Social Networking - Good, Bad and Ugly
I was thinking tonight about how much the internet's social networks are just like real world networking in many ways. There are cliques and in crowds and folks on the outside. There are people who are viewers, who just talk the talk and then there are people who are doers that actually walk the walk. My time on Twitter, Facebook, MySpace and various other social networking arenas has shown me that not much is different online from the real world - except of course that people seem to feel they can be much more obnoxious online because they think they are tucked safely away behind a computer screen. I find it humorous and sad at the same time that there are adults acting immaturely and more like children than my children. With so many wonderful examples of what social networking could be, how it could be used wisely to help others or promote causes, you would think there would be more people doing just that. There are people doing that, but this post isn’t about them, those great people will have a post all their own a little later on.
Just like offline there are people who collect friends (aka followers, contacts etc.) like they collect possessions. They show no real interest in actually interacting with all those friends, they just make them look good to have them around or to be associated with them. You can tell who these people are because they're all fluff. They’ll make promises for show, but do nothing to follow through or back them up. These types of people say things for the purpose of being dramatic publicly but then privately message you with some back story later to cover their asses.
I heard someone say recently that before they add someone to their social network, they check to see who their contacts are. I can understand that to a certain degree but shouldn’t everyone be judged based on the content they provide more so than whom they may or may not know. That irked me. Believe me, I’ve got some new media "heavy hitters" on my contact lists so I’m not saying this because I’m worried, I'm saying this because I think it is foolish to rely on that as a deciding factor. That’s just my opinion though.
I find it ironic that the new media experts, social media strategists, PR people and marketing consults that self-promote and evangelize social networks, wanting everyone to follow them, hire them and talk to them - don’t follow back when you do. I’m guessing that they are so wrapped up in their own self-images that they don’t realize that the little guy they blow off today may be the next big thing to rock their fish bowl tomorrow. You know what they say, you can’t spell B L O G G E R without E G O.
Don’t get me wrong, there are a thousand great things about social networks and new media and I love all of those things, but for every one good thing there are just as many bad. I’m hoping to see the tide turn so there will be more good than bad and more real people connecting, creating and building relationships than people interested in self-promotion and popularity contests. That’s my hope. What’s yours?
Tags: Social Networks, Socnets, Social Networking, New Media, Twitter, Facebook, MySpace, Bloggers, New Media Experts, Social Media Strategists, Public Relations, Marketing Consultants, Fishbowl, Dayngr, Dayngrous Discourse
Dished out by Dayngr at
1:08 AM
9 comment(s):
Yes, Dangyr, you are quite right. But I'm not surprised. The only defense I'd say I'd have for them is that they may want to keep abreast of certain topics/discussions and if they have thousands of followers, they can't. Too many updates to wade through.
OK, having said that. I'll further your argument. I think that people in social media are no different than anyone else - even though many seem to position themselves as being more sensitive, more 'in touch' with human emotion.
That's mostly bullshit.
We all secretly want to be rock stars of some sort. Hell, I was pumped when I got my 100th follower late yesterday.
I notice this with blogs as well. A rock star blogger could describe what they had for lunch and they'd get a bunch of responses telling him or her what a great decision he or she made. At times, I've written something provocative and I may get a reasonable amount of traffic but no responses.
A hierarchy has developed. It's settling in. And it shows that those of us in this field are, in fact, no different than anybody else.
By
Jonathan Trenn, at
December 28, 2007 9:33 AM
Oops, I have been horrible about stopping by to comment even though I do read your posts via feed reader!
As for social networks and such, some of them remind me very much of the cliques from high school and how people were also vying for a better position as one of the "popular" people. Me - I was never one of the popular people but that's okay, it was never my goal in life to be one.
For me with my blog, it's not all about how many links I have or even what my Page Rank is (I only worried about that for paid post purposes) - my blog is a way for me to actually use my creative skills once in awhile (I hope!) and to interact with those people who I have met that have turned out to be wonderful blogging friends and buddies. Sure - it would be nice to get 100 comments on a post sometime but who could keep up with that?
At any rate, I think I'm rambling but I also wanted to add that my company dropped the ball with the holiday cards for the troops due to poor timing on the part of the Human Resources Department. If this sort of program is still in place next year, I shall do my best to get something up and running before Thanksgiving or as close to it as possible. I promise!
By
Linda, at
December 28, 2007 10:57 AM
Valid points... I think this is the topic du'jour lately around the net.
I think all of us have our own process to our social interactions.
Mine vary with the different mediums. On Myspace, I add anyone who A)Races or has some car connection or B)I know personally. I do look at their contacts, but just to make sure they aren't a spambot or someone whoring for a bajillion friends.
On twitter, I add anyone that follows me, and then I add folks I see who pop up in interesting @ conversations. I don't think Twitter has hit mainstream enough to have the spam problems of myspace..yet.
I don't use Facebook that often, I just can't seem to grasp why everyone else LOVES it so.
By
Erica Ortiz, at
December 28, 2007 11:11 AM
I'm with Linda. I read but I don't comment that often. This post definitely struck a chord. I've come to the same realization about blogger cliques and how you're judged by your "followers" as opposed to your content. It's like high school all over again but worse, because like you said, people feel anonymous behind that computer screen. It can be disheartening. But what can you do except make sure you don't contribute to the douchebaggery on the internet and in social networking?
By
A Margarita, at
December 28, 2007 2:00 PM
As humans we group, we congregate, we associate with those we most relate too. The concern for me is when one group dictates to another group or individual how to behave, how to interact, dammit how to twitter! It becomes a "my way" is better than yours, and turns into a school yard argument.
Social networking is just that, networking and we all have something to promote whether it's our site, product, cause, blog or self. Not one person belonging to a socnet can claim they're not there for self-promotion of some sort.
On all of these socnets we have choices to unfollow or unfriend, if we find we're not gaining from what someone else is contributing. But, to tell someone what you want them to contribute so that you benefit is quite selfish.
I appreciate your post, in the middle of as Erica Ortiz describes, the topic of du'jour.
Aloha,
NEENZ.
By
NEENZ, at
December 28, 2007 3:25 PM
Good post and honest. There are too many of those folks too busy to have conversation with just anybody it seems.
Heck, there are some that will follow you back but will rarely if ever engage in conversation.
I hope I never end up being like that. (crosses fingers)
By
Tojosan, at
December 29, 2007 8:47 AM
Seems to me that even with Web 2.0 and social networks, we still are dealing with Human 1.0. But these things - Twitter, FB, etc. - do help us extend our vision, our reach and our knowledge. They won't change who we are or what we do -- not immediately anyway... but eventually the free flow of information will wear down our rough edges - I do believe.
By
Geno, at
December 29, 2007 11:35 PM
4 Months later I am quite happpy to report that I've seen much more good than bad and ugly out and about on the social networking scene. How about you?
By
Dayngr, at
April 01, 2008 4:51 PM
Good stuff that still applies today. My experience has been very good too, but I have noticed a trend of elitist behavior by a select group of people. Someone called TheFeva posted this offensive but interesting tweet with a link to a list he/she created called TwitterSNOBS. Susanreynolds shared it first. http://twitter.com/thefeva/statuses/769966693
I'm in the middle so I don't know the real answer when it comes to following on social networks and twitter/utterz. On one hand there are those that believe in open communication so they follow almost everyone: Chris Brogan, Guy Kawasaki, Jeremiah & Scoble and then there's the other side of the camp that believes in the less is more school of thought like Merlin, Veronica, and many more.
Both sides are convincing and have valid points. I'm learning that it comes down to your own unique personality and personal preferences. Are you a people person? Can you handle the avalanche of attention that crash down on you relentlessly or do you prefer to deal with a small group and take your time to nurture and develop those relationships? All subject to taste I guess.
Obviously, most people fall smack dab in between these two camps and follow everyone they find interesting or highly recommended. i.e. Jason Calacanis, GaryVee, etc.
So, your point about social networking and twitter being just like real life is very good. So true.
I'm glad we're friends. Virtual or whatever. :)
By
Paisano, at
April 01, 2008 5:39 PM
Post a comment
<< Home