Moving beyond a shallow definition of “social media”
David Armano. Photo uploaded to Flickr by jdlasica
@bbhlabs sent me a link to this great blog post on the Harvard Business site by David Armano (@armano).
I say “great” because David sets out an approach that’s core to our thinking and practice here at Made by Many – namely, the use of visual design to develop and articulate strategy. (Armano is a true awesomeist, especially in terms of visual thinking, and if you don’t read his blog Logic + Emotion, then you should.)
Why is this a good idea? Because visualising a service forces you to commit, and to commit you need to have considered the whole system, and the value exchange between it and all the different people you want to interact with it.
A design-led approach to solving a business problem is very different to the way most “social media” projects work in real life. As David puts it:
The current state of “social media” for many businesses looks more like an episode of MacGyver than Apple’s design process. Duct tape and bubble gum hold together fragile tactics such as Twitter accounts run by the summer college intern (nothing against college interns) or agency-generated Facebook fan pages that have few actual fans.
Armano proposes that the term “social media” is itself part of the problem. This shallow phrase reduces what is probably the most significant thing to happen to the world since the Industrial Revolution (if not the Renaissance) – the development of the World Wide Web – to the status of a marketing channel, you know – like a replacement for TV ads, and direct mail and posters. This is so sad and wrong.
Of course, it’s true that there are many exciting applications of “social media” within the worlds of marketing, advertising and PR – but let’s get things in perpsective: the really important thing to grasp about the World Wide Web and digital technologies is how they’re changing the way we live, think, organise, love, eat and even fight. The Web is about the evolution of all human behaviour, not merely advertising and PR.
It never used to be called “social media”. eBay and Amazon never talked of “social media” – they talked about “service” and “community”. They spoke of the potency of The Web to smash old business models, flatten out-dated hierarchies and wrench power away from the centre and towards the edges to create new types of value exchange. Communications is but a tiny fragment of this revolution – albeit massively interesting and important – and yet it’s the campaign-flavoured, comms-focused stuff that defines – and limits – “social media” for most businesses.
Contrast that with the remarkable new products and systems the Social Web makes possible. To quote David again:
Think iPhone (product) and iTunes/app store (systems). These are complex objects and ecosystems, which are conceived, developed, prototyped, tested, iterated upon and evolved over time. Designers and developers from all backgrounds work together to pull off this intricate system of product and ecosystem.
We have to move on from such a shallow definition of “social media”. Design can help – especially strategic, opinionated design. It forces you to think things through from a system-wide point of view, and it puts you in the shoes of the user, so that you understand their experience and the value to them of what you’re trying to achieve. We live in a world where the consumer decides how to, or whether, to engage with your business.
See also:
About the author
Tim has been creating innovative online community stuff since 2000 and was recently named as one of Revolution Magazine's 'Future 50' - one of the the "marketers, authors, entrepreneurs, and thinkers who will shape the digital industry of tomorrow". It also called him "disruptive and challenging". Tim is a founding partner of Made by Many, Agilist, strategist, Dad and designer of social software.
-
Comments (16)
-
Responses (4)
-
Has Google’s Trademark Shift Caused A Spike In Use? | Media News: Internet Marketing & Online Advertisng
[...] Moving Beyond a Shallow Definition of “Social Media” (Made by Many) [...]
-
Has Google’s Trademark Shift Caused A Spike In Use? « Internet Marketing KB
[...] Moving Beyond a Shallow Definition of “Social Media” (Made by Many) [...]
-
Has Google’s Trademark Shift Caused A Spike In Use? |
[...] Moving Beyond a Shallow Definition of “Social Media” (Made by Many) [...]
-
Red Links 27/07/09 : Alexia Golez
[...] Social media is shallow. Think beyond the boxed universe. [...]
-
Great post Tim. Although it’s only really marketing people that use the term ’social media’ anyway. They obsess about it because they are the people who think they stand to benefit the most from it in the long run. But the simple fact is that they wont. The people that embrace design principles like participatory design, building feedback loops, and learning to manage failure are the people that will benefit long-term. Marketers as we know them now will still be confused about this stuff in 10 years time.
Mike
July 22, 2009
at 11:38 am
Excellent post, couldn’t agree more. The overwhelming problem with the term “social media” is that for most people it conjures up images of Facebook, MySpace, friending people, sharing holiday pictures, etc….whereas in reality the social web is an incredibly profound change in how people will engage with the entire corporate world, giving them a never before seen ability to come together for their mutual benefit without the intercession of brands or corporates. Sites like Zopa, Get Satisfaction, Couchsurfing, Freecycle, even The Guardian’s recent crowdsourcing of the MPs expenses investigation represent the socialisation of banking, customer service, trave, journalism….it’s a powerful and profound force that has huge implications for any number of company’s business models, never mind their comms strategies. One might argue that social media versus shared media versus socialist media (as we mooted here http://bit.ly/15ytS ) is an irrelevant semantic debate but as long as it eclipses the profundity of what’s happening I don’t think it is.
PatsMc
July 22, 2009
at 11:47 am
Tim,
Thanks for this. 8am and I’ve already begun my education for the day.
Rick Liebling
July 22, 2009
at 12:03 pm
Fantastic post. Nail on the head.
Lena
July 22, 2009
at 12:06 pm
Great post :)
Is not about social media is about creating ideas thah creates engagement.
:)
Ps: Sorry about my english, again.
Dani Seuba
July 22, 2009
at 12:43 pm
All media is social. Let’s stop using the term “social media”. It’s as meaningless as the term “web 2.0″. Cave paintings are social media ;)
Phil Dearson
July 22, 2009
at 1:00 pm
Great post, Tim and thanks for the link to David’s wonderful post.
‘Social Media’ scene is dominated by the PR crowd. They have their strengths. There is no denying that. I think it is high time people started to work harder and try to arrive at creative (design) approach in Social Media. Whenever I raise this issue, people point out that I an thinking in terms of a campaign (being an ex-ad guy) and not long term. Being a student of ’social media’, I do not know how to explain what I have in mind. Your post to some extent explains it. Wish there were more examples.
Subbu
July 22, 2009
at 1:39 pm
Nice post. There are too many ‘fly-by-nights’ out there at the moment peddling expertise they don’t have with too little depth and minimal robust strategy involved. Particularly agree that a systems-based approach (which automatically leads to a more visual expression of ideas) is critical. You don’t ‘do’ social media, you create and curate community. It’s a process, not a thing.
Ben
July 22, 2009
at 2:26 pm
Awesome post.
Made me think about how many times I have listened therms like “social media’, “web2.0″ and all the other cliches at brainstorms. Also, how people mistake the concepts and treat the social web (not media) as a mere touchpoint, like TV or magazines.
Like I read at Substance this week, we need to understand that it is not about social media, but social web: http://findsubstance.com/2009/07/16/more-social-less-media/
tks again for the post
André
July 22, 2009
at 2:32 pm
Great post Tim. I think smart, nimble shops can take advantage of your thinking and add design to their process.
But some large agencies tend to ‘over process’ projects if that makes sense? Sometimes stories just need to get out there quickly, in raw fashion for consumers to play with the assets. It doesn’t become spreadable until they take it and pass it along.
Griffin Farley
July 22, 2009
at 3:00 pm
When anything is new, people will consider it a novelty. “Social Media,” however is definitely here to stay and it gives consumers an unbelievable amount of power–shifting the voice (talking to, rather than at) and the conversation that PR or copywriters need to develop. I’m excited to be at the forefront of what is only the beginning of corporate to consumer engagement.
And about the summer-intern-run Twitter accounts and Facebook fan pages with only a few fans…these companies lack the follow-through that would make them successful with social media…and if I was looking to partner with a company and saw that they had poorly executed a strategy, lacked the vision to do so and had consequently made a poor effort, I wouldn’t give them the time of day. Why even implement a social media initiative if it goes nowhere? It only hurts companies to put up a twitter or Facebook account when they do nothing with it. In my opinion, it makes them seem as if they do everything half-assed. Not good.
Either do it. Or don’t. But what a wonderful thing to miss out on.
Sara Buschkamp
July 22, 2009
at 5:28 pm
“We live in a world where the consumer decides how to, or whether, to engage with your business.” Or just purely engage – notably also with themselves and not just in a narcissistic way.
I am observing/participating/engaging! in a Facebook conversation at the moment where a Russian correspondent is bemoaning Twitter for its “useless” noise. But through several messages you can see him tussling with his own experience of the new media dynamics.
I think there is a potential to over egg the social aspect and little time is spent understanding what is happening to the individual on a deep psychological basis. Individuals are taking hold of the vast potential of the network connections but also trying to maintain a strong sense of their own core and own worth. This is potentially so empowering at the individual level.
tim harrap
July 22, 2009
at 7:45 pm
Great insight! The networks and communities that the Web enables and the different ways of participating in them is indeed revolutionary.
Verity
July 23, 2009
at 9:52 am
Medias are really helpful for grabbing social information. its really great post.
adaptable potency
July 25, 2009
at 5:22 am
Thanks Tim. I think that Twitter is particularly unrewarding for the lone individual ‘trying it out’ for the first time.
Let’s face it, social software is shit without friends.
I would also say that the individual is the flip side of the crowd. The profile page and the people page are two of the landmark pages of any social software service. Both are arguably now more important than the home page. The way people project themselves as individuals seems to be becoming much more sophisticated. I’m obsessed with avatars at the moment. They seem to be coming alive right now. This chimes with your thought that:
tim
July 23, 2009
at 10:39 pm
Griffin – hi – I don’t think they have a choice. I always quote 19 year old Made by Many-ite Alex Maccaw on occasions like this: “Oh well, you don’t have to change. Survival isn’t mandatory”. Words to live by. From the mouths of babes…
I actually think big agencies will catch on fast – let’s face it, it’s not rocket science. More like, being on an alien planet for them (although, obviously, getting to this planet would involve some rocket science). But they’re adaptable, and clever, and good at a bunch of things small, nimble shops aren’t so good at.
tim
July 23, 2009
at 10:48 pm