8
Mar

When Social Just Means Another Way To Hype Yourself

Posted by Steven Hodson in Saturday, March 8th 2008      

You can trustme .. I won't listen but you can trust me Ever since becoming active on Twitter and FriendFeed I have noticed something that really makes me wonder if in the long run what Robert Cringely wrote the other day might in part be true. In his post Robert equated the clamoring around social networks; and the various offshoots, to the popularity that was enjoyed for a brief time by CB radios. As one who was heavily involved at the time with the whole citizen band radio subculture (who can forget the tweaking to get those bouncing signals from around the world) I can to an extent see the comparison.

While Robert foresees the decline due to the lack of value I look down a different road as to why I think that while social networks might be here to stay they are also creating their own stranglehold that will take much of the life out of them.

The whole purpose; or at least the purpose that is pimped out to the general internet public is that things like Facebook, Twitter and even FriendFeed are a great way to create new friendships, keep in touch with all these new and old friends and to have a conversation with everyone involved. To an extent among the average users this might be the case but in watching these services for some time now I have come to the conclusion that for the early adopter crowd and other A-Lister types conversation is the last thing they are interested in.

For this very large group this whole social engine is nothing more than another way for them to hype themselves and whatever conference/project they happen to be working on at the time. I first got an inkling of this self-gratifying promotionalism as I got involved with Twitter because of my work on TwitBox. Sure there were conversations going on but it was on a two tiered level with very few of the top tier players showing any real interest in the rest of us users. You could see this by checking out the Follower/Following ratio of the people you want to follow.

Then along came FriendFeed; which in my humble cranky opinion is one of the best aggregator type services out there, but it suffers even more so from this self-promotional hype by top tier movers and shakers. It is no fault of FriendFeed that this is happening but it could in the end be a contributor to social hype overload that I think will be the real killer of these types of networks.

Which will be a real shame because I really like FriendFeed because it has managed to something different and do it well. While it provides a way for us to aggregate all our information flows in one place it goes one step further by letting us have conversations about things we have posted and more importantly have conversations about things other folks have posted as well.

This was generally working very well; as it was on Twitter as well, until the top tier social magpies figured out it was also a great way for them to re-publish their thoughts that had originally been regulated to their blogs. Now with a very little effort they had their words spreading throughout the blogosphere via things like Twitter and FriendFeed. This would have been great and could have lead to great conversations except for one thing. Their participation stopped at that point - there was no conversation.

I have lost count of the number of so-called leaders of the social movement who signed up to FriendFeed and by the very nature of their name and popularity had other people joining and friending them; along with those already who were members that friended these big names as well because of the “allure”. While that sure helped build up FriendFeed’s numbers these newcomers were no better than conversation dead ends. All you see from them is what they have posted on their blogs, what they have said on Twitter or what they have repeated elsewhere around the blogosphere.

Unlike those on FriendFeed who do try and be parts of larger conversation these dead enders don’t partake in conversations on FriendFeed, not even the one’s that might develop around their regurgitated words. For them things like FriendFeed are just easy vehicles to further hype themselves with the least amount of effort. It is this use of services like Twitter and FriendFeed as hype and self-promotional that in the end could ruin them for everyone because at some point everyone will get hit with hype overload and decide it’s time to check out.



under: Social Media    

Related Post

Viewing 9 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    this reminds me of what I wrote as a columnist for the college newspaper back in the '70's commenting on the midnight bull sessions in various rooms and lounges at different times in the 4 main dorms that formed the quad of the mens side of the campus. The issue I said was if you spent all your time in these bull sessions, you were quickly reduced to repeating old bull, because you didn't really have enough time to advance into something new from the classes and seminars you attended during the day.
    • ^
    • v
    i am sure you are right about some people and their motivations. but for me, there is nothing better than a comment field or a @ sign

    fred
    • ^
    • v
    While you make a good point, and friendfeed has integrated ways to continue conversation, I utilize it as a way to scan through things I may have missed or overlooked throughout the day. I'll gladly continue any conversation someone may start with me on friendfeed, but with the plethora of social sites I'm already using, I don't plan on initiating it. I think much of the problems with social sites, such as A-listers not conversing very much, will get better as we slowly develop towards fewer sites that do more things seamlessly. If our attention isn't divided amongst so many different places, it will be easier to keep up with the flow of conversation.

    Twitter @thattalldude
    • ^
    • v
    I hope your point

    "I think much of the problems with social sites, such as A-listers not conversing very much, will get better as we slowly develop towards fewer sites that do more things seamlessly."

    comes to fruition but as long as things like social networks and aggregators are looked upon as cheap and easy methods for hyping a blog brand I don't know if it will happen.
    • ^
    • v
    These are all really good points. I just had a fascinating discussion with an academic at University of Texas that networks such as Facebook, FriendFeed and, yes, even MyBlogLog begin to devalue the word "friend"

    Aggregation of events is a technical problem that is basically solved. What is more interesting and will be the next venue for innovation is what to do with all the aggregated events and how to filter though them in a way that adds value.

    I also find it ironic that the Google Ads that are shown next to your article advertise ways to "promote your blog" and "wanna get rich blogging" - an example of a matching algorithm not tuned to the nuances of its audience.

    Ian
    Product Manager, MyBlogLog
    • ^
    • v
    I've been saying for sometime that this whole socialization of web interaction has devalued what friendship means - even written about it here more than a couple of times.

    The thing that I have found with FriendFeed though is that it offsets the potential uselessness of socialized friendship because of the ability to encourage additional conversation points. MyBlogLog - when I could use it - partially had that ability as well and to a certain extent I still hold out high hopes for the service. I also think that it could be built up even more. It would be interesting to see FF and MBL be able to communicate as well.

    There isn't a day that goes by where I find the AdSense almost useless for anything more than filler and the occasional pennies that they earn :)
    • ^
    • v
    Recognized what you described of course; one has to be blind not to see. BUT... I was also strongly reminded about this idea:

    "However if you ever took the time Mr. Rubel to look past you comrades in the A-List I think you would be incredibly surprised to find some of the best writing right there under your nose."

    I have 100+ people on my list. Some I never talk to/with and vice versa. Others I wish good morning and spend the day with. Yet others I see having real, online social relations.

    It's still Usenet: you have to be able to tweak a mean ol' kill filter :)
    • ^
    • v
    I agree with your quote whole heartedly but the point is htat you do take time to converse with folks in your contact lists - I've seen you do it on Twitter. Another good example as well of this "elitist" level is they can toss out a question or a request for help and get inundated with replies and yet some-one lowly like myself can do the same thing and get squat in return.

    This has been proven otherwise on only two seperate occasions and yet I am supposedly reside in the "Friends" lists of many of those many movers and shakers but get natch from them .. so where is the value is that I wonder.
    • ^
    • v
    Yup, the "walk into a bar and just ask:" falls a bit flat for me as well at times.

    Robert Scoble does a pretty good job of staging engaged. He doesn't only react when you @ him but he'll also @ you when he sees you say something in another conversation.

    This whole moving from Geocities to MySpace to [fill in] just shows you how we're all still looking for a good model to belong.

Trackbacks

blog comments powered by Disqus
« From the Pipeline - 3.7.08
Where the F#@k is the story? »