Life 2.0: Social Media Obsessions and Virtual Inhibitions
The beauty of social media is that it helps to bring us together. We can meet new friends half-way around the world. We can meet colleagues we otherwise might never know. We can meet and work with clients virtually. We can re-connect with old classmates, friends, or loved ones. We can find the hottest news in our peer group, what our favorite blogger was doing five minutes ago, or even find a date.
I’d wager that we can learn more about many complete strangers these days through social media tools than past generations would have known about some of the people they saw and interacted with on a daily basis. It’s all rather exciting stuff. Or is it?
Acceptance of Social Media
Not everyone embraces social media tools like blogging, social networking, microblogging, social news sites, photo and video sharing sites, social bookmarking, and even wikis.
Do we have an issue with information overload? Has social media obsession led to self-obsession? Is it possible (or perhaps the better question is “is it worth it”) to pursue all, or even most, new media technologies? Or is it better to keep a certain amount of skepticism when it comes to social media?
I chatted recently with Andreas Charalambous, a good friend and lecturer in film and media studies in London, about these and other issues separating the neophiliac and cultural pessimist crowds on the social media front. But first, where do you fall?
- Neophiliacs - This group is ready and willing to embrace new technologies, whether in social media or the latest gadgets. All technological advancement can be seen as positive. This is your early adopter crowd. They were the first to jump on the latest social media craze, and they’ll be the first to jump on others (even perhaps before they can determine any actual value).
- Cultural Pessimists - These people are the skeptics… the ones who aren’t as comfortable with ever-changing technologies, Web-based or otherwise. They’re not going to upgrade to the latest potentially-bug-filled version of Windows just to say they have. They’re not going to invest in the latest video game consoles the moment they’re released. They didn’t pay too much for an iPhone. And they’re not going to play around with new social networks when they’re comfortable where they already are.
I’d like to think that most of us fall somewhere nicely in between those two extremes. I’d also like to think that I’ve found my own place in the mix as someone who pursues new technologies as they’re released (at least to the point of testing and evaluating them for my own needs) without becoming so tech-obsessed that I have to use every tool that gets hyped up. (I talked more about my thoughts on this issue in my past post, The Social Media Grinch.) Where do you fit in? Do you try every new tool? Do you tend to desert the old for the new quickly? Or are you still standing firmly by the social media tools you may have been using a year or two ago?
The Great Divide
Andreas makes an interesting point regarding where we generally see the biggest separation of the neophiliac and cultural pessimist crowds:
“The biggest gap between the two is when a totally new technology is introduced, like a new format (eg. Bluray replacing DVD). It is difficult trying to convince someone to make a total change from something that is relatively new anyway, and that fulfills their needs, to something that has totally wiped the slate clean.
It’s the issue of trying to convince someone to stop using what they are familiar with , and moving to ‘the next big thing’. Someone who is an avid user of something like Myspace for example, might not see the benefit of switching to Facebook.”
I think the real key is the “fulfills their needs” part. When it comes to new social media tools specifically, does one social network generally fulfill needs that your existing social network doesn’t? Is it worth the time and energy to move (or create an additional network to then update and manage), or better to stick with what’s already working for you (especially in an age where the competition will likely create their own version of new features launched by competitors relatively quickly)? Do we really need to switch from Myspace to Facebook to whatever comes next… even if we’re happy where we are?
Problems with Neophilia
It might be an attractive concept - being first to use this tool, that product, or some new service. Yet there are some potential downsides:
- Cost - Neophiliacs are often gadget-junkies, needing the latest and greatest not only in social media but more tangible technologies as well. There can be a high cost involved in being first.
- Wasted Time - Aside from the financial costs, this group has to devote more learning time (not as many have been there before them to have tutorials available, etc.). There’s also the issue of spending time dealing with problems (with any kind of technology), as the problems aren’t usually ironed out until early user feedback comes in. There’s only so much time in a day, which means that to stay on top of the latest tools and technologies, these users have to eventually leave others behind. That means they’ve wasted time building networks they may no longer be using, and they have to start from scratch (often building very similar social groups elsewhere) - and they’ll never have the biggest reach within their target audience, because most others won’t be coming and going at their rate (possibly not until after they’re gone).
- User’s Remorse - More specific to social media, what you post to the Web is rarely ever completely gone. Fascination with new tools and technologies (and less familiarity with built-in privacy options or privacy policies) can lead to people posting more information publicly than they’re later comfortable with.
Andreas is a self-admitted gadget junkie, and he shares an example of the cost issue that neophiliacs can face:
“[Minidiscs] weren’t around long enough for the prices to drop, as with other technologies which become standard. I bought one for around £300, and before I knew it, it became obsolete when MP3 players and the iPod came out. Something [can be] big for 5 minutes, then forgotten about 5 minutes later.”
Do you have any examples (about social media or any other technologies) of where it wasn’t such a good idea to be first on board?
Problems with Cultural Pessimism
While being an early adopter has its downsides, so does being late to the game.
- Missed Opportunities - By not participating in any social media tools (or very few), you run the risk of missing personal and professional networking opportunities (a potential future employer or client might not find you, you may never reconnect with colleagues from a past company, etc.). From more of a marketing perspective, you also can lose income opportunities.
- Negative Image - Let’s face it. If you work in an industry like PR, where communication is key and social media tools are the norm, you need to at least try some of the technologies being developed in order to simply relate within your own field.
What other problems do you see with cultural pessimism or being slow to accept new technologies (especially in social media)?
Striking While the Network’s Hot
On the professional front, Andreas makes the point that being willing to engage in new social media environments is sometimes about staying ahead of the competition:
“In a sense, young people use social networks to promote themselves, whereas professionals want to market their services. But [with] the Internet in this case, where everyone has access (including market rivals), it is harder to keep one step ahead of everyone else.
It’s like when a big studio wants to promote an upcoming film, they can easily afford a budget of millions of dollars for marketing alone. Then comes along a small indie production, and [the low cost of social media marketing means] the playing field is leveled…. It’s a cheap, effective method of targeting potential customers.”
Obviously that point applies more to social media marketing than social media on the PR front or simply in forwarding conversations and building relationships. But it’s a valid point, and I think it’s one reason we see large numbers of people moving from one tool to another.
I’ve talked in the past about how the Internet marketing crowd will often target a new social media tool… social networks in particular. They flood it with spam or otherwise promote sites, products, services, or companies so aggressively that it becomes a turn-off for the original user base of the network. In the beginning, they make a lot of money. Eventually, so many competitors jump on the bandwagon that the early marketers leave to trash a new tool, network, or service. It seems to play a significant role in the social media life cycle and user attitudes.
Old and New
We’ve been talking a lot here about social networks, but let’s look at two other social media tools: blogging (one of the “older” social media elements, and my own biggest social media obsession) and microblogging (one of the newest, and seemingly most addictive).
The sheer number of new blogs being created every day should tell us that the technology is (at least slowly) becoming more accepted. Services like Twitter make talking about blogging seem entirely “old school” at times, applying to similar audiences even if for somewhat different purposes. Yet not everyone is comfortable with blogs yet, including younger groups (which can seem surprising, with them growing up alongside some of these new technologies). Andreas shared a perfect example of someone that we might lump into the cultural pessimist group, at least with blogging:
“We encourage our students to use blogs to assist in their education, whether it be collecting research or submitting work. One student in particular spends most of his time on MSN, Myspace and Facebook. When I ask him to submit his work on his blog, he asks if he can submit on his Myspace instead, and eventually submits hard copies of work on paper. He just does not want to use a blog. He doesn’t get it, and doesn’t want to find it.”
What I find most interesting about this example is the fact that the student isn’t skeptical of new media as a whole… just blogging. While that’s confusing in a way (especially to someone who adores blogging), I can understand there being differences.
Blogging is more solitary than other social media tools, at least when you’re new to it. It’s not as simple as “adding friends” to your network. You have to invest time into building your blog, your readership, and your relationship with them. Blogging only really becomes social when you’ve done those things - when you’ll have people leaving comments and linking to you to continue the discussion. At the same time, some people still view blogs as essentially journals - somewhere to share private information with friends, family, or others you’re already acquainted with.
I obviously don’t know what the student’s motivations are for wanting to avoid blogging, but there are technologies I personally try to stay away from, so I can understand the broader idea. With me, it’s microblogging.
Technologies vs Tools
It’s no secret that I’m not a big fan of Twitter and similar services. I toyed with them. I acknowledge that they can serve a useful purpose for some. But for me, microblogging fulfills no actual need that’s not being fulfilled elsewhere. I don’t need another distraction, nor all of the noise that comes along with it.
Would that lump me into the cultural pessimist group? I don’t think so. I didn’t “hide” from the technology. I evaluated it and formed my own opinions. Now microblogging is a new technology. Let’s look at it from the tool perspective.
I’m an avid Wordpress user. I host all of my own blogs, and run every one of them with Wordpress. I highly doubt that’s going to change in the foreseeable future. I don’t care if a new blog platform comes around, or if one of the smaller platforms makes big advancements. Why? Because I moved to Wordpress ages ago due to the huge community making constant improvements. It’s well-supported. It would also be a pain in the ass to move even a single blog to a new platform. So I would have to have a hell of a reason to make that decision. I don’t see it happening. Does that attitude make me a cultural pessimist? Should I try even more blogging platforms? What about when they’re upgraded? Should they get another chance? (And for the record, I’ve used Blogger, MT, LJ, and other blog platforms, so it’s not a matter of just staying with my first experience.)
Where do you personally draw the line when it comes to new social media technologies, tools, and services? Do you have to try everything that comes out, just the broader technologies, or are you happy letting others play the role of guinea pig?
Social Media and Education
While Andreas points out that some “examining bodies have written the use of blogs into their curriculum now,” I’m personally more interested in the future of social media and its acceptance on a wider educational level.
When I decide to continue pursuing my own education, I’m seriously considering virtual degree options. I wouldn’t have considered that just a few years back, but with the number of reputable schools involved in virtual learning these days, it seems like a more practical option for a busy professional (not to mention one that fascinates me given my industry and our sheer obsession with social media). Working in this area directly, I asked Andreas about his thoughts on how new media tools are playing a role in education (now and in the future):
“Teaching is becoming more virtual it seems. There are organisations that educate purely online, whether it be distance learning or mobility issues for the learner. Theoretically, you could hold an entire lecture online now using something like Secondlife. It’s something that’s possible with the technology we currently have, so how long before all lectures are held in front of your computer screen? Look at what video conferencing has achieved.”
Being me, with my neverending love of testing everything I can get my hands on, I’ve actually played with the backend of quite a few of the opensource and similar virtual learning applications. I’m sure some have changed since then (about a year ago when I was considering using one of these tools in the development of a site I was building). I can’t help but wonder how some of them have progressed since then, and how they’re being applied in more serious educational environments.
I’d love to hear about anyone’s experiences with online learning, especially the incorporation of social media tools. Do you think social media elements will ever be widely enough accepted to make them the norm in any kind of educational capacity? We’ve talked recently about whether or not people trust bloggers. Do you think they’ll ever be trusted and accepted to the point of replacing other types of traditional media? What are some of your own favorite social media tools, and where do you see them potentially going (and growing) in the future if they achieve mass acceptance?
If you enjoyed this post, please leave a comment or subscribe to the feed to stay on top of future rants, interviews, or PR and social media tid bits.
Comments
I think that the really great/useful social media tools will just evolve naturally into most people’s usage (across the generations). The problem with (some) Neophiliacs is that they *try too hard* to promote/evangelize their latest shiny, new techno toy, singing the benefits that they derive from these tools (i.e., just because it works for you, doesn’t mean that it is everyone’s cup of tea).
For example, I really liked the final (reality check) line in Jim Horton’s recent, thoughtful Twitter essay ( http://www.online-pr.com/Holding/Twitter.pdf , which can also be accessed from this post: http://online-pr.blogspot.com/2007/07/twitter_17.html )
“Twitter, however, is not a killer application that everyone needs to know, like word processing or spreadsheets and yes, PowerPoint.”
I like the idea of a Need to Know (or even Desire to Use) principle, when it comes to selling social media. And Andreas certainly has some interesting ideas.
I like your idea of returning to school virtually. But it’s important to be careful when choosing a distance ed program. I’ve taught in several and can tell you there’s a huge difference in quality among distance ed programs. You need to know what questions to ask, beyond accreditation.
Cathy - I don’t expect to start on a virtual degree program until I decide where I’d like to move to (or if I’ll stay put for a while). That’s something I don’t expect to have set in stone for a year or a little longer. Personally, I would only consider an online degree program from a respected college or university that I were already quite familiar with (none of these heavily-advertised programs we see all over the Web, TV, etc.). :) Out of curiosity though, what would you consider one or two of the biggest questions to ask or things to keep in mind when comparing those types of programs?
The problem with the analysis you write about in this thoughtful post Jennifer is that, although you do mention it, the two prominent differences in uses of the net – and technology - are age and personal finance, class if you will.
Marketing for decades has heavily relied on psychological theories that, don’t get me wrong here, has often trodden on new terrain - particularly when it was applied to politics from the 1980s onwards.
But sometimes it’s like the PR industry is being too clever for their own good.
You mention Blue Ray. There is an obvious financial cost here that prohibits most people spending on the player and on the expensive disks – as well as the fact that this was item was being positioned against Toshiba’s HD-DVD.
And don’t forget, for what? Why should people upgrade their player and films to Blue Ray? The truth is that in the CD revolution of the 80s and 90s a lot of old albums re-released on CD were appalling remastered, with quality no better, if not worse, than the vinyl they were replacing.
Back to personal finance again:
‘Cultural Pessimists - These people are the skeptics… the ones who aren’t as comfortable with ever-changing technologies, Web-based or otherwise. They’re not going to upgrade to the latest potentially-bug-filled version of Windows just to say they have. They’re not going to invest in the latest video game consoles the moment they’re released. They didn’t pay too much for an iPhone. And they’re not going to play around with new social networks when they’re comfortable where they already are.’
There’s financial risk in some of this, but not all this. Upgrading to Vista is expensive, and fraught with problems – this has been well documented across the web.
Iphone – looks interesting, admittedly, but again prohibitively expensive – up until now – for most mobile phone users.
Then you mention social networks in the same paragraph – well, for one, they are free to join. But there is also the aspect that people have invested time and energy in existing social networks – they have built their personal profile up and “friends” network and are reluctant to abandon that for something new.
You mention the ‘Great Divide’. It’s still the case that the biggest divide is between the less well off and those that can afford it indulge in new technology.
There’s also such a big difference in age. At 32, I’m still, just, looking above me when it comes to the age gap.
Just as much as old people are terrified of technology now, god knows what it will be like when I’m their age.
But I was chatting to a friend the other day and he was saying that emailing is pretty alien to the under-18s – they find more immediate ways of electronic communication.
‘Problems with Cultural Pessimism
Missed Opportunities - By not participating in any social media tools (or very few), you run the risk of missing personal and professional networking opportunities (a potential future employer or client might not find you, you may never reconnect with colleagues from a past company, etc.). From more of a marketing perspective, you also can lose income opportunities.’
Of course, you are right, but this isn’t for the population at large, but just for that small band of professionals who thrive off innovation.
I mean yeah, Neophiliacs and Cultural Pessimists – there is something here, it just needs more work and expanding upon.
Anyway, rambling here. Admittedly, you’ve got me hooked with these posts and I’ll bookmark this site for further debate.
‘Do you have any examples (about social media or any other technologies) of where it wasn’t such a good idea to be first on board?’
Betamax ;)
I understand what you’re saying Andy. The Bluray example was simply one that my interviewee gave that would apply to the consumer perspective. The reason I didn’t delve too much into the cost issue here is that the primary focus of the post was on social media tools (generally free)rather than consumer electronics and other fun stuff. So it simply doesn’t come into play with the audience here and the social media focus of the post. :) The rest is just to help clarify the concepts.
And I agree with you - I think the time invested into various tools does stop some people from moving forward - not the early adopter crowd that wants to try everything, but likely the bulk of folks falling in the middle.
“Of course, you are right, but this isn’t for the population at large, but just for that small band of professionals who thrive off innovation.”
But keep in mind - my audience here isn’t the population at large - it’s that small band of professionals. ;)
I look forward to future debates - don’t get enough of it around here anymore!
[…] http://nakedpr.com/2008/05/21/life-20-social-media-obsessions-and-virtual-inhibitions/ […]