/
Navigation
Chronicles
Browse all articles
Explore
Semantic exploration
Research
Entity momentum
Nexus
Correlations & relationships
Story Arc
Topic evolution
Drift Map
Semantic trajectory animation
Posts
Analysis & commentary
Pulse API
Tech news intelligence API
Browse
Entities
Companies, people, products, technologies
Domains
Browse by publication source
Handles
Browse by social media handle
Detection
Concept Search
Semantic similarity search
High Impact Stories
Top coverage by position
Sentiment Analysis
Positive/negative coverage
Anomaly Detection
Unusual coverage patterns
Analysis
Rivalry Report
Compare two entities head-to-head
Semantic Pivots
Narrative discontinuities
Crisis Response
Event recovery patterns
Connected
Search: /
Command: ⌘K
Embeddings: large
TEXXR

Chronicles

The story behind the story

← → days · ↑ ↓ browse · Enter similar · o open

Bad News For Bieber?  Klout Unveils Redesign And A Scoring System That Looks At Real World Influence

Klout, the site that aims to measure your online influence, has made some big changes to its scoring system, and it has a new look to match the new algorithm.

TechCrunch Anthony Ha

Context & Ripple Effects

Klout has spent 2012 defending what its number actually means: Brian Solis argued in March that Klout and PeerIndex measure engagement rather than influence (Klout and PeerIndex Don't Measure Influence), and April brought the 'Klouchebag' mockery of score-chasing behavior. The company had already pushed scores into the Twitter timeline via a Chrome extension in 2011 and monetized them through perks like the confirmed Cathay Pacific SFO lounge partnership.

The redesign announced August 14, 2012 is Klout's answer to that credibility gap: rebuilding the algorithm around real-world influence rather than pure social-graph activity, with a new look to match. The pickup was broad — Business Insider, AllThingsD, GigaOM, PandoDaily, ABC News and others all ran the story the same day — signaling that the influencer-scoring category still commands mainstream attention even as skeptics question it.

First-order effects

  • Every user's score gets recomputed under the new methodology, so accounts built on large follower counts with thin real-world footprint — the 'Bieber problem' the headline gestures at — face visible downgrades.
  • Perks partners like Cathay Pacific now have a moving eligibility bar: lounge-access thresholds tied to Klout scores will shift as the algorithm reweights who counts as influential.

Second-order effects

  • Rival scorers such as PeerIndex, already lumped together with Klout in the Solis critique, are pressured to match the real-world-signal pivot or cede the 'actual influence' framing to Klout.
  • Brands running Klout-targeted campaigns must re-validate their influencer lists, since the population above any given score threshold changes overnight.

Third-order effects

  • If real-world signals become table stakes, influence scoring drifts toward requiring verified offline identity and data partnerships — raising privacy questions and deepening dependence on the major social platforms' APIs.
  • The perks economy around scores hardens into a de facto credentialing layer for consumer marketing, which keeps alive the debate about whether such numbers measure anything real.

The trend: Influence-scoring services are racing from raw follower counts toward real-world signals as they fight for legitimacy and brand-marketing budgets.