The swift rising of new social network Pinterest is understandably resulting in people falling ravenously on any data for who is using it, how and why.
The risk is that a single source of data ends up being widely circulated and taken as gospel, when an alternative analysis tells a very different story. (The failure to put data through a sceptical eye can of course occur with well-established social networks too, as shown by my recent blog post about the Facebook myth).
A great case in point at the moment is Pinterest and the Visual.ly infographic comparing Pinterest traffic in the US and the UK. It’s a nicely presented and useful piece of analysis… but it takes its data from only one source which for a relatively low traffic site (as Pinterest currently is in the UK) can be rather risky.
Compare Visual.ly’s data (from Compete) with the data from a rival metric firm (Nielsen) for the same month and this is what you get:
In other words, nice infographic Visual.ly, but everyone reading it or using it – beware. There is other just as credible evidence which tells an extremely different story.