-
Website
http://avc.com/ -
Original page
http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2008/06/my-vision-for-s.html -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
ShanaC
1217 comments · 71 points
-
daryn
213 comments · 14 points
-
kidmercury
827 comments · 103 points
-
howardlindzon
207 comments · 71 points
-
Charlie Crystle
203 comments · 35 points
-
-
Popular Threads
-
Getting Computer Science Into Middle School
1 day ago · 254 comments
-
End of Year Music Posts
11 hours ago · 36 comments
-
How To Get Me To Hang Up On You
3 days ago · 158 comments
-
Open APIs and Open Standards
4 days ago · 207 comments
-
Trading Deals, A Lost Art?
2 days ago · 78 comments
-
Getting Computer Science Into Middle School
I'm curious to the perspectives of those NOT involved in online social networking/media, still the much larger majority of folks.
Why aren't they comin'?
What will bring them into online social media?
What do/will they expect from social media?
Will they want to share?
What will get them to stay?
I am watching to see how the non-participants are going to influence things.
I hear too often from, too many people: "I don't get it, why would I want to waste my time with all this (explitive)"
I think we're just scratchin' the surface.
For those here now, I think ya statement; "every single human being posting their thoughts and experiences in any number of ways to the Internet." is spot on.
For those NOT YET here, I'm not so sure.
Feels like there is a chasam. I'll be watching.
You are right that a lot of older people haven't yet and may never get on board with social media...but I don't think anyone is thinking about them! Fred once put up a Darwin quote that still resonates with me about survival through adapting to one's environment--which I believe in. The internet has already changed everything and is going to continue in a big, big way.
>What will bring them into online social media?
>What do/will they expect from social media?
>Will they want to share?
>What will get them to stay?
great questions and i am looking for those who will answer them correctly
" Why aren't they comin'? "
Because they are content with their current form of social networking/media therefore they have no need to change.
" What will bring them into online social media? "
Their work will bring them into online social media. Peoples' work has a powerful influence on their behavior, whether they are a professional, laborer, craftsman or student. Work determines how fast you adopt technology and it can force you out of your comfort zone to embrace new technology, new media.
" What will get them to stay ? "
Once online social media has been integrated into their work flow they will stay.
A good example of this evolution is when a company joins facebook and their employees follow. Software companies that create applications that allow other companies to use social media to reduce cost, save time and increase employee productivity will be the most successful.
Ya got me thinkin'!
That is definitely a BHAG. I'm not sure yet whether I feel that it's a ridiculous notion or not. The thing I love about your blog is whether I agree with you or disagree with you, you always make me think. I'm going to have to think about what that means. My first impression is as grand visions go, that's a nice one.
Thanks for the post. It was also very helpful in understanding better what you're interested in and why. If it facilitates "sharing", you're going to be at least a little interested. I think it's also creates some interesting frames of reference. Microsoft used to have that "Where do you want to go today?" campaign. I never liked it. Perhaps it would have been better off with "what do you want to share today?" I haven't really come at my "sharing" from that angle, and am thinking perhaps I should. Lots to think about. Thanks again,
Robert
You consistently make the error that others are like you. Some people simply won't take the time and make the effort to share their lives with the rest of the world. Some will, but inconsistently or at a low level. Some will be very active in a niche (music, twitter, photo sharing...) but not in other niches. And still others will do share themselves prolifically, through a wide variety of channels. But please don't insist that because you do something it's the inevitable wave of the future. The future's almost never a straightline projection of one trend - it's a much richer mix.
But the goal of social media should be two fold
1) Make it easier to share
2) Deliver value for sharing
Then we'll get more sharing
Fred
I'm probably an outlier here, but I’m not seeking only to connect with people like me. I love the diversity that’s out there. I am seeking to connect with people whose thinking processes I appreciate, whether they are like mine or not.
just a conversation that anyone can hear learn from reply to or join
http://www.facebook.com/pages/VentureDeal-Ventu...
The section enables us to provide a more engaging experience for visitors, by sharing resources as links, videos, reports, etc. that people can view right there. It's a big improvement in convenience for visitors to consume and share information that they're interested in.
Our Facebook page is simply for Fb users - a convenience for those who play in that sandbox to gain some value. You could have gone to VentureDeal.com, by clicking on my name in this blog comment and choosing from among the many ways to connect - brought to you by Disqus - making things easier to share...
1.5) Make it easier to find shared content
I think that's an even more important problem to be addressed, since the haystack of generated content is growing exponentially bigger but the ability to consume it is still limited by human speed and time. The major challenge, in my view, is creating a way to deliver a continuous, personalized stream of golden needles to users.
I would question 2 though. Assuming media was trivial to post and to find, wouldn't sharing be an incentive in itself, at least for the large mass of users?
3) Give everyone a flexible but useful story to tell and share.
For example, people are more willing to post on comment thread than to post new stories themselves.The story does not have to be the same for everyone. It can be a story about books (shelfari), story about photos (flickr) or websites (delicious etc).
People like to congregate around existing content. Social media provide the structure for those activities.
As others have said, its the interaction that's the payoff for the sharing
Fred
Fro example, you could use to bridge sharing form desktop to mobile as in what Twitter had in Track to mobile client.
He said 'a computer on every desk'
Implicit in that is the understanding that not everybody currently wants one
Fred
I'm sure someone is doing this well, anyone know who?
A huge chunk of LJ blogs are still private, MySpace and Facebook
profiles are getting more and more private. The net follows real
life... most people just have small groups of people they care about.
A shift may come when the media stops digging dirt on people... when we
all just concede the fact that we're all human and imperfect. Until
then, people may go "public" but still want to edit that public persona.
If you think I'm wrong, feel free to publish your bank account balances
on your blog or to Wesabe in public or something... Because I know
you, I know that those numbers don't affect what a down to earth guy,
nonassuming guy you are, but let the hate machine hook onto a specific
number and you'll never live it down.
I know there are stats I have that I would never put up... but it's
certainly not my bank account. ;)
Another example: You care where photos of your kids get published and so
do they.
But my blog posts, tumblrs, and twitters are designed to be public and go anywhere
Fred
And yes... YOUR posts are meant to go overwhere, but most LiveJournal
blogs and MySpace blogs are private.
Myspace, to my mind, was largely a forum for self-expression that, as the network expanded, developed more utility as a communication medium.
In consumer products, brand preferences, are also proxies for self-expression - politics, aesthetics, socio-economic status can all be revealed by a simple tendency to favor one brand over another. Self-expression is a very powerful driver and I think, to overstate the power of this form of signaling.
Bill
you come to the front page, the conversation is already going on, and you happily join in. imagine four or five friends at a table in starbucks, each has been reading a newspaper, or a book, or has seen a cool play, and they are talking to each other, and to each other, about the stuff they have been paying attention to .... we all do this every day at the cafe or the coffee shop, and cannot yet do it online ... the closest i can imagine, three or four friedfeeds on the front page, but a lot cooler ..
middle distance, ...... not every single human being posting, but every single human being conversing, with whomever they want ... and, ha, businesses are going to get this sooner or later, forced to, the walmart or verizon friendfeed equivalent ... i mean, can you imagine, corporations talking to their customers. it will be unavoidable.
long term ... the equivalent of global omniscience, meaning, anybody can know anything, or, everybody can know anything, just ask ...
i call it post linearity
the current twitter thing, here is how it has to scale (that word is bugging me, but) .... so that everybody can talk to both anybody and everybody ... all nodes connect to all nodes
should be fun
For the most part, when we use social media we're making an active decision to share a piece of content with others: uploading a photo to flickr, voting on a story at Digg, twittering, etc. It's an active form of sharing. But with Facebook, we've been engaging in passive forms of sharing. We add a new app, our friends are notified...even with their Beacon program, we buy movie tickets, our friends find out. This is a very passive form of social sharing -- it eliminates the inherent friction involved in sharing content online and it will eventually make more people out there "like Fred" (in reference to Rick Gregory's comment).
The companies that continue to eliminate the friction involved in sharing content, bridge the online/offline gap and do so in a way that respects and adheres to peoples' privacy concerns (good point Charlie), will be the winners in this space.
-Wayne
What if they will fight to the death to avoid "posting their thoughts and experiences?"
Are they to be forced? By who?
Its just a 'vision'
http://vanelsas.wordpress.com/2008/06/02/the-re...
I think this is spot on - we are looking for ways to interact with people on one of a myriad of ways, and how we interact, the level of intensity, is in large part determined by the topic. For example it might be enough to Share back and forth information about cancer, until I want to take a stand in raising funds to support research which requires a greater level of engagement and a more valuable outcome. Then I might Coordinate people against the cause, or use a website like thepoint.com to create Collective Action.
So to me it is about much more than sharing - I consider social media the next extreme sport - "Extreme Interactivity" is what i am calling it.
Thoughts?
p.s. I will cross post this on Alexander's post too as I am interested in feedback.
Context - why do we care, whats the purpose of interaction
Communications - sharing, talking
Collaboration - working together towards a shared goal
In writing my book over the last few months though, I have been struggling with whether or not to call it the 5 C's with the addition of:
Connections - who we know and how much we trust them
Community - the places we gather together where we feel at home
This thread is really helping to bring this idea into greater clarity, but I would love to hear your feedback on the framework...
We all seem to be revolving around what the key dimensions are.
Some quick reactions to the Cs:
Context - agree but in the interest of not confusing this with the old meaning of context I would propose using the word Care instead (still a C!). I think that someone has to care about something to be motivated to take any kind of action, sharing or otherwise - and Clay does talk about what some of the characteristics are (although not comprehensive in my opinion) that would make it more likely that at least one person cares enough to take some action, even if it is just sharing.
Communications - agreed
Collaboration - yes, but we lose the distinction here between collaboration and collective action which i think is important. The Wikipedia example (unequal division of labor with a few driving the bulk of the effort) vs. thepoint.com where everyone has to commit to the same action. I think that is a different level of interaction.
Connections and Community - I agree although I think you are considering community in a more virtual sense and i am thinking about it more as location, meaning i can choose to filter my connections also by my location, esp if i want to take it to a real world context.
My own personal paradigm has been 1) Connections, 2) Shared Interests (passions, pursuits, needs, life issues) and 3) Location (per above). I think these are the three axes that matter in a social media model. Then sharing, collaborating and/or acting collectively are what we do with that. Does that resonate with you?
Gotta run but look forward to continuing the dialogue.
Stephanie Sarka
That's my grand vision, expressed with uncharacteristic brevity.
1. "That not everyone is an extrovert."
I actually think that if people are extroverts they might even be less inclined to use social media. I'm an extrovert. This means I get my energy from other people, from "live" in-person interactions. It's why I work best in meetings or in crowded cafes, and not in front of a computer or in a lab (back in my engineering days). One of the many reasons I started blogging a couple years ago was because it forced me to practice the written word. It added the accountability of a paper trail and forced me to think things through by myself. To this day, I'd much rather soapbox in front of some friends or a crowd to share my thoughts, ideas, workshop a problem, whatever, but I have also, through my blogging, gotten much better at putting my thoughts down in text. Though I get less satisfaction from it, I have reaped the rewards of cultivating a network through my blog and engaging in dialogues with people, and I like that and obviously see the value in it.
2. "Everyone will share their lives with the rest of the world."
I appreciate the power of this statement. My initial reaction was that it was too general, and that people don't want to share their "lives" via the Internet. But I think you're right. Though everyone will do it at different levels, to different degrees, depending on their personalities, comfort-level, objectives, interests, etc. on the aggregate that's where we are headed.
Great post, Fred. Thanks.
and here we are ten years later, with the advent of wordpress/facebook/twitter, socialmedia has become the emerging mass media. 70 million people are using facebook, almost half of them daily. i think you can fairly describe social media as "active sharing online." what facebook has done as perhaps the best social platform is to have made the permissions and access controls (notoriously geeky opaque functions in past technology) as easy as using a remote control or a word processor. this is their greatest invention, and because of it they have scaled like nobody's business.
the past year has seen the rise of the application layer, with a number of really interesting products that have filtered the social graph through structured, thematic interactions: slide, rockyou, zynga, sgn, ilike, flixter, etc. this will continue as more and more developers figure out ever more ingenious ways of engaging users in tight social affinities.
moving forward, i think we will now see the beginning of native social advertising, that provides a context for advertisers to ask relevant questions and stimulate authentic conversations between friends. this, as you know, is the problem that we are working on at socialmedia.com
ill be sharing some insights tomw at the iab socialmedia summit in nyc (http://www.iab.net/events_training/ugc2008/over...) and hope to continue this comment thread at the dais...
-s
you're getting things backwards.
how does advertising help the social media consumer ?
advertising is not the next step in social media by any measure of progress.
it's important to find ways of converting value into cash, but advertising is not the so-called 'next big thing'.
We see the same thing on this blog. Fred writes a thought piece, 10 or 20 of us comment on it, and thousands read it. Everyone benefits from the interaction. So, when Fred says "everyone posting their thoughts in any number of ways" my translation is that the opportunity is available to everyone to do so for free, but few will. It will follow the normal 1% rule or community pyramid of most other social activities.
I wrote a blog on this subject 2 years ago, and updated it today. See "Social Networks 1% Rule" http://dondodge.typepad.com/the_next_big_thing/...
Don Dodge
however, new tools like disqus and tumblr and twitter are making participating easier and easier.
so i think my goal of getting everyone to participate at some level is possible
I've written more about it here: http://chrissaad.wordpress.com/2008/06/01/my-vi...
i didn't use the word "public" in my one line vision for a reason
i suspect that most of what gets posted to the internet will be private if its easy enough to do that
Now extrapolate... in 5 or 10 years, what sort of media will people be doing by themselves, for themselves and friends ?
:-)
those who are in it for life to build meaningful products and services will prevail.
if you're in for the quick buck without the heart put in it you'll have your playground broken.
no surprises, it's always been that way, and it'll always be the same.
my solution to you: cut the crap, stick to meaningful, ethical advertisers with solid products
you will never run out of business. EVER
no need to worry about the dwindling $1 ecpms
I would like to augment your vision. Might I suggest "information about every single human being posted to the Internet on their behalf"?
Much of the information conveyed on twitter answers the questions: "Where are you?" and "What are you doing?"
This can be done automatically.
I can envision an information stack that starts with location data and builds towards more sophisticated levels of information about activities and experiences. Starting with my GPS coordinates at a given time we can figure out that I am at the Arclight Theater in Hollywood and then determine that I am watching Indiana Jones.
This has the advantage of requiring zero effort on the part of the individual other than to wear an internet and gps enabled device.
What's also neat is that if this is done in a open fashion it creates a whole new marketplace for anyone to develop new information services. One company worries about GPS data, another about mapping the data to buildings, another to mapping it to movies and so on.
I see a flood of investment and innovation in this area as people work to figure out the utility of automatically logging when and where they are at all times.
Exciting times.
Joel
i scrobble all my music listening to last.fm and publish it here
http://www.last.fm/user/fredwilson/
i set up the scrobbling once and now it just happens.
i call it "spying on myself" but maybe automated sharing would be a better thing to call it
- which pieces of information should be shared (movie preferences? actual movie purchases? choice of cologne?)
- with whom (stated friend? same school? same proximity? other affiliation--same frat, yacht club, nightclub guest list?)
- in what way (active notification? news feed? visual discovery graph? recommendation engine while browsing same content e.g. music/movies/shopping?)
That's a lot of different combinations you can make...
You are extrapolating along an obvious but in the end, unimportant dimension of the technology simply because it is visible. The real game is just getting started, and involves going way beyond talking to doing. From sharing fun stuff to collaborating on serious stuff. From exchanging chickens on Facebook to exchange money in real-world economic relationships. From opining ad nauseum on issues (like I, admittedly, do on my blog) to the deep structure of the information iceberg our world is today. If you thought citizen movie reviews dethroning newspaper reviewers was impressive, wait till you see what happens when social media starts hitting things like workplace email, spreadsheets and databases.
When talking about the adjective "social" people have the archetypal image of parties in their head. They forget the single most important social activity we all engage in: work. When social media hits work (and I am not talking Enterprise 2.0), that's when the pre-game show ends and the show begins.
For what it's worth, here is the beginning of my vision for social media :)
and i don't mind you disagreeing at all.
the whole point of putting it out for debate is that i am going to learn something
For better or worse :)
"But once again, what I do doesn't map very well to what the average audience member does. I think I need to remind myself of that fact on a daily basis."
I think that your vision for social media misses the fact that many people don't want to or could care less.....
rob
ps - lijit needs to work on their search algorithms a bit. I only partially remembered the posting and did a search for "techcrunch meme" and didn't find your posting from April 27 - I had to use the archive feature and page down quickly while keeping an eye open for the chart that I knew accompanied the article.
i think its my blog though, something about the way that typepad archives stuff
i try google site search regularly and it's not any better at finding stuff on my blog
it's very frustrating
Should it be a cultural revolution to share all this information without being monetarily rewarded? Will this happen with help from institutions that are financed other ways than ad revenue?
"every single human has the rights and (access to) tools posting their thoughts and experiences in any number of ways to the Internet ..."
I would agree that we are heading for a world where people will easily be able to share their lives with the people that they want to share it with. I think this is why Facebook was so successful to start with - they were the first to figure out that being able to adjust your privacy settings and share different things with different people was going to be key.
Now, instead of just reading, it's empowering to truly participate, not primarily to dish out content but in the process understand what it is that can be applied to enrich my life.
But I cloud the issue. What I really love about your post, Fred is this: "...To which I say bullshit." No matter the topic, that's always a response worth applauding.
The ah-ha moment is already occurring in discussions n GillmorGang discussion and etc. Fred, you are missing out.
As inevitable as the success of other inventions, because in it's essence it's a product.
Social Media is a better product offering. Look at it from the product perspective, it's just a better, more efficient product. In my experience " painkiller " products are usually unstoppable in their adoption. So maybe a useful angle might be, to what other invention would you equate social media to?
Radio?
TV?
Cell Phone?
PC?
Movies?
VCR?
How does it compare in it's adoption and monetization?
Thanks for making me start the week on a thoughtful note.
at the moment. It is difficult to bet against, as it is essentially a
"technology will get there eventually" argument. However, it's also a
dangerous temptation to focus on the creators (sharers) rather than
the consumers. This breeds corporate mass media ("fuck the public")
and moves away from communities that make their own content for
themselves (where consideration of the audience/consumers is paramount).
I think Fred identifies one of the timeless qualities of entrepreneurship/investing in starts-ups: Find the pain point and fix it.
r.
The point is not necessarily what sort of patterns he may have in investing or what types of technologies he finds most interesting/successful on a regular basis, but what sort of patterns he may have in identifying pain points and then finding effective solutions.
People will be federally funded to pursue their proposals, and then the results can be shared for free with everyone, since it was federally funded and it doesn't cost anything to copy it. Then we shouldn't have a need for copyrights or patents, since there would already be a system to fairly fund people for their proposals.
Besides funding info-product proposals, there would be enormous application for such reputation/trust systems, from helping with legislation, to solving the problem of oversight of classified programs.
I think that's happening now, in a measured way. What are people doing on myspace, twitter and facebook? majority of them are posting their thoughts and experiences on the internet. These social media sites have made it easy for people to share their thoughts and experience on the internet. I think the future of social media can be predicted by looking at google and how it's growing and also looking at areas where it is losing money.
The only one I've ever fallen for is youtube which I was obsessed with for most of late 2005 and 2006
Fred
Hopefully, everyone does not have to be an extrovert in order to participate. In fact, I would sincerely hope that the Internet itself is approachable - offering layers of interaction to ease the anxieties some may have in participating in the real world. It would allow for a normal mother of 2 in rural America to reach out and find commonality across the globe, or allow a 21 year old the ability to rapidly deploy his brilliant idea without corporate America bashing his dreams.
It is this banner of bold hope and broader definition of social media that I would flock to - not the narrow minded view so many disapointly cling to.