Hello Brian. Great observations. Because of the "static", as you say, and the fact that we are all too busy we certainly miss many opportunities to have a meaningful conversation; we buzz right past them.
It is kind of like asking someone, "how are you?" and they reply "well, um, ok I guess" and you say, "that's great" and keep moving. The opportunity and invitation for meaningful engagement was there but you zipped right by because you are too busy. I do it all the time.
Quick question: You mentioned both trackbacks and comments. Do you consider one "more of a conversation" than the other? Do you feel as though there is greater value in seeing engagement in the comments on your own blog versus others continuing the conversation via a link from their own blog? Just curious.
I also like your idea about, "tracking, contributing to and measuring an online reputation based on how and what we contribute". In my day job, we build software for PR professionals that measures/tracks conversational dynamics related to topics or brands which can be used to reveal influencer (for purposes of listening & engagement). However, most of the emphasis is on the engagement of others around the influencer's topic rather than the other way around... measuring the engagement of the influencer based on their participation with other people's content. I like this & will have to think about it some more.
Tim Walker
· 1 year ago
Good thoughts, Brian. Here are a couple of initial reactions while I mull over deeper implications:
1. Sturgeon's Law ("90 percent of everything is crud") certainly applies to online conversations as much as it did when Sturgeon said it about sci-fi publishing. It might even be a higher number -- maybe 95%, as you suggested -- because self-publishing removes a further barrier. Anything we can do to improve signal-to-noise ratio, while still leaving the door to the party open, is a good thing in my book.
2. Real expertise is reflected in the way that experts can make connections between phenomena, whether that means Yo-Yo Ma playing different movements of a Bach piece or a surgeon being able to react to unexpected bleeding during an operation. So that's one more argument in favor of connections, depth, and searching for "classics" as we go about our business online.
Another argument in favor of pursuing these connections comes from the arts, where we see many examples of artists, writers, and other creatives reacting -- sometimes at a distance of centuries -- with the creations that have come before. There's no reason we can't be writing our own versions of Faust, so to speak, with the work we do building communities online.
Jitendra
· 1 year ago
Great Piece Brian...Intersting that you mention the incentives issue. I think incentives are indeed at the root of the 90-9-1 rule (see here http://www.useit.com/alertbox/participation_ine... />and fixing the perverse incentives is the most important thing we can do with the democratic media.
Reza
· 1 year ago
Dear Friend, A group of researchers at University of Nevada, Las Vegas, are investigating effects of Weblogs on “Social Capital”. Therefore, they have designed an online survey. By participating in this survey you will help researches in “Management Information Systems” and “Sociology”. You must be at least 18 years old to participate in this survey. It will take 5 to 12 minutes of your time. Your participation is greatly appreciated. You will find the survey at the following link. http://faculty.unlv.edu/rtorkzadeh/survey This group has already done another study on Weblogs effects on “Social Interactions” and “Trust”. To obtain a copy of the previous study brief report of findings you can email Reza Vaezi at reza.vaezi@yahoo.com.
Adam Metz
· 1 year ago
A lot of this post reminds me of alternative music in the '80s and '90s (think The Clash, The Cure, Bauhaus, Nirvana, Radiohead) and how a lot of the music was a back and forth conversation between bands (and albums). These bands were literally echoing the little bombs that the band before them dropped.
Blogging and social media are a lot like that: just because a post is written at a single point in time doesn't preclude it (1) from being a touchstone (a la The Cure's "Boys Don't Cry" (2) from being a pertinent voice in the conversation, 11 years later (a la Radiohead's "OK Computer"). Think about it.
Lani
· 1 year ago
>What if we spent less time cranking out posts and more time joining, spotlighting and promoting the conversations that take place in the comments section, forums, and across social networks?
This is a struggle for me and I take your article as a challenge. Wonderful work!
deirdre
· 1 year ago
Hi Brian,
You make some really good points. There's a lot of clutter in online coversations. It just reminds me of how we have to sort through all of the noise with marketing in general, whether it's online or offline (the web is no different). Regarding the point about asking someone how they are and then answering great no matter what they say...what a shame that people are like this by nature. Conversations online are the best opportunity to really listen, focus and act appropriately. I think what you are saying is really valuable and I will point many of my colleagues to read this blog post. Thanks for always offering honest and candid views.
Philip Sheldrake
· 1 year ago
You're impatient, and quite right too! The spread of good ideas, the construction of wisdom, has always taken time. Years, decades, centuries; and rarely in a manner one could call efficient or optimal.
In previous times, one could attribute the slowness with which great ideas formed and then disseminated to the media available to them at the time. Now we have instant media, we want instant identification, acclamation and propagation. Yet this media is too effective - too fast and too free - so good stuff is lost in the noise. Yesterday's gold nuggets are buried in today's sediment.
Your frustrations are well articulated, and I can see now that I share them. In particular, the relentless emphasis on the "now" versus the "five minutes ago" implicit to the blogging platform needs analysis.
There are several interesting aspects of this MarCom Professional network that are relevant to this topic, and I'll finish this comment by listing them...
1. The network is populated by real people, not displaynames. That means real people have to live with their posts and comments, and so are therefore more likely to think a bit more before putting fingers to keys.
2. The network is actually a bliki; a hybrid of a blog and a wiki. This enables collaboration on posts / content / points of view, with a sub-community of your choice if you like, and therefore does what you intend to "fudge" on Blogger.
3. As the network continues to grow, I don't see why MarCom Professional shouldn't be able to use other non-time metrics for presenting content to members based on things like the degree of collaboration, the number of referring links and pageviews (either originating from within the network and from search engine results), the topic and the authority of the author... although don't ask me for an algorithm for this one!
Jen, writer Membership Million
· 1 year ago
Blogs are not going to go away. Didn't they say the same thing about newspapers and books? And look at the world today. And I also agree that taking the time to check out other posts' comments can spark another topic of conversation. Issues have many different sides and it's always interesting to see what other people have to say.
All Comments
It is kind of like asking someone, "how are you?" and they reply "well, um, ok I guess" and you say, "that's great" and keep moving. The opportunity and invitation for meaningful engagement was there but you zipped right by because you are too busy. I do it all the time.
Quick question: You mentioned both trackbacks and comments. Do you consider one "more of a conversation" than the other? Do you feel as though there is greater value in seeing engagement in the comments on your own blog versus others continuing the conversation via a link from their own blog? Just curious.
I also like your idea about, "tracking, contributing to and measuring an online reputation based on how and what we contribute". In my day job, we build software for PR professionals that measures/tracks conversational dynamics related to topics or brands which can be used to reveal influencer (for purposes of listening & engagement). However, most of the emphasis is on the engagement of others around the influencer's topic rather than the other way around... measuring the engagement of the influencer based on their participation with other people's content. I like this & will have to think about it some more.
1. Sturgeon's Law ("90 percent of everything is crud") certainly applies to online conversations as much as it did when Sturgeon said it about sci-fi publishing. It might even be a higher number -- maybe 95%, as you suggested -- because self-publishing removes a further barrier. Anything we can do to improve signal-to-noise ratio, while still leaving the door to the party open, is a good thing in my book.
2. Real expertise is reflected in the way that experts can make connections between phenomena, whether that means Yo-Yo Ma playing different movements of a Bach piece or a surgeon being able to react to unexpected bleeding during an operation. So that's one more argument in favor of connections, depth, and searching for "classics" as we go about our business online.
Another argument in favor of pursuing these connections comes from the arts, where we see many examples of artists, writers, and other creatives reacting -- sometimes at a distance of centuries -- with the creations that have come before. There's no reason we can't be writing our own versions of Faust, so to speak, with the work we do building communities online.
A group of researchers at University of Nevada, Las Vegas, are investigating effects of Weblogs on “Social Capital”. Therefore, they have designed an online survey. By participating in this survey you will help researches in “Management Information Systems” and “Sociology”. You must be at least 18 years old to participate in this survey. It will take 5 to 12 minutes of your time.
Your participation is greatly appreciated. You will find the survey at the following link. http://faculty.unlv.edu/rtorkzadeh/survey
This group has already done another study on Weblogs effects on “Social Interactions” and “Trust”. To obtain a copy of the previous study brief report of findings you can email Reza Vaezi at reza.vaezi@yahoo.com.
Blogging and social media are a lot like that: just because a post is written at a single point in time doesn't preclude it (1) from being a touchstone (a la The Cure's "Boys Don't Cry" (2) from being a pertinent voice in the conversation, 11 years later (a la Radiohead's "OK Computer"). Think about it.
This is a struggle for me and I take your article as a challenge. Wonderful work!
You make some really good points. There's a lot of clutter in online coversations. It just reminds me of how we have to sort through all of the noise with marketing in general, whether it's online or offline (the web is no different). Regarding the point about asking someone how they are and then answering great no matter what they say...what a shame that people are like this by nature. Conversations online are the best opportunity to really listen, focus and act appropriately. I think what you are saying is really valuable and I will point many of my colleagues to read this blog post. Thanks for always offering honest and candid views.
In previous times, one could attribute the slowness with which great ideas formed and then disseminated to the media available to them at the time. Now we have instant media, we want instant identification, acclamation and propagation. Yet this media is too effective - too fast and too free - so good stuff is lost in the noise. Yesterday's gold nuggets are buried in today's sediment.
Your frustrations are well articulated, and I can see now that I share them. In particular, the relentless emphasis on the "now" versus the "five minutes ago" implicit to the blogging platform needs analysis.
There are several interesting aspects of this MarCom Professional network that are relevant to this topic, and I'll finish this comment by listing them...
1. The network is populated by real people, not displaynames. That means real people have to live with their posts and comments, and so are therefore more likely to think a bit more before putting fingers to keys.
2. The network is actually a bliki; a hybrid of a blog and a wiki. This enables collaboration on posts / content / points of view, with a sub-community of your choice if you like, and therefore does what you intend to "fudge" on Blogger.
3. As the network continues to grow, I don't see why MarCom Professional shouldn't be able to use other non-time metrics for presenting content to members based on things like the degree of collaboration, the number of referring links and pageviews (either originating from within the network and from search engine results), the topic and the authority of the author... although don't ask me for an algorithm for this one!