Tagged with Social Media

Identity and Anonymity

You Are Not Your Name and Photo: A Call to Re-Imagine Identity | Epicenter | Wired.com

Christopher “moot” Poole, creator of the controversial bulletin board 4chan, gives one of the most insightful talks about identity on the web I’ve ever heard. He argues, and warns about the problem of only having the option of only one fixed identity. Social networks like Facebook, he explains, are convinced on the idea that you are only one person. I remember reading Mark Zuckerberg saying that presenting different identities to different people is unethical and dishonest. Poole argues, which any human being would agree, that we are more multifaceted than what Facebook and other social networks think we are, or like us to be. It’s not a question of anonymity vs real profiles. The problem is not having a choice to be who we want to be or to present ourselves the way we want to be seen.

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

Malcolm Gladwell Doesn’t Believe the Hype of Social Media

Twitter, Facebook, and social activism : The New Yorker

If you’re Malcolm Gladwell you just can’t say you don’t like social media. You have have to make a big statement and shatter preconceived notions.

Tagged , , ,

Cognitive Surplus – Review

Cognitive Surplus is written by the author Clay Shirky. He is also a teacher at New York University, where he teaches “New Media” at the Interactive Telecommunications Program. His previous book is called Here Comes Everybody where he tackled the subject of the power of the web for groups to organize. Shirky has also written for publications like The New York Times and Wired.

My first exposure to Clay Shirky was a talk he gave about the so called problem of information overload. In the talk he explained that the problem is not really information overload. We have had an over abundance of information for centuries. The problem, he said, is a filtering issue. He explains that since the cost of publishing on the web is zero, there’s no loss if you don’t filter for quality. In traditional publishing the costs are high thus the need to filter for quality before taking that risk. In this book he writes about this subject when he gets to the history of the printing press.

My first impulse to read this book was because I wanted to hear the good news first. What I mean by that is that it was either Nicholas Carr’s The Shallows or this one. For the last couple of months, there’s been this debate going on on how the web is doing x to us. Mostly negative. How it’s robbing our attention, our ability to concentrate, etc. Now that I read Cognitive Surplus, I wouldn’t say the it has an opposing view to The Shallows. Carr’s is about psychology and the web and Shirky’s is about sociology and the web. But one is definitely viewing the glass half empty, and the other is viewing the the glass half full. While Clay Shirky is definitely a techno optimist, don’t confuse him with a social media 2.0 guru enthusiast.

If I could sum up the book with one idea it would be this: “The stupidest possible creative act, is still a creative act.” This quote comes from the first chapter of the book we’re he discusses LOLCATS. Here Shirky is acknowledging that sure, there’s a lot of crap on the web, but it’s better than having nothing. And it’s not just about a content creator making something for an audience, but about creating something to share with a community. For that purpose, the quality is secondary.

The key idea in the book though is free time and television. Television is so embedded in our culture that we don’t realize how much time we actually spend on it. Shirky started looking at this because of the frequently asked question, “Were do people find the time.” The time has always been there since industrialization and the 40 hour work week. It’s that for the last 50 plus years or so, we have spent that free time passively staring at a light emitting box. The so called boob tube. Shirky’s conclusion is that the people who have opted to watch less television have made Wikipedia possible, as well as LOLCATS.

Through out the book Shirky also answers why we’re doing this for free and what motivates people to do it. The short answer: because we can. The opportunity is there. People just don’t want to be a passive consumer anymore. They also want to create and more importantly, to share with people. Now we can. He also writes about the impact and the potential that social media can have with civic service.

This is a big deal. It’s an interesting time to be in. We still watch a lot of television, but while we’re watching it, we look up info on IMDB from our smart phones. We listen to music, but look for what people are saying and we rate them. We are no longer just an audience, we are the people formerly known as the audience.

Tagged , , ,

Facebook – To Big, To Fail

While Facebook’s popularity keeps rising, its reputation has been dropping since the recent privacy changes. Betty White declared it a waste of time when she hosted SNL, even though her hosting was supposedly possible because of Facebook. She was joking of course, but I don’t think FB is a brand that people feel they should apologize to. Some people have deleted their accounts. Others are considering it.

I was reading a post over at the Tomorrow Museum called “Friend Hoarding“. That post led me to “Facebook is Worse Than AOL“. There’s a quote in that last post from Matt Haughey, founder of MetaFilter, that says that (paraphrased) “Facebook is like AOL in 1997 wanting to be everything to anyone”. But as the saying goes, when you try to be good at everything, you never get good at anything.

Facebook’s popularity is surely not going to stop growing, but they’re getting more infamous than famous. They’re trying to be the hub of the web, but the web is a huge wild animal. You just can’t put it in a white and blue container. They’re trying to be too big and they’re certainly going to fail if they keep trying.

*See what I did there with the subtitle?
Tagged , ,

The Numbers Game

Stop Chasing Followers

Cut throat advice by Zeldman.

You don’t want a million people reading your HTML5 blog. You want members of the HTML5 working groups and key influencers from Google, Apple, and Microsoft reading your HTML5 blog. Likewise, it’s better to have twenty meaningful comments than a thousand +1s.

Tagged ,

Malcolm Gladwell On Social Media

In an interview with The Globe and Mail, Malcolm Gladwell shared his views on social media. It isn’t so surprising that he doesn’t think too highly of it.

A Facebook group with 200,000 followers – is that an illusion of mobilization?

It depends on what you’re trying to do. If I’m putting together a flash mob, that I want everyone to meet me in half an hour in Times Square, it’s really useful to have 100,000 followers on Twitter. If I want everyone to go to my website and buy my new book, it’s incredibly useful to have 100,000 followers on Facebook. If I want to start a political movement to overthrow a tyrannical regime, it may be less useful. If you follow me on Twitter, I do not own your heart. I may own your pocketbook momentarily. And I may own your attention for five seconds, but that’s it.

Tagged , ,

Thin Relationships

The Social Media Bubble

A lot of people will simply not agree with this, but I find it really hard to not agree completely.

I’d like to advance a hypothesis: Despite all the excitement surrounding social media, the Internet isn’t connecting us as much as we think it is. It’s largely home to weak, artificial connections, what I call thin relationships.

Tagged ,

The Social Media Guru

Violet Blue guest posting over at Laughing Squid writes:

Comedy is truth: While some of us scratch our heads and wonder how an environment for jobs like “social media guru” and pay-per-Tweet advertising can exist, others create scathingly brilliant and hilarious videos about an environment that is so very ripe for parody. As of today, no one’s done it better than Markham Nolan and his public service announcement video The Social Media Guru. It’s also a promo for Xtranormal Beta, text-to-video moviemaking software that we hope will be available for Mac users sooner than later. Still, the truth hurts. Telling us he’ll gladly give us a special offer for advice on our Twitter accounts (translation: “I’ll sit on your Facebook and whack you up the Twitter. Financially.”) Nolan peels back the rich tapestry of bullshit and delivers line after line of painfully familiar, nonsensical promises that the douchiest of exploitative social media consultants seem to be offering. We OH, and we weep.

Required viewing.

Tagged , , ,

I’m Not Here to Make Friends

In the latest This American Life podcast, the theme was “Frenemies”. The idea was about people that stay in friendships that are awful. Basically people that have friends that are almost their enemies. Thus frenemies. The story of note was about the video embedded above. It was made by Rich Juzwiak and he tells the story of what compelled him to make the video.

This video gives me an excuse to say something that’s been on my mind. While it’s a harsh thing to say and something that people would hold on to saying in real life, (the irony couldn’t be more poignant) most people think of saying that and say it in more subtle ways. It happens in jobs for example. But another place it happens is in the “social media sphere”. It’s not as blunt as “I’m not here to make friends”, but using social media to give advice about social media, is like people smiling and shaking your hand while holding on their other hand a copy of “How to Win Friends and Influence People”.

Tagged , , , , , ,

The Audience vs Friendship Dilemma

Communities or Commodities

Over at the Emergent Village Weblog, which is a Christian website, Don Heatly wrote an introspective, but very insightful post about the conflicting nature of online social networking:

Although I actively participate in a network of blogs, Facebook, and Twitter, I question whether we are truly creating new communities or merely using one another as commodities. Are the friends and followers I collect truly friends? Or are they just potential customers of my ego, possible readers, or promising hosts for whatever viral meme I want to inject into them? While I may write clever posts about the evils of consumerism, am I really just seeking to create consumers of me? In fact, is this article yet one more example of my own shameless self-promotion? And was that last question just the old marketing trick of admitting one’s minor flaws in order to seem more credible?

Here’s the thing. If you find yourself needing to question the authenticity and realness of a relationship, then that relationship is not authentic nor real. There’s no way around it. If a relationship is real, you don’t have to ask if it’s real. There’s no need to measure it. Those kinds of questions simply don’t come up.  This is not the medium’s fault, i.e. Facebook, Twitter, etc. If a relationship is authentic, then no matter what communication tool you use, be it Twitter, a chat client, or a phone, there will be genuine exchanges within those mediums. I’m neither saying that relationships can’t happen after online interaction, but no matter how much Zuckerberg tries to model social interactions, the relationship has to be something more than just Farmville gifts and comments on status updates to be a genuine thing.

via This is Probably and Interesting Blog

Tagged , , , , ,
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.