This is a very sophisticated nuance you're distinguishing, Dave, but I agree completely. The value in social network sites <grin> is the credibility of the networks involved. Jane considers interacting with Jack because Jack is a friend of Jill's.
Dave Delaney
· 1 year ago
Exactly. Perhaps many of us have in fact been using the term "Social Networking" incorrectly all of this time. It begs the question of which other terms we may be using wrong. I think part of this is due to the speed of the world we live in. Twitter appears and "Micro-blogging" is it's coined name, while it's a far cry from blogging, it's the name we have accepted.
As a podcaster the vary term "podcast" has always irked me. It makes the consumer think they must have an iPod. The term was coined too quickly, thus mass confusion has resulted. I can't tell you how many blank stares I've received when explaining that I have a podcast (two of them actually). Thank god for Uncle Seth : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpciLIA0Kn4
Are we early adopters too early at adopting titles and terms for our passions?
fishwreck
· 1 year ago
Irony alert. I believe your use here of "begs the question" would be one of those times.
Yep I agree - an important and useful distinction.
jmilani
· 1 year ago
(expanding on Twitter)
I appreciate the distinction, but I wonder if it matters. Would SNSs be relevant without those who use them for “social networking?” Aren’t these users the ones who help make SNSs popular by working to expand their networks, often by reaching out to strangers?
I also wonder if the “Social Network Site” label fits something like Twitter. It’s a microblogging site, but its social networking features help it stand out from something like Tumblr. Specifically, the ability to easily follow others seems ideal for those looking to grow their networks by reaching out to strangers. Here’s a thought: since many Twitter connections develop into connections on other sites, perhaps Twitter is a social networking site that serves as a gateway to the “true” social network sites.
But even on sites like LinkedIn or Facebook, a good part of the time is spent making connections. You may be reaching out to someone from your real-life network, but you’re still building your social network. The line gets even more blurred when you add the ability to join groups of people who simply share a common bond (e.g. attended the same school) or a similar interest (e.g. photography). You may know some of the members before joining, but you're unlikely to know all of them.
Frank Martin
· 1 year ago
Sigh...first comes the new thing, then the argument about ownership, and then the argument about vocabulary. I think I'll wait a couple of months before declaring the term passe or dead. Meanwhile, it will give the academics something to do while the people in the trenches are networking socially on sites. ;-)
Dave Delaney
· 1 year ago
Ha! Nice one Frank. I doubt very much that it is dead, if anything it's closer to what we're doing than the aforementioned "podcasting". It's just a little cloudy when it comes to understanding who we are communicating with and why. Friends and family, or actually networking to make new contacts in social networks such as LinkedIn.
Jeremy makes some fine points on this as well. I mean, there are loads of friends of mine connected on LinkedIn, however, there are also new people I have networked with who I would not consider a friend - yet.
fishwreck
· 1 year ago
"since many Twitter connections develop into connections on other sites, perhaps Twitter is a social networking site that serves as a gateway to the “true” social network sites"
That's it exactly.
In everyday conversation, I don't think it matters which term you use, however, when you're talking to a knowledgeable audience or trying to make a distinction, it's very handy to have separate terms.
Dave Delaney
· 1 year ago
Yes, you're right. I think he did get it when speaking of Twitter.
You're right about everyday conversations. Most people don't know what the hell I'm on about most of the time. LOL!
Cheers.
mattbigelow
· 1 year ago
It depends on the site.
I appreciate the distinction, but on reflection I'd say I belong to a few Social Network Sites and a few Social Networking Sites.
I'll definitely watch my words from now on though.
Dave Delaney
· 1 year ago
It's a funny topic. As I mentioned the two can be cloudy, like in my LinkedIn example in a previous comment.
I agree with you though. Damn, academics making us think. Grrr... :-)
Cheers.
Sean McGaughey
· 1 year ago
I find that almost everything related to computers and the Internet is explained in terms of metaphor. It's like this black and white boxes which connect to us have potential that is largely limited by our ability to imagine and explain that potential. I prefer the term "social media" because it seems to encompass the interactions between people and the entertainment/media elements. I have long said that the concept of "friends" on social media sites is a bit of a misnomer. It does imply that we are connecting to other people, but I often refer to people I have met online as my 'imaginary friends' until we have met in person.
Dave Delaney
· 1 year ago
Thanks Sean. C.C. Chapman spoke about "f"riends vs. "F"riends on one of his episodes of Managing The Gray. I assured him that I was his "PH"riend! :-)
Todd
· 1 year ago
I'm with you. I've been trying to make a habit of saying "online social networks" but it certainly hasn't been easy.
Dave Delaney
· 1 year ago
Cheers Todd. It isn't easy when we all adopt different terms so quickly.
Glad Doggett
· 1 year ago
Good points here. I will follow your lead and use SNSs from now on.
All Comments
Networking" incorrectly all of this time. It begs the question of which
other terms we may be using wrong. I think part of this is due to the speed
of the world we live in. Twitter appears and "Micro-blogging" is it's coined
name, while it's a far cry from blogging, it's the name we have accepted.
As a podcaster the vary term "podcast" has always irked me. It makes the
consumer think they must have an iPod. The term was coined too quickly, thus
mass confusion has resulted. I can't tell you how many blank stares I've
received when explaining that I have a podcast (two of them actually). Thank
god for Uncle Seth : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpciLIA0Kn4
Are we early adopters too early at adopting titles and terms for our
passions?
I appreciate the distinction, but I wonder if it matters. Would SNSs be relevant without those who use them for “social networking?” Aren’t these users the ones who help make SNSs popular by working to expand their networks, often by reaching out to strangers?
I also wonder if the “Social Network Site” label fits something like Twitter. It’s a microblogging site, but its social networking features help it stand out from something like Tumblr. Specifically, the ability to easily follow others seems ideal for those looking to grow their networks by reaching out to strangers. Here’s a thought: since many Twitter connections develop into connections on other sites, perhaps Twitter is a social networking site that serves as a gateway to the “true” social network sites.
But even on sites like LinkedIn or Facebook, a good part of the time is spent making connections. You may be reaching out to someone from your real-life network, but you’re still building your social network. The line gets even more blurred when you add the ability to join groups of people who simply share a common bond (e.g. attended the same school) or a similar interest (e.g. photography). You may know some of the members before joining, but you're unlikely to know all of them.
closer to what we're doing than the aforementioned "podcasting". It's just a
little cloudy when it comes to understanding who we are communicating with
and why. Friends and family, or actually networking to make new contacts in
social networks such as LinkedIn.
Jeremy makes some fine points on this as well. I mean, there are loads of
friends of mine connected on LinkedIn, however, there are also new people I
have networked with who I would not consider a friend - yet.
That's it exactly.
In everyday conversation, I don't think it matters which term you use, however, when you're talking to a knowledgeable audience or trying to make a distinction, it's very handy to have separate terms.
You're right about everyday conversations. Most people don't know what the
hell I'm on about most of the time. LOL!
Cheers.
I appreciate the distinction, but on reflection I'd say I belong to a few Social Network Sites and a few Social Networking Sites.
I'll definitely watch my words from now on though.
LinkedIn example in a previous comment.
I agree with you though. Damn, academics making us think. Grrr... :-)
Cheers.
episodes of Managing The Gray.
I assured him that I was his "PH"riend! :-)