Post WBC12 Blog Posts & Social Stats

The Wine Bloggers’ Conference of 2012 has come and gone. Many pinots were drunk, new friendships formed, and memories of our time in Oregon made. Penticton is just a short 9 months away, and before we dedicate ourselves fully to organizing WBC13, we get to analyze some of the data from WBC12, and we get to read blogs!

Oh, so many blogs!

So what have we been finding out since reading some of your posts since the conference? Here are just a few of the highlights:

Randall Grahm’s keynote speech on Friday inspired a lot of wine bloggers in the audience (minus a few who were not so moved).

The Neuroscience of Wine breakout session became a popular blog topic.

There were fun parties!

Many bloggers took advantage of being in Oregon and arranged their own trips and visits to Oregon’s wine regions before and after the conference!

Despite the speed at which the live blogging sessions moved, there were a lot of carefully crafted and detailed reviews of the wines!

If you want to read all the blogs written, over 100 posts with links are now in our WBC12 Blog Post Directory. If you don’t see your post on the list, leave it as a comment.

Now on to stats!

Here are just some of the few interesting tid-bits
of how loud and far reaching your voices were heard throughout the weekend (#WBC12 trended WORLDWIDE at least 4 different times!!)

#WBC12 was mentioned in 16,200 tweets by 1905 different users reaching almost 4 million people and making 50 million impressions on the web.

“Wine Bloggers Conference” was mentioned on the web with the word “Oregon” 73,400 times and this number is increasing daily. The Wine Bloggers Conference has seen 112 Facebook posts since the conference. 86% of the #WBC12 social media market takes place in the US, followed by Canada and then the UK. The “Wine Bloggers Conference has been mentioned on at least 212 blogs and websites within the last 16 days (and is growing daily). And there have been at least 14 videos related to the conference that have been published.

It’s exciting to see that the WBC12 conversations are continuing on Facebook, Twitter, and in your posts; it’s equally exciting to see that so many people have already registered for WBC13 and are starting online conversations about our pending arrival in Penticton!! It’s going to be a fun 9 months of anticipation!

- cindy



  • Cindy

    Rich Reader – very, very good points and questions. This would make a great panel discussion or breakout session at a future WBC. I think the above highlights the overall enthusiasm generated online from WBC, which should not be discredited -and should be applauded. However, I understand your point of view and largely agree with you that the true reach and effect that our collective enthusiasm yields has yet to be measured.

  • Rich Reader

    Would we want to incentivize different components in the
    communication cycle that our twitterage of a WBC produces? The current metrics for Twitter statistics
    need to be expanded upon, or at least, deserve a little clarification. From the baldest of overly broad
    definitions, down to the clearest of distinctions, we are laboring within an
    inadequate lingua franca that fogs everyone’s understanding about what has been
    learned. Please bear with my inquiry
    into “what it is that we know” versus “what it is that we
    thought we knew”:

    * Of the
    16,200 tweets that passed through the minds of as many as 1905 different
    users, how many of those tweets were positioned at the top of the threads?
    i.e. gave birth to conversations that we know about.

    * How
    many distinct conversations were produced by whatever the number of
    top-of-thread tweets had been crafted?

    * How
    many top-of-thread tweets were met only by robotically reflexive RTs which
    added no content, context, thoughts, or feelings to those
    “hollow” threads?

    * How
    many of the original tweets contained a link that invoked a
    call-to-action? * How
    many of those links were invoked by users who interacted with those tweets

    * How
    many of the original tweets had zero RTs or replies?

    * When
    one speaks of reach, does it mean that almost 4 million people were
    cognizant or subliminally affected by those tweets on their screens?

    * When
    one speaks of impressions, is that to say that of the almost 4 million
    people who were cognizant or subliminally affected by those 50 million
    impressions, that the average number of impressions made on participating
    individuals would have been about 12.5?

    Reach and impressions are stale leftovers from TV, radio,
    and hardcopy print media. There’s very
    little accepted agreement about how these measurements are understood by folks
    in the Twittersphere, and what lessons we should be learning from that

    While no one expects to get past the artifacts of
    communications history overnight, we should at least recognize where we may be
    misleading ourselves and hug it out.

  • Sharon Parsons

    This far Spaswinefood
    has posted two #WBC12 posts:

    scent of an Argentine wine affair

    Willamette Valley is just not only Pinot Noir

    I look forward to posting others later. Sharon @spaswinefood

  • nguyenanh
  • Cindy


  • Cindy

    I will add this – stay tuned! Thank you!

  • Cindy

    I will have to look into that, and figure out where one would find that info. The stats on the 18th in particular were very impressive, so I wouldn’t be surprised. I’ll let you know what I find out!

  • Steve Raye

    Somebody said that for a given period of time we were the most active # on that true?

  • Cindy Lowe Rynning
  • Kim Kolb

    We were busy!

  • The Academic Wino

    Thank you for including my posts! I had an amazing time at #WBC12