Social Media- “What’s In a Name?”

In a recent blog, No More "Social" Media: It's Knowledge Media, Andy Krzmarzick proposed to change the name Social Media into Knowledge Media.  In a following post, Gov 2.0 moves beyond ’social media’ — and why it’s more than semantics, Chris Dorobek wrote: “But the term “social media” is, in fact, dangerous because it gives people the opportunity to discount there very powerful tools with a broad brush… At the end, the power of these tools comes from their inherent ability to enable information sharing and collaboration, not from the social aspects”.

These are valid suggestions and concerns. I have, however, some thoughts about the effects of terms we choose to describe things and I would like to suggest an alternative.

Working on visuals for years has taught me a great lesson about metaphors (visual, verbal, and otherwise). A metaphor could be extremely valuable in explaining some aspects of a phenomenon or an object.  But, as people tend to generalize (or sometimes to stereotype), they could perceive the metaphor as a sole representation of reality, or even worse, as reality itself.

Hence, when we say social media, some people might think that it is the only aspect of the beast.  If we call it knowledge media, people might perceive that it is all about sharing knowledge regardless of the social aspects.  So, what is a good name for this medium or media?  My preference would be to use a "neutral" name like new media.

Even if we use the neutral term of new media, we still need to relate to the real role of the social aspect. In his post, The Golden Triangle, Fred Wilson rightfully pointed out that “The three current big megatrends in the web/tech sector are mobile, social, and real-time.”  In that statement, it seems to me, all parts of “the three megatrends” include information sharing and collaboration- not just in the social one. However, the social aspect is the proponent for sharing information and collaboration and it is not just a tool. The mobile and real time aspects, however, are facilitators in many (but maybe not in all) cases.

To me, the main aspect of the new media (or whatever you would call it) is indeed the social. We are herd animals and are “programmed” to like to associate with one another (unless there are some roadblocks…).  People like to share things with their friends and acquaintances- a meal, a gift, a favor, feelings, and, yes, information.  Before new media, as many have pointed out, writing (including newspapers), TV, theater, film, and billboards were some of the main possible ways to share information in a larger scale than a few people.  They were mainly one-way streets. We, the audience, were the recipients and by-and-large, were not able to respond. Now, the new media has allowed us to participate in the information creation and dissemination processes.

This has social consequences.  In the wild, people share photos, status information, etc., and they “aggregate” with one another as they like. These resulting communities usually grow spontaneously and organically.

Within organizations, however, the implementation of social media could be different.  From my experience, one usually needs to work extra hard to convince people to open their personal gates at work, to traverse organizational boundaries (or even break them), to merge organizational cultures, and to establish a community. Afterwards this is done, one needs to continue working to maintain the community so it will get stronger and not just fade away.  If all works well in this organizational environment, one would see a dramatic increase of information sharing and even collaboration.

Another important aspect of this new media is that it could increase the number of people within and outside your organization who know you or about you, and as Mark Drapeau points out (quoted in Gov 2.0 moves beyond ’social media’ — and why it’s more than semantics): "It used to be about who you know. Today, it's about who knows you- and that, increasingly, the people who are the most connected are the most influential".

Some managers might object to the word ‘social’ in social media for a reason.  They do not wish their employees to start exchanging information about their social lives outside work or they are concerned that the new freedom will break the traditional organizational boundaries and thus endanger their own positions.  Sometimes, sharing of some aspects of a one’s private life is necessary to start conversation and networking stressing that this person is a human being and not just a robotic entity in the office.  Employees might be empowered to exercise their own best judgment when to stop or some appropriate guidelines could be established and implemented.  From my experience, managers could be educated about the advantages of these new environments.  The rewards could be enormous.

 

Comments

[Mark Drapeau]

Thanks for the great overview of what is a current and interesting discussion.

[Kaleem Kamboj]

Dear Nahum, thank you for the succinct remarks. I agree. Here are some thoughts…
"What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet."
It is true that a name, a metaphor and a poetical reference may conjure certain perceptions and projections. All media is social. The interaction has not been as interrelated and as direct as technology has made available at the present time. In the past the critic or fan provided commentary indirectly. The customer bought or boycotted in response. The gap of the indirect response allowed certain syndicate control. Societies went from story tellers – to story makers – to our current open source stories. Platforms too are still as prominent as they were at each historical stage of social conversation. Today we call these platforms Twitter, facebook and LinkedIn. The names continue to change as we learn new ways of conversation of being human.

[Andrew Krzmarzick]

Well said, Nahum. Ultimately, I stated the case for knowledge media strongly to spur discussion, but would argue that the accepted language (social media or Web 2.0) should be used when introducing the concept...then include terms like "knowledge network" or "collaborative tools" to stress that these tools meet serious needs within organizations and to help resisters in understanding and accepting their value to accomplish the mission. "New media" may fall within this category as well (i.e. talking about the integration of social media with more traditional tools that facilitate communication and collaboration).

[Nahum Gershon]

Thanks, Andy for both your post and comment. I deal with implementation issues of social/knowledge/new media, etc., in real life and you are right that we need to tailor the presentation appropriately to the task at hand. There are always social issues with these new media since they require a change of behavior and new kinds of interpersonal and inter-organizational habits. I would like to continue the voice-to-voice (V2V) that we started and maybe even extend it to F2F encounter when you are in town.

BTW, I meant by the term new media the integration of social aspects with the new mobile and real-time capabilities as well as with more traditional technologies.

[Nahum Gershon]

Dear Kaleem, thanks for your thoughtful comments. I totally agree with your historical assessment that we always had social interaction with most of available media and that the new social media hve given us more active and direct participation capabilities. Yes, we are still learning how to communicate and will always do so while technology is providing us with more ways to satisfy the human need to communicate with one another.

[sourcepov.wordpress.com]

Nahum, I couldn't agree more. In fact, with 'New Media' we're on the same page:

http://bit.ly/povSM2

There's also some traction on 'Collaborative Media' and 'Collaborative Technology' but those are mouthfuls .. might not stand up to everyday use.

I'm about to post on 'semantics in a virtual world, and the challenge of shifting context', and it looks like we're on the same page there too. Thanks for your link to Mark D's post, I need to read it. One going in thought: the loss of 'critical thinking' skills in society (and of course, in gov't) allows otherwise useful metaphors to overpower what they're trying to describe.

Looking forward to further dialog & insights.

Chris

[Jordan 5]

Hello, Nice to meet you and reading you article, You article really nice. I am a girl come from China, I am a sport shoes lover, But the Jordan shoes is my best lover. When I was young my father bought a Jordan shoes to me, From that time,What I wear is Jordan.

[cheap Jordans]

We won't be able to modify our previous. We are not able to modification the simple fact that individuals will act in a very specific way. However the only factor we are able to do is play around the one particular string we've, and that's our perspective.

[Jordan 13]

Human hope like a star eternal stars, And the dark clouds can't hide its rays. Especially in today, Peace is not a dream, a dream,It is people's desire

[Onitsuka Tiger]

College sports, especially football and basketball, are a big industry.

[Epini]

celebrex better than advil celexa antidepressants bourke con edison erythromycin outdated clomid without prescription fast shipping tetracycline online women using cialis cymbalta compare prozac http://www.gzchealth.com/bbs//forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=27040&extra= - penis levitra profe http://www.pro2thai.com/index.php?topic=9834.new#new - baclofen prices baclofen generic http://www.chainat.go.th/smf_dlt/index.php?topic=92282.new#new - benefit of stopping paxil long term affects of paxil use http://www.ipilsite.com/showthread.php?p=19#post19 - how many tablets of aciphex aciphex vs nexium http://forum.warszawamoto.pl/showthread.php?tid=29611 - pictures of naprosyn substitute for naprosyn depot provera shot symptoms pharmacy amsterdam cialis flomax effects