...
Since my last post, much has changed in my life. I was hired by the Orlando office of Edelman, one of the largest P.R. firms in the world, as an Assistant Account Executive. Today, I met Edelman's head of digital practices for the U.S,. and as I drove him back to the airport we chatted about "social media." This short, enlightening conversation really made me start thinking about what communications has become and where it may go in the future. It inspired me enough to get my fingers twitching for the keyboard....
I clicked "play" on iTunes for the mood music, and out of my speakers came the song "Technologic" by Daft Punk. To give you a sense of the eerie coincidence, the following is an excerpt of the song's lyrics: "Surf it, scroll it, pause it, click it, cross it, crack it, switch - update it, name it, read it, tune it, print it, scan it, send it, fax - rename it, touch it, bring it, pay it, watch it, turn it, leave it, start - format it." The lyrics aren't eloquent or overtly brilliant, but they make a point. You can always count on iTunes for reading your mind [insert government conspiracy here].
On to the subject of this post...while I was driving Dave to the airport, trying my very best not to scare him with my unfortunate Colombian driving, I brought up a question that has been on my mind for a very long time. "Why don't tech-savvy people like using the term 'social media?'" Dave gave me a pretty straightforward answer: who's to define "media?" To media relations professionals, social "media" may mean print, TV, and radio. To advertising professionals, social "media" may mean commercials and ads. To me, social "media" means Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, and all other social networking communities online. There is no wrong answer. Dave and his peers are bothered by the term "social media" because it's not accurate. He suggested using the term "social technologies" instead, which makes much more sense to me.
If you really think about the big picture, you'll realize how absurd it is that there is just one
specific term ("media") to define an unimaginable number of categories and subcategories. Can we really consider Facebook and Skype to be the same? Can we consider Myspace and Flickr to be the same? How about digg and Blogger? There are similarities with all of these, but it would be like calling humans and chimps by the same name because they both have thumbs and chew with their teeth.I am by no means an expert on the topic of social technologies, although I feel a very special right to call myself an inherent connoisseur since I am a member of the first generation to be born into homes with personal computers (think black screen, orange letters). And even as a self-proclaimed "inherent connoisseur," I am still intrigued by the rapid and ever-changing landscape of the web. I remember watching a few episodes of "The Universe" series on the History Channel. I was awed by the vastness and mystery of space. That same feeling washes over me when I try to even grasp the possibilities for the future of this "World Wide Web" thing.
Where will Twitter be in five years, how will Facebook evolve in the next two, will MySpace even exist in the next six months? It's almost as if the online space has morphed into this hyperspeed, roid-driven virtual world where a year in Internet time is seven years in human time. It's really a vicious cycle...social technologies are driven by users' lack of attention spans, users' attention spans become shorter with every new social technology. It's a vicious, rabid little cycle, but oh, do I love it.
At the end of this post, I am left with no answers. But, that's ok...I like the mystery of it all, I'm not searching for answers. As with space, I respect the Internet for all of its complexity, even though I don't fully understand it (and never really will).



You 