Tagged with: conversation • group affiliation • online persona • reputation • social-groups
Why isn’t a document on a shared workspace “social media”?
Social media is all about having a “conversation”. An exchange of information between persons.
You can write your question in a word document. Upload it. Send me a mail. I check the mail. Download the document. Answer the question. Well, you get the idea.
Yes, it’s a hassle. But that is not why this conversation isn’t “social media”.
Photography by From A Second Story.
Social media puts the emphasis on the person in the conversation.
It is not only about the message itself, but also about the persona’s of the people involved in the exchange.
That is why we love big photos of REAL people next to the conversation. That is why it’s important to have an prominent “about” page on your blog.
When we have a conversation the actual content of the message is only a small part of the story. Based upon our perception of the other person we fill in blanks, we create assumptions, we draw conclusions and color the message to a more “detailed” image.
Social media supports multiple mechanisms to help us fill in the blanks.
LinkedIn displays the badges of the groups you are a member of. People see the groups you are associating yourself with and create assumptions based on that. I am a member of the Triiibes group; so I must be cool.
The mechanism works the same as the “I am a PC, I am a Mac” campaign. If you have a PC, people think you are a nerd, if you have a Mac, people think you are cool and creative.
LinkedIn provides recommendations. People write recommendations for other people. Building a reputation. If I need a plumber, I ask my neighbour. I trust my neighbour, so I trust the plumber he recommends. The reputation that is build up and propagated is used by me to build up a mental construct of the persona.
Social media puts the person back into online conversations. That is what makes it “social”.
I’m not sure collaborative document editing isn’t social. It certainly has some of the same results as traditional social media (people work together to create something that’s more than the sum of the effort involved). There are anonymous and psuedonymous social sites that still get a lot of traction — fmylife.com is a recent example.
Hi Anonymous
(sorry, couldn’t find your name)
… hmmm, those anonymous sites put a dent in my argument.. yes yes. Hmm. For now I just exclude them from my definition until I have a better explanation.
Thanks for raising this point.
There are important connotations to the word “social.”
-communities
-communal
-relationship or companionship
In this sense, shared document editing might or might not be a “social” activity. For example, in the course of editing a submission from a writer, there may be considerable back-and-forth communication and shared changes but the exchange does not meet the criteria of “social.” It is essentially a business transaction.
It is possible that “social” is more about community and relationship (which certainly implies “people” or a person) than it is about one-on-one although we can be social one-on-one. Social is really more one-to-many and many-to-one in addition to one-to-one… community.
Social media are tools that allow us to create and participate in social networks. Social networks allow connections, community, and interaction not only among individuals but among organizations as well. In other words, organization-to-organization, organization-to-individual, and individual-to-individual. In this sense, organization could refer to corporate or non-profit entities as well as other groups or associations.
The tools (social media) are becoming more personal and personalized but it is the communal nature and the creation of a community that makes them truely social.
I don’t know if I would call FMyLife social media. Social media = conversations, but that is a tough fit because emails are conversations and I wouldn’t consider those social media. There has to be an aspect of exhibitionism to the conversation (i.e. others could possibly see and catch up on the conversation so far).
@Woody: thanks for helping out… I have to blend in “community” into this argumentation. This makes perfect sense as this is one main topic I will be discussing when talking Social Media and project teams… Thanks!
@Diwant: you might be right. I think an anonymous “conversation” is not a real conversation it’s more like being the drunk in the bar talking to anyone who forgot to walk away
(with the exception of self-help groups that need this kind of privacy, but even then i’m not sure).
Yes welcome to my generation (I’m in my mid-twenties). This is exactly where we’re at. My email inbox is full of facebook messages (of conversations). Who needs email anymore when you have facebook? Who needs voicemail when you have text messaging (a conversation)?
Good post Bas. I also agree with Woody that it has much to do with our need (crave) for community and relationships. I’m actually working on a book proposal dealing with that idea.
Thanks!