

From:

blackbird_song

Thank you for the tolerance of the worry and for more information about how GA actually works. I do apologize for making you explain it to me whilst I'm trying to work on something else I promised to do instead of doing my own homework on this issue. *rolls eyes at self*

Catherine

From:

princessofgeeks

i'll remember that if i rant in a locked post, to rant in text only! :).

From:

torachan

The thing is, the vast majority of linking is not going to be sekrit backstabbing or whatever people are afraid of.

From:

blackbird_song

Well, that depends. But even if it isn't the majority, I think it likely (having stepped carefully through various LJ minefields over the years) that there will be enough of that going on that this could become a background problem that might tinge the community atmosphere here. Mostly, I think it just sets up a perception that backstabbing is going on, whether or not it actually is.

In any event, if people don't want to risk being discovered talking behind the backs of others in locked posts, it should be possible to avoid that by using text or even initials. So schoolyard, though!

Catherine

From:

pthalo

I've found that listening to other people vent about people that I don't know well poisons any relationship I'm going to later have with them. There are people who are otherwise very good people that I can't manage to stop disliking and it all started with my friend Jane Doe who mentioned to me that she was fed up with Mary Smith always bumming rides off her. Early impressions of a person are a big deal, and I imagine I would currently have a much better relationship with Mary Smith if I could stop thinking of her as the bummer of rides who used to make Jane Doe leave parties earlier than she wanted to so that she could go home when she wanted. Petty, and ridiculous, but no matter how much I work on it, I just can't overcome it.

What's really best for relationships is discussing the problem with the person who is causing it. Or failing that, with people who will never ever meet that person. So it becomes "asking for advice/venting about my relative who doesn't use dreamwidth or LJ or whatever" to people who live so far away from the relative that it doesn't matter.

From:

blackbird_song

I agree with this, on the whole. The venting is necessary, I think, when one either has tried and failed to communicate with the person in question and must still resolve an untenable situation, or cannot figure out how to muster the courage or proper words to talk to a person who might be causing serious stress.

I make a distinction between venting and gossip. The former is necessary to relieve stress, typically amongst a group of people who either knows the person and can help come up with a constructive solution to the problem, or with (as you suggest) a group of people who will never meet the person under normal circumstances. Gossip, however, turns upon at least a whiff of malice that adds excitement and danger to the mix. I tend to have more of a problem with the gossiper than the gossipee, as I make a point of making up my own mind about each person I meet, but that's largely because I'm very keenly aware of the danger you mention here.

I'm far too tired to make any more sense than I already have (which may be pitiful), so I'll just thank you for the comment and your patience with my response, and then I'll be good and go away. :)

Catherine

From:

copracat

I'd be interested in knowing if, in all honesty, there is anyone who absolutely wouldn't experience any anxiety at all if they discovered they'd been discussed, and had no access to that discussion or ability to speak up for themselves.

My answer, in all honesty, is yes. People are likely to talk about you in arenas you have no access to all the time, particularly if you bother to do something publicly, like post in an online journal. My family does it, my friends do it, my work colleagues do it. I do it. It's human to talk about what is in our lives.

Websites that are not LJ have been using programs like Google Analytics for years. LJ, along with other blogging sites, showed up in the referrer logs for websites on my last two jobs. Anytime you link to an actor on IMDB, or to something on an official website, and someone clicks on your link, the linked website has been getting a referrer link from your journal.

I think you're right, it's going to be a culture change for some LJ/DW users, particularly those who see their journal site home as a closed environment and, as with anything that humans have a hand in, wank may ensue, but no more or less often than happens now.

Thanks for posting,

foxfirefey.