Sat 4 Apr 2009
Media We
Posted by Lisa Hickey under social media
A couple of things happened yesterday that got me thinking about life in this brave new world of social media. Each gave me an insight which was cool in its own way, but combined they gave me an “aha” so big I couldn’t wait to run out and tell the world.
1.) I saw some interesting blog comments. Surprising? Not a bit. But in several cases, I wanted to take ONE sentence, one insight, out of context and post it on Twitter. Obviously give credit to the person who said it, but without having to explain where the comment came from. It took me a while, but with help from @jakrose and @CoCreatr others I learned I could permalink to the blog comment itself (look for the link as a number near the comment, then shorten link with bit.ly). Obvious, once shown how. This led me to discuss with people that I wanted to be known as “Chief Bubbler” ~ someone who would bubble up the insights from comments on blog posts that might otherwise get hidden from view.
2.) I figured out the difference between Social Networking and Social Media. Okay, this is another thing that SEEMS like it should be obvious, right? But for the longest time, I couldn’t really articulate it clearly. Then, I got it. Social Networking is the connections between people, and the conversations you have with those people. Social Media is the sharing of content between people in those networks.
There’s some overlap, of course. Conversations become content, for one thing. But it helps me, strategically, to separate them in my own mind. Networking is something I do with individuals, focusing on the relationships I have with people and their interconnections. Social media is finding, creating and exchanging content that has value to like-minded groups of people.
3.). Media We is born. So I’m thinking about all this yesterday. The definition of media, and the creation of content. And the fact that I want to find new and unusual content that people don’t usually see. Content of value. But in order to do that, I have to research, and I have to edit, and I have to attribute properly, and make sure I’m sharing content *responsibly*.
As I’m thinking, I’m messaging people who have blogs, and I’m asking those people if I can set guidelines with them about how I can best use their content. And I think to myself: “I feel like all of a sudden I’m head of *media relations* somewhere.”
“In fact, I feel like I’ve just been named CEO of my own personal media company. Media We.”
How the heck did that happen?
What do you think? Anyone else feel like they started their own personal media business without even knowing it?
Love your definition of the Social Media verses Social Network
I think that social media are simply the platforms and networking is what you do with them (among many other things). Your comments are good but are all about what individuals are doing and have done, Julia Roy, Perry Belcher, Chris Pirillo, Gary V, all the individuals who have made themselves brands using social media, which gives them the same power as a big brand providing they are willing to put in the time and effort. Right now there are lots of people working on their individual brands. So what does this mean? Right now people are drunk on the possibility of spreading themselves across the digital and social universe. They become names, get a few speaking gigs, build a small business, become authorities. All cool. But what are the other ends? What does it mean for brands, for causes, for movements? Will it simply be a way for more and more splinters of interest to exist, circle the wagons and contain themselves? Will social ever replace in any way the big common, shared experiences, i.e. Facebook/CNN inauguration? In the past, media channels of any kind — newspapers, networks, cable, etc. — had little to do with the media or the network but all to do with the content, programming and what people actually used them for. Right now there is so much talk about social media as social media and engaging as engaging and not enough talk and imagination about what can be done with it all and for what purpose, commercial or otherwise. Should be interesting challenges to confront. Glad that you are thinking about this stuff and advancing the conversation.
edward boches
http://edwardboches.com/
Thanks, Lisa, for the credit. Media we, a cool name. I share the feeling of growing into “head of *media relations*”, my media relations - so I was musing to call it “Media Me”. But, as the blog-comment relationship demonstrates, it is indeed co-creation, hence “Media We”.
be entertained
congrats, lisa. seems like you’ve had a media company for a while now. you just gave it a name. a simple step, but a big one. may your steps from this one forward leave deep impressions in many new places. cheers.
Agree with Edward on this. While I like (love?) your thinking on Media We, the challenge is purpose. A CMO of a big retail client can nod and smile and think good thoughts about Twitter. But we, as an industry, need to help the CMO prove to the merch guys that social media leads to ROI. The merch guys don’t care about social media for the sake of social media. They’d dance in the rain naked if it lead to a same-store-sales increases. So it comes back, wait for it, to ideas. Imagination, as Edward said.
Social Media is just that. Media. Cool, new, different, vague, fun, scary, boundless. But media just same. It’s what we do in the media that will really make or break us.
Thanks for the shoutout Lisa. Love the chief bubbler title.
I have struggled with the media v. networking nomage at two different recent employers, trying to package it in an easy to digest way. I have settled on Social Media being the larger category and Social Networking a sub-category thereof. SN referring to website with profiles and friending of any sort. Social Media referring to commenting, rating, chatting, content ceration/sharing, etc. Conversations and discussions online, after all, can become their own media.
Lisa, Another thought provoking post from you, whom I consider my social media magellan. Personally I think of small things I do in the SM arena as less of the work of a media company and more closely resembling a tv network. I deliver content sometimes original other times discovered. It is the slant of what I deliver and how I package it that leads to my value, my followers, my friends.
I think that the recurring note about the value of imagination and creativity in this area has yet to truly and completely reveal itself.
I also think that to much attention is paid to the platform (twitter, fb or whatever) and not enough to what is facilitated by the platform.
The pervasive, omnipresent and inescapable connection of communication is truly staggering. How we exploit that power will be exciting.
Wow. Some really useful discussion here. And I say that as someone who is keen to learn about what is useful v. the stuff that is just remarkable.
Lisa and a few others advised me today on how to make Twitter useful, and within a couple of hours it happened. And to good effect.
I now have a piece of software that allows me to segment my tweets. I learned to look for themes, strands and ways of tracking them that finally made me see Twitter as a facilitator of the citizen - as well as the traditional - journalist.
It’s now a C21st newswire.
It’s a medium (infrastructure, way of linking people) and also a network (desirable medium with content that spawns growth) with what I feel now has a genuine and exciting use.
I thank you.
Matt
Thanks everyone, for such inspiring comments. It helps me to be able to first see what things *are*, and then to be able to envision the greater and greater potential for what they can *do*. And I’ve spent my life thinking that creativity and imagination should be paramount, so no arguments there! It’s the sharing of both content and ideas that move people to action. I have no doubts that, when done correctly, ROI will be proven beyond peoples expectations. I will tackle that tomorrow. : ) thanks again. Lisa
There’s nothing I don’t agree with here (except some of the cynicism). It’s fun to read and think about, fo sho.
Since we’re mostly ad folk here, we can’t help but want to find “a purpose” for this stuff. This stuff that we can’t seem to label easily. This stuff that when we finally do label it, we can’t seem to define.
I’m not trying to be over simplistic here, but can’t we just let it go? Just enjoy it? (As Lisa genuinely seems to be doing?) Have fun with it? Let it morph into what it wants to be and then sell the shit out of it to our clients once “it” figures itself out?
I read something recently (I think it was in last week’s Mediaweek) that sort of made sense to me. The author suggested that brands should first simply observe (and not create some stupid facebook page), keep their eyes and ears open for what’s being said about them. Maybe hire someone (Lisa) just to track what’s being said where. Then, look for patterns and opportunities to enter the conversations. Then, maybe even add value to the conversations, sneak in some content if the time/place seems right. The key is to do it unobtrusively and in a way that seems natural. The brands that can do that — and it will take a careful, delicate dance — will win.
In the meantime, I’m having a blast chatting with my friends from elementary school and following Deepak Chopra’s tweets.
I really appreciate your distinction between social media and social networking. The tools of social media enable us to network forming more connections over a far greater distance in less time than has ever been possible.
Seems to me there is something far more profound going on here than the traditional financial metric of ROI can adequately capture.
Love your “Chief Bubbler” title - a fitting title for you Lisa!