Recently there seems to be a lot of chatter revolving around what IS “social media.” Even podcasting, which has long been considered a founding member of the social media club, may be getting the Pluto treatment, and getting booted to the curve.
But by focusing on trying to define what is and is not social media, are we really doing a disservice to companies that are curious about these tools? Is it more important that they understand what tools fall into the ‘current’ social media bucket, or how and why using those tools are important?
I vote for the latter. I don’t care if you want to call podcasting ’social media’, or ‘goat cheese from Nantucket’, I just care about what it does, and whether it can help businesses grow and better reach their customers. The label isn’t important to me, what the tool DOES and how it can be used to BENEFIT a company is what I am interested in knowing.
And last night on Twitter, I heard a new term ‘microsharing’. Now granted, ‘microsharing’ might be a better term than ‘microblogging’–or maybe it isn’t.
But I think we are short-changing the advancement of this entire space when we get hung up on something like labels. Tomato or tomato? Who cares? Is it more important to come up with THE ‘accepted’ definition for ’social media’ (until someone moves the goalpost in a month and comes up with a better one), or is it more important to help Company A better understand how ONE of these tools can better help it reach and communicate with its customers?
I say let’s worry less about naming the tools, and more about making sure that companies understand how and why they should be using them.
Mack,
Bravo! I can think of a single point made with which I disagree. For some strange reason, we seem obsessed with naming things. Clients don’t care what we call what we do: They care only about how what we do will benefit them.
Our job is not in labeling; it is in creating, launching and managing for success goals, strategies and tactics.
Good job, Mack.
I totally agree but unfortunately clients (most of the time) need a name for what you’re going to do. We’re so busy naming such tools so it can almost be legitimate since they are such new ways of marketing. While we shouldn’t have the need to label these actions, as I said before, clients need it to sound like you know what you’re doing.
I totally agree but unfortunately clients (most of the time) need a name for what you’re going to do. We’re so busy naming such tools so it can almost be legitimate since they are such new ways of marketing. While we shouldn’t have the need to label these actions, as I said before, clients need it to sound like you know what you’re doing.
Labels can become an issue when two people have different names for a tool or process. Communication can become jumbled.
An example is a colleague of mine in different industry who didn’t understand the term social media the same way I did. It made for a confusing conversation until we clarified what each of us meant by the term.
And I think we are hypnotized by labeling things. It’s almost as if our minds can’t process something fully until it has a name. That’s one of Seth Godin’s self proclaimed reasons for his success, his ability to give things names.
Nick I agree completely on clients needing a name. That’s why I dont think they really care if podcasting should or should not be considered as ’social media’. I think many people think of podcasting as being social media, so go with that. Companies don’t really care about the philosophical debates, they just want to know which tools can help their bottom-line, and how to better use those tools. That’s what we should concentrate on, IMO.
Chris I agree about conflicting labels. Like if the MSM starts calling Twitter a ‘microblog’ (like Twitter users always have), then suddenly, Twitter users start using the label ‘microsharing’. Why?!? It just confuses the companies that could possibly be using these tools to better reach and respond to their customers……who are on Twitter. So ultimately, we do a disservice to ourselves when we go crazy trying to name everything.
And I wonder if a lot of this isn’t simply due to ego? I think many people want to be ‘the one’ that finds the ‘perfect’ definition for social media, or the perfect way to describe what Twitter does. End result is we have a buncha people throwing around their version of these terms, which confuses the hell outta people and companies that are just discovering these tools.
Maybe what is needed is a flow chart that represents direction a company can take to optimize there social media efforts. I know understanding where to put my efforts is very cloudy, especially when you keep hearing you should try this, or that. In the next breath we here, not all channels work for every product or business model.
All we really gain by defining terms for a media is to give the CEO the opportunity to spread the word that oh! we are going to use podcasts to further our profit margin, or it’s time to find someone in our organization to twitter. All of which will not further understanding of the task at hand.
so now you are hitting on the concept that I have been promoting called Gisting – getting at the essence of what something is. It doesnt happen in the world of messaging, but is created in the world of conversation… the space between us where we create meaning and understanding. If we can only get a chance to get past the book cover, we can find out what is valuable inside…
Wait a sec, Chris.. did you just introduce another… well… label?
; )
Thanks so much for this, Mack. I think that some of the fear that companies experience when first starting out with social media is that there’s the perception of a steep, steep learning curve because of all these terms and vocabulary.
Proponents of something new sometimes feel the needs to differentiate it with a newfangled “name”, and demonstrate that they’re in the know by tossing those terms around (just like jargon in any industry, a pet peeve of mine). But I believe very passionately as you do that the names aren’t what matter.
As the people who know and understand (to some extent) the social medial tools and their uses, it’s our job to educate people and companies on how to use them to enhance and further their success, whatever they’re called and whatever bucket you put them in. Thanks for driving home that point yet again.
I think the we should avoid the “label” trap. But, then, when asked for a metric of a social media activity, we are back with the issue of definition.
I remember talking to a young guy in my team. We were talking blogging. And social media. He was looking at me like I was a madman. But then I started talking about the way it worked and he smiled.
He said, “oh, like MySpace and Facebook? I’m all over that. If you aren’t on MySpace, you are nobody”.
Focusing on the outcomes and explaining the process can be surprisingly beneficial. It was the story that won out in the end.