Skip to main content

Fixing The Feedburner/Google Analytics Campaigns

How many people you think they got working on that Feedburner thing over there? One? Half? A summer intern? A guy who works on it while he watches football?

The flaws and problems with Feedburner have been frustrating to say the least, so I was pretty damn excited when, a little over a month ago, Feedburner finally announced that they were integrating the ability to add in Google Analytics campaign data to the end of feed item URLs. This was huge. Before this, you had to add in the string into the original RSS feed, which most of us couldn't do since we didn't have access to that original feed, but wanted to track when people were coming from our feeds.

My excitement ended, though, when I cranked up the feature and saw what it did to my stats. Yes, it was helpful to see who came from Google Reader or Bloglines, but if the content was syndicated, it stripped out the referrer. This was a problem with my music blog. Hype Machine is by far and away our #1 referrer, and when I implemented this change, the clicks from there went to almost none, because the campaign source was hard-coded in there as "feedburner". Which was not helpful at all. If the campaign is already "Feed: {etc}", then what does having the source as "feedburner" tell you? Nothing, that's what.

My Solution
When the campaign feature was first announced, I noticed an interesting dynamic code in the "content" area: ${distributionEndpoint}. This made much more sense in the source area, so I put it there instead of "feedburner", only to find that the only distribution endpoints that Feedburner acknowledged were Google Reader, Google Feedfetcher and Bloglines. Now, wouldn't it just make sense to have this include whatever site referred it? Yes. But that's Feedburner for you.

But what happens when it doesn't acknowledge one of those few endpoints is that it just leaves it blank. So what I did, see, is to go ahead and put ${distributionEndpoint} in the source, so that when the feed doesn't find Hype Machine (which it probably won't for a while) or any of the other endpoints that it won't find, it just uses the referring site as the source like normal. And my referrals from Hype Machine are back to where they were.

By the way, I hate to badmouth Feedburner so much. It really is a really good service. But I get really frustrated with some of the half-assed implementation that Feedburner (among other Google properties) implements, suggesting that the services are not really much of a priority for Google.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why you should be clicking the Google +1 button

One of the things that most makes me feel like I'm beating my head against a wall is when I'm trying to convince people to click reaction buttons like the Facebook Like button or Google +1 button on web pages. I think that most people just don't really think to do it when they read something that they like, but they should, because as Avinash Kaushik brilliantly termed it , it's applause.  Now, I kind of get why people shy away from the using the Facebook Like button: because it shows up on your Wall, has a chance to show up in people's stream and now shows up in the ticker. All of those things are great for people trying to promote their content and get more clicks, but it's not so great for those of us just trying to get feedback on what people are liking and if they're actually reading what we're writing. Even if you're not actively embarrassed to have people know that you like it, it just feels a little more intrusive than a lot of people wan...

Some scattered thoughts on the money of digital music

If you haven't already read Digital Audio Insider's interview with Camper Van Beethoven's Jonathan Segal ¹, it's a must read for anyone with even a slight interest in digital music and the money of the industry. Segal has tons of thoughts on just about every aspect of digital music, but best of all, he brings in these thoughts as someone whose initial music industry experience was in the days of purely-physical media, when "pirating" meant copying something onto a blank tape. My main takeway is general and obvious but an important reminder: we are in a transition time for music, and what it will become is anyone's guess. I think Segal's take on merchandise and live performances taking the place as artist's primary source of income as "asinine" is too harsh to be true, but I do think that we're in such a state of transition that any shot at predicting artistic income in the future is completely in the dark. Such predictions are really ...

Why are we still judging work done by time spent?

Every morning, when I fill in the hours on my work's electronic timesheet, I'm struck by how odd it is that we're still judging our work by the time spent on it. It's odd because it's old-fashioned. In the paper and phone world, you could really only do work when you were at work. But we do work all the time now. I check my email when I first wake up. Does that mean I start my day at 6:30 am? Should that be reflected on my timesheet? How about when I respond to an email or check Basecamp when I'm on the bus? Does my work day start then? How about when I look at Google Analytics at night or think about email newsletters when I'm in the shower (which I'm somewhat ashamed to admit I did this morning)? On the other side, if someone finishes the work that they're meant to do, why should they feel like they need to stay at work until 5:00, just because that's the official time of the work day? I don't think anyone would argue that time spent ...