Are we using the right metrics?

As a young academic, I am reliably informed that the landscape of scholarly communication is not what it was 20 years ago. But, despite all that has changed, it seems that we still largely rely upon the same tired and narrow measures of quality and academic impact - namely, citation counts and journal impact factors. As someone who has used the internet in almost every aspect of their academic work to date, it's hard for…

Moving up to "Titan", down to 342nd…

Interestingly, on the Sunday Times Social List, since the other day, when I was 212th (out of just over 5000), to 342nd, but now out of 12500 ... so my status has improved from "Oligarch" to "Titan". Amongst friends and contacts I am now 26th out of 100 (I was 18th out of 50)....  We can see that most of my "activity" status comes from Twitter... Just fascinated to see how these measurements "work":