Sociability and the web
Yesterday I had the pleasure of someone deciding to spend a good portion of the day with me, something that is quite rare. It’s also something that is important to a topic that I have spent quite a bit of time thinking about. How much of your time do you give to others, and what would you like to receive in exchange for that time.
I ask this because whilst Kutcher and CNN are turning followers into a commodity I value the dialogue that I have with those that I follow, and that follow me. Twitter i about just one thing, dialogue. Through dialogue we can discuss projects, we can establish friendships and we can acquire knowledge. All of these things can help up along in life.
I’m interested in this topic because one friend, months ago, said that twitter and social media were chronophage, that is to say that they’re a waste of time. Of course that’s something all internet users worry about. It’s something we all struggle to justify and eventually there is just one reality we must accept.
There is no point wasting time on the social media with those that don’t have or want to take the time to talk to us. Over the past few months I have seen friend after friend after friend run out of time, losing the ability to stay online and converse, as much through twitter as through skype, IM and other forms of electronic conversation. I’m sure you’ve experienced it too.
Each of these people, as they have less time to be social, and as they leave messages unanswered devalue the time we spend online. Send twenty messages without getting an answer and you believe that you’re at fault, that you’re wasting your time. You can stop worrying about that.
It’s the people that don’t have the time to answer that are wasting your time, not the other way around. By this I mean that you can always answer. You don’t need to answer the same morning, or the same day. You should still take the time to answer. It gives you value within the social media. It also keeps one more person interested in what you’re doing.
A few people have seen the value that answering to everyone has, two examples are Vaynerchuck and Loic Lemeur. I don’t follow either of them but they live according to this ideology. I call it an ideology because in reality it’s as bad as not answering at all. For the novice, the inexperienced web user getting an answer is great, it’s confidence building and it’s flattering. To the social media veteran you eventually see through the smoke and mirrors. For a long time I followed certain big names and without giving names I stopped following them. I stopped because I could see they were giving generic answers, trying not to ignore too many people consistently.
The point is the following. The social media are about dialogue so you should only follow as many people as you feel you can have a personal conversation with without losing site of individuals as a result. The social media are about friendship, rather than brand. The more you value the friendships you establish the more you will gain. The popularity contest between CNN and the other guy are devaluing the follower. It’s a good publicity stunt because it generates buzz but at the end of the day because you’re talking to a mass you’re unable to chat with individuals. Remember this. Friendships create community, not crowds.
