Social Media
Brian Solis has posted a lengthy and informative treatise entitled, "What's Wrong With Social Media?", in which he brings together a number of positive and negative viewpoints on the use of the term "Social Media".
IMHO, the only thing wrong with "Social Media" is the questionable motivations of those that find it necessary to give it a name. Let's back up a bit and take another look at what has been happening.
Back when the Constitution of the United States was written, our forefathers wrote about freedom of the press, meaning newspapers. Sometime between then and now, technology gave us magazines, radio, television and the term "media" to cover everything. By and large, the media was run by journalists as delivery of news was of paramount importance.
Now, it has been downhill for the media ever since, what with the growth of advertising along with our normal competitive desires and need to control the activities of our fellow man. Newspapers, radio and television stations used to be locally owned and dedicated to the prosperity of the local community, a situation that has changed over the years.
To make matters worse, technology introduces the microprocessor, and a bunch of geeks see it as an opportunity to take over the world. (Prior to this time the geeks were quite happy serving as tool makers for the world).
So, what do the geeks do?? They turn the whole world upside-down, rename everything, throw out the baby AND the bath water. Of course, they have an advantage -- they are the only ones that understand this new technology.
Someone coined the phrase, "Revenge of the geeks/nerds." Maybe so -- one would have to admit that the geeks have done a very poor job of providing the whole of society with a safe, workable, economical "Personal Computer".
We need to understand that the first users of any technology will be suspect while they plow new ground -- but, even more so because of the extremely high financial rewards some have reaped at the expense of society as a whole.
The net effect of all of this is a system that is highly competitive. The blogosphere creates problems for the mainstream media causing them to join the competition. This, at a time when we should be lowering the competitive levels, not increasing them.
So, when Brian Solis writes:
"The key point is that Social Media has yet to reveal its true impact among those around the world who have yet to embrace it and participate."
"The way we react and share information will only continue to change until it completely transforms from one-to-many to many-to-many."
I must counter by noting that the transformation would be very simple -- switch from blogs, a one-to-many format, to forums, a many-to-many format.
You might be interested in my Off-Line Forum samples, a true many-to-many approach:
http://nationalcomputerassociation.com
See you there...
Doug Skoglund
SandS Software, Inc.
skoglund@pdmsb.com
IMHO, the only thing wrong with "Social Media" is the questionable motivations of those that find it necessary to give it a name. Let's back up a bit and take another look at what has been happening.
Back when the Constitution of the United States was written, our forefathers wrote about freedom of the press, meaning newspapers. Sometime between then and now, technology gave us magazines, radio, television and the term "media" to cover everything. By and large, the media was run by journalists as delivery of news was of paramount importance.
Now, it has been downhill for the media ever since, what with the growth of advertising along with our normal competitive desires and need to control the activities of our fellow man. Newspapers, radio and television stations used to be locally owned and dedicated to the prosperity of the local community, a situation that has changed over the years.
To make matters worse, technology introduces the microprocessor, and a bunch of geeks see it as an opportunity to take over the world. (Prior to this time the geeks were quite happy serving as tool makers for the world).
So, what do the geeks do?? They turn the whole world upside-down, rename everything, throw out the baby AND the bath water. Of course, they have an advantage -- they are the only ones that understand this new technology.
Someone coined the phrase, "Revenge of the geeks/nerds." Maybe so -- one would have to admit that the geeks have done a very poor job of providing the whole of society with a safe, workable, economical "Personal Computer".
We need to understand that the first users of any technology will be suspect while they plow new ground -- but, even more so because of the extremely high financial rewards some have reaped at the expense of society as a whole.
The net effect of all of this is a system that is highly competitive. The blogosphere creates problems for the mainstream media causing them to join the competition. This, at a time when we should be lowering the competitive levels, not increasing them.
So, when Brian Solis writes:
"The key point is that Social Media has yet to reveal its true impact among those around the world who have yet to embrace it and participate."
"The way we react and share information will only continue to change until it completely transforms from one-to-many to many-to-many."
I must counter by noting that the transformation would be very simple -- switch from blogs, a one-to-many format, to forums, a many-to-many format.
You might be interested in my Off-Line Forum samples, a true many-to-many approach:
http://nationalcomputerassociation.com
See you there...
Doug Skoglund
SandS Software, Inc.
skoglund@pdmsb.com
posted by Doug Skoglund at
9:52 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home