I hate the term ‘social media’ and I think we should kill it off once and for all.
It is meaningless, confusing and doesn’t convey the real concept.
Here are a few thoughts on the matter:
1. What we are really talking about is how we share information, not social media, whatever that meant.
2. Most of the ‘old’ media has incorporated elements of ‘sharing’ via the Internet, so splitting the media by old and social is inaccurate.
3. In fact, media has always been ‘social’. Talking, gossiping, letter writing and even watching TV can be a social experience where we share.
4. No media exists in isolation, each channel – TV, newspapers, Reddit or whatever – influences the other
5. Why lump blogs, forums, wikis, bookmarking, microblogging, geolocation and innovations like Stickybits together? They are all so different and some have more in common with ‘old’ media than we think.
6. If we kill social media we can get rid of annoying social media gurus.
As you can see, a compelling argument. I know I have used the term social media in the past too, but as of late it has started to annoy me.
Tags: Information, pr, sharing, Social Media Posted by
Your post amused me! As a student doing a specialised module in digital media PR I do not want to get rid of it, as I’m hoping it will look good on my CV that I can use online media to communicate with audiences using “social media”.
I totally understand where you are coming from though, but I feel that a mixture of “old” and “new” media are important for PROs to get as much exposure as possible. Your number 4, I agree with.
.-= Clare McCausland´s last blog ..Google Analytics =-.
I don’t want to get rid of ‘social media’, but I see the day when it won’t be treated as a separate entity. Hopefully, we won’t have social media consultants, or event talk about social media as being diffferent to ‘old’ media because sharing information online will be normal.
I started to make the point here in an argument I had with someone on Reddit. People get too caught up in definitions and theory, when in reality the theory is not an accurate portrayal of what is happening in the real world.
As you can probably tell, I am a voracious user of social media, but I am also keen believer in cutting through the crap so our industry can move on and work with some fo the great resources which are available online.
Your post amused me! As a student doing a specialised module in digital media PR I do not want to get rid of it, as I’m hoping it will look good on my CV that I can use online media to communicate with audiences using “social media”.
I totally understand where you are coming from though, but I feel that a mixture of “old” and “new” media are important for PROs to get as much exposure as possible. Your number 4, I agree with.
.-= Clare McCausland´s last blog ..Google Analytics =-.
I don’t want to get rid of ‘social media’, but I see the day when it won’t be treated as a separate entity. Hopefully, we won’t have social media consultants, or event talk about social media as being diffferent to ‘old’ media because sharing information online will be normal.
I started to make the point here in an argument I had with someone on Reddit. People get too caught up in definitions and theory, when in reality the theory is not an accurate portrayal of what is happening in the real world.
As you can probably tell, I am a voracious user of social media, but I am also keen believer in cutting through the crap so our industry can move on and work with some fo the great resources which are available online.
microblogging is really useful when you want to broadcast short updates. i am still leaning towards traditional blogging.”~
microblogging is really useful when you want to broadcast short updates. i am still leaning towards traditional blogging.”~