Nothing better than spending a rainy Sunday reading some thoughtful articles and listening to raindrops and corellas and koels chattering away — in between arguing with Laurel Papworth, of course! I’ve been reading some stuff Mark Pesce has posted recently, including his own essay Unevenly Distributed: Production Models for the 21st Century, as well as The Register saying that people are tiring of social network websites and a piece explaining why Malcolm Gladwell’s bestselling book The Tipping Point is bullshit. I may reflect upon some of them later.
Social Media: It’s about the people, not the tools
One of the biggest mistakes businesses make when thinking about social media is that it’s all about the tools — that if only they choose the right software they’ll be a success. That’s about as sensible as thinking your retail business will be successful if only you buy the right bookkeeping software.
Yesterday a client asked:
My friends at [some business] wish to create a social networking section as part of their site, with home pages or profiles for each user. Do you recommend any third party apps for this or a currently operating system?
No, I don’t recommend the tools until I know what the job is.
That question is like being asked, “I want a motor vehicle, can you recommend one?” Before you could answer you’d need to know the requirements. How many passengers? An answer of “6” means a people-mover, not a sports car. An answer of “40” means you need a bus.
Does it have to go off-road? Land Rover time! Does it have to carry 3 tons of bricks? Well, you need a truck, not a car. Do you need to make a social statement with your vehicle? Then maybe you need a Rolls-Royce. Or a Porsche. Or a Ferrari.
Or a packet of Viagra.
Continue reading “Social Media: It’s about the people, not the tools”
Prussia.Net versus Skank Media: my new business structure
I think I’ve figured out how to explain my business plans for 2008. I’ve written about this previously, but while running errands today I had a brainflash. How does this sound…?
In my new About Stilgherrian page, I wrote:
I’m particularly interested in how new social networking and communication technologies are changing the way we work, play, socialise and organise our societies. Yes, I’m a geek… But I’m not that interested in technology itself. I’m more interested in the social questions.
What does it all mean for your life? Your family? Your business? Your community? For the law and politics? How will it change the very core of what it means to be human?
Well, my brainflash is about how this translates into what the two businesses actually do.
Continue reading “Prussia.Net versus Skank Media: my new business structure”
Now I’m Twittering
For those that haven’t noticed, I’ve finally caved in and started using Twitter. Twitterings at twitter.com/stilgherrian and in the sidebar of the website. I now have the joy of figuring out how this new data feed will be useful for me (and you). Stand by.
Corey Delaney meets Life Streaming (sort of)
With little energy after last night’s massive session of Silent Hunter III, I haven’t written an original essay today. Instead, let me suggest you read two things I’ve commented upon. 1. The redoubtable Laurel Papworth‘s analysis of Corey Delaney’s page being deleted from Wikipedia. 2. Duncan Riley’s polemic on life streaming and whether we should still draw the line on privacy somewhere.
Retreating into the walled garden, for safety
Why do people pour their lives into proprietary environments like Facebook when everything they need to communicate with their friends is already on their desktops? Or their phones. The inimitable Stephen Fry has once again written complete sense, theorising that it’s deep human nature.
What an irony! For what is this much-trumpeted social networking but an escape back into that world of the closed online service of 15 or 20 years ago? Is it part of some deep human instinct that we take an organism as open and wild and free as the internet, and wish then to divide it into citadels, into closed-border republics and independent city states? The systole and diastole of history has us opening and closing like a flower: escaping our fortresses and enclosures into the open fields, and then building hedges, villages and cities in which to imprison ourselves again before repeating the process once more. The internet seems to be following this pattern.
How does this help us predict the Next Big Thing? That’s what everyone wants to know, if only because they want to make heaps of money from it. In 1999 Douglas Adams said: “Computer people are the last to guess what’s coming next. I mean, come on, they’re so astonished by the fact that the year 1999 is going to be followed by the year 2000 that it’s costing us billions to prepare for it.â€
But let the rise of social networking alert you to the possibility that, even in the futuristic world of the net, the next big thing might just be a return to a made-over old thing.
Another possibility, I guess, is that most people are overwhelmed by the choices available. Facebook and the rest just give them a few obvious options and they can get on with it. Or are both Mr Fry and I completely missing it?