1. social currency ™
Social Media Analysis of the 2010 Toronto Mayoral Election
June 17, 2010

2. Introduction and Purpose
Research Objectives
For the pilot initiative, we’ve analyzed social media channels providing a perspective on how the major
mayoral candidates are being discussed online – specifically, the propensity of each candidate to be
mentioned in social media channels and the accompanying sentiment for the past 6 weeks (May 1st –
June 11th)
In tracking the online discussion surrounding the candidates, the goal is to get a snapshot of who’s
winning the “word of mouth war”, by answering: Who has momentum? Who has positive buzz? What
issues are resonating with voters?
2

3. About Social Media
Social media is conversation or interaction between people online. While it’s still early in the race, an
analysis of what people are actually saying about the candidates in social media channels offers a unique
perspective and texture for the campaign.
Unlike traditional news media, which tries to maintain objectivity and fairness in reporting the news, social
media is a domain of unfettered subjectivity and bias. It’s an environment where innuendo assumes
equal prominence alongside fact, and where special interests are forever seeking to leverage the
channel’s potential to influence opinion and alter outcomes in their favour. It truly is a new and wild
frontier.
Traditional polling is usually asks voters who they plan to vote for. Social media provides a broader
perspective. The volume and tone of discussion provides a real-time indication of voter engagement and
intentions, possibly foretelling the fortune of the candidates based on the response and potential influence
of the medium.
3

4. Overall Weekly Activity Timeline
What it is: Trended volume of instances where candidates names are mentioned in social media channels
What it says: Candidate mention activity is sporadic, but seems to be building. Discussion is most often fuelled by offline
events like debates and major policy announcements
Analysis: From a social media perspective, voter engagement remains low. Look for conversation activity to increase as the
public gets more engaged in the campaign.
Total 3590 mentions
May 10: Interfaith Council Meeting
Average 598 per week
May 11: Habitat for Humanity Debate
May 18: CP24
Debate
711
662 648
627
505
437
Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6
May 1-7 May 8-14 May 15-21 May 22-28 May 29-June 4 June 5-11 4

5. Social Media Source
What it is: The percentage of candidate mention activity that can be attributed to each social media channel
What it says: More than half of the conversation takes place on Twitter.
Analysis: The content-rich nature of blogs is home to more substantive analysis of the campaign, whereas Twitter tends to
echo the day’s headlines and events as people pass along news, observations and opinions.
Base
3590 mentions
May 1 – June 11
Twitter, 51%
Blogs, 39%
Video/Image
Sharing, 2% Social Networks, Message Boards,
3% 4%
5

6. Candidate Share of Voice
What it is: Share of mentions for each candidate in social media channels
What it says: Ford receives the highest volume of mentions overall, followed by Smitherman and Rossi
Analysis: Ford’s controversial stance on issues fosters the most discussion – both criticism and praise, while
Mammoliti and Thomson fail to inspire much conversation activity.
Base
Smitherman, 25%
3590 mentions
May 1 – June 11
Facebook Fans Twitter Followers
Ford - Rossi, 17% Ford 674
Smitherman 1004 Smitherman 1617
Rossi 6495 Rossi 1441
Pantalone 642 Ford, 35% Pantalone 597
Mammoliti 464 Mammoliti 476
Pantalone, 11%
Thomson 615 Thomson 1083
•As of June 17 •As of June 17
Mammoliti, 6%
Thomson, 6%
6

7. Candidate Sentiment
What it is: An analysis of the sentiment from candidate mentions
What it says: Rossi has the largest proportion of positive comments. Conversation about Ford is polarized and least
likely to be neutral. Comments relating to Smitherman and Mammoliti are more negative than positive.
What it means: Rossi’s aggressive online marketing is instrumental in driving positive buzz. Smitherman’s buzz is
negatively impacted by reactions to transit policy and challenges faced as a provincial MPP.
Recall Share of Base
100% 35% 25% 17% 11% 6% 6%
Voice
3590 mentions
7% 4% May 1 – June 11
14% 12% 13%
23% 28%
67% Positive
83%
71% 55% Neutral
81% 78%
60% Negative
22% 26%
15% 13% 14%
7% 9%
Overall Ford Smitherman Rossi Pantalone Mammoliti Thomson
Net
-1% 1% -19% 15% 5% -10% 4% 7
(Pos minus Neg)

8. Most Popular Discussion Topics and Sentiment – All Candidates
What it is: A ranking of the most frequently discussed topics of conversation for all candidates, along with accompanying
sentiment.
What it says: Transit is the most discussed issue. Debates inspire dialogue and discussion. People are using social
media to vocalize their support or opposition of a candidate.
Discussion relating to Transit/Transportation 3% 9% 1% 13%
(TTC, Bike Lanes, Road Tolls)
Discussion relating to Candidate Performance 2% 9% 1% 12%
at a Debate Base
Non-Specific Comments in Support of a 9% 3590 mentions
9%
Candidate May 1 – June 11
Discussion Around a Campaign Event or 7% 2% 9%
Appearance
Non-Specific Comments Opposing a 8% 8%
Candidate
Discussion relating to Candidate Experience 3% 3% 6%
Discussion of Ford’s comments on AIDS and 2% 3% 5%
Homophobia
Reference to a Poll 3% 3%
Negative Neutral Positive
8

9. Most Popular Discussion Topics and Sentiment – Ford
Recall: Ford’s share of voice = 35%
What it says: Support and opposition are almost evenly divided. Ford’s “Truth About Aids” tweet garnered a strong
negative reaction, which was perpetuated by Smitherman releasing a statement on the issue.
Discussion relating to Transit/Transportation 1% 4% 5%
(TTC, Bike Lanes, Road Tolls)
Discussion relating to Candidate Performance 2% 6% 2% 10%
at a Debate Base
Non-Specific Comments in Support of a 10% 1239 mentions
10%
Candidate May 1 – June 11
Discussion Around a Campaign Event or 3% 2% 5%
Appearance
Non-Specific Comments Opposing a 9% 9%
Candidate
Discussion relating to Candidate Experience 2% 3% 5%
Discussion of Ford’s comments on AIDS and 4% 5% 1% 10%
Homophobia
Reference to a Poll 2% 1% 3%
Negative Neutral Positive
9

10. Most Popular Discussion Topics and Sentiment – Smitherman
Recall: Smitherman’s share of voice = 25%
What it says: Smitherman’s transit policy garnered significant negative discussion. General opposition outweighs
supporters by almost 3:1. Negative discussion also stems from his track record and issues during his tenure as MPP
Discussion relating to Transit/Transportation 8% 15% 1% 24%
(TTC, Bike Lanes, Road Tolls)
Discussion relating to Candidate Performance 2% 11% 1% 14%
at a Debate Base
Non-Specific Comments in Support of a 4% 914 mentions
4%
Candidate May 1 – June 11
Discussion Around a Campaign Event or 9% 1% 10%
Appearance
Non-Specific Comments Opposing a 11% 11%
Candidate
Discussion relating to Candidate Experience 8% 5% 13%
Discussion of Ford’s comments on AIDS and 1% 4% 5%
Homophobia
Discussion Relating to Smitherman’s Trip to 1% 3% 4%
China
Candidate Specific Issue Negative Neutral Positive
10

11. Most Popular Discussion Topics and Sentiment – Rossi
Recall: Rossi’s share of voice = 17%
What it says: Transit is the most common issue discussed relative to Rossi. Supportive comments outweigh
statements of opposition by almost 3:1
Discussion relating to Transit/Transportation 3% 16% 3% 22%
(TTC, Bike Lanes, Road Tolls)
Discussion relating to Candidate Performance 1% 6% 2% 9%
at a Debate Base
Non-Specific Comments in Support of a 18% 616 mentions
18%
Candidate May 1 – June 11
Discussion Around a Campaign Event or 13% 3% 16%
Appearance
Non-Specific Comments Opposing a 6% 6%
Candidate
Discussion relating to the G20 Conference in 2% 2%
Toronto
Reference to a Poll 1% 2% 3%
Discussion relating to Rossi’s Plan to Create 1%
1%
250 000 Jobs
Candidate Specific Issue Negative Neutral Positive
11

12. Most Popular Discussion Topics and Sentiment – Pantalone
Recall: Pantalone’s share of voice = 11%
What it says: Pantalone generated discussion by pushing to extend serving ours during World Cup. His “Civic Values”
platform (which included ideas on electoral reform) also received coverage.
Discussion relating to Transit/Transportation 1% 5% 6%
(TTC, Bike Lanes, Road Tolls)
Discussion relating to Candidate Performance 1% 8% 1% 10%
at a Debate Base
Non-Specific Comments in Support of a 5% 382 mentions
5%
Candidate May 1 – June 11
Discussion Around a Campaign Event or 18% 1% 19%
Appearance
Non-Specific Comments Opposing a 2% 2%
Candidate
Discussion relating to the G20 Conference in 4% 4%
Toronto
Discussion relating to the World Cup, including 1% 10% 2% 13%
motion to extend liquor serving hours
Discussion relating to electoral reform, 7% 7%
including online voting and councilor numbers
Negative Neutral Positive
12

13. Most Popular Discussion Topics and Sentiment – Mammoliti
Recall: Mammoliti’s share of voice = 6%
What is says: Mammoliti’s Waterfront proposal was received more negatively than positively. There was no positive
support relating to any of his “Outrageous” ideas.
Discussion relating to Transit/Transportation 5% 5%
(TTC, Bike Lanes, Road Tolls)
Discussion relating to Candidate Performance 14% 14%
at a Debate Base
Non-Specific Comments in Support of a 2% 223 mentions
2%
Candidate May 1 – June 11
Discussion Around a Campaign Event or 4% 4%
Appearance
Non-Specific Comments Opposing a 9% 9%
Candidate
Discussion relating to his Waterfront Proposal 4% 12% 1% 17%
Discussion relating to the World Cup, including 18% 18%
motion to extend liquor serving hours
Candidate Specific Issue
Discussion relating to Pride Parade Funding 2% 17% 4% 23%
Negative Neutral Positive
13

14. Most Popular Discussion Topics and Sentiment – Thomson
Recall: Thomson’s share of voice = 6%
What it says: Thomson’s performances in debates are more negative than positive. There was excitement and activity
surrounding recent poll numbers which showed her share of decided voters increasing.
Discussion relating to Transit/Transportation 1% 10% 3% 14%
(TTC, Bike Lanes, Road Tolls)
Discussion relating to Candidate Performance 5% 18% 3% 26%
at a Debate Base
Non-Specific Comments in Support of a 8% 216 mentions
8%
Candidate May 1 – June 11
Discussion Around a Campaign Event or 11% 11%
Appearance
Non-Specific Comments Opposing a 3% 3%
Candidate
Discussion relating to Candidate Experience 6% 6%
Reference to a Poll 13% 1% 14%
Discussion relating to housing policy 3% 3%
Negative Neutral Positive
14

15. Summary
Not so long ago, political campaigns were fought primarily on mass media channels like television and the
newspaper – but the age of web 2.0 and social media has opened up a new battleground. The web is a
place where the candidates, media and the voting public are freely engaged in a raw and candid dialogue,
sharing news, promoting policy views, and stirring up controversy, all in hopes of exerting influence on the
outcome of the election. The social web has changed the political landscape forever as special interests
attempt to leverage the web’s immediacy, expansive reach and relative anonymity – where anything can
be said with relative impunity.
At the time of this study, voter engagement (as measured by conversation levels) seems to be
growing. Much of the conversation is stimulated by events, the media and ardent campaign
supporters. Interestingly, share of voice for each candidate aligns somewhat to recent polling
numbers. Transit is a strong source of discussion both online and off. Overall, positive and negative
sentiment regarding the candidates is evenly split, but certain candidates foster a larger proportion of
either positive or negative discussion.
What’s clear from this early analysis is that social media can both accelerate and amplify word of mouth
about the campaign. The ease at which messages can be passed along perpetuates a viral loop that can
either benefit or harm a candidate’s chance at victory, a double edged sword of which most campaign
teams are keenly aware.
15

16. Methodology
Using specialized software we formed a query using the names of the top six candidates – Rocco Rossi,
George Smitherman, Joe Pantalone, Sarah Thomson, Giorgio Mammoliti and Rob Ford. Northstar
collected and analyzed six weeks of data, from April 25th through June 6th, 2010 from social media
sources like blogs, discussion forums, Twitter and image sharing sites like YouTube and Flickr. Data
from Facebook was limited to publicly available content only, meaning any private conversations between
friends that are protected by passwords and user privacy settings were not collected. Essentially,
anything that is considered part of the public domain was considered for the analysis.
Over 50,000 documents were considered for the analysis, which was then culled down to genuine citizen
generated discussion and opinion by filtering out news articles coming directly from traditional media
outlets, spam or any other sources judged to be unworthy of inclusion. We also filtered out data coming
directly from the candidates themselves – specifically from candidate Twitter and Facebook profiles.
Personal profiles maintained by candidate staffers were included in the analysis as we thought it was
relevant to include any advocate or detractor of a candidate, who wasn’t a candidate themselves.
Positive or negative sentiment was assigned based on the expression of a personal opinion or comment.
News stories like personal appearance and policy announcements were considered neutral, unless
appended by subjective remarks. It’s also common in social media for people to forward or “retweet”
content that’s of interest. In the event where opinionated content was passed along, we assumed the
sender shared the same point of view to the original author, unless that opinion was appended with its
own commentary.
16

17. About Northstar Research Partners
Northstar is a full-service market research firm that performs all forms of consumer research, including
qualitative, quantitative and ethnographic. Social Currency™, Northstar’s social media research practice,
monitors, measures and mines social media activity, giving brands a perspective on how and why the
social web responds to market activities. Social Currency™ is led by Patrick Gladney.
Northstar was founded in Toronto and through a combination of strong organic growth & strategic
acquisitions, has grown to a team of 100 research & insight consultants in 7 offices globally. Collectively
we operate in more than 60 countries, with offices in Canada, the United States, and the UK.
17