Comments on: MySpace: Promote, Facebook: Friends, Twitter: People http://blog.michaelleis.com/2009/06/myspace-promote-facebook-friends-twitter-people/ In bite-sized servings Thu, 11 Mar 2010 02:46:45 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Dennis Schleicher http://blog.michaelleis.com/2009/06/myspace-promote-facebook-friends-twitter-people/comment-page-1/#comment-461 Dennis Schleicher Fri, 26 Jun 2009 18:32:32 +0000 http://blog.michaelleis.com/?p=418#comment-461 In twitter<br>People, companies, and other organizations are very EQUAL. There is a greater amount of democracy between different actors and even between tweets. No matter how much money you spend you still only get 140 characters, so it puts a ceiling on actors who have a higher amount of surplus than others (time&money). And you get such a small narrow foothold in this space that a BIG company can't front any more brand image than my kid brother. <br>Not sure if that made sense - but -In a nutshell it provides a way for these different actors to come together in a very easy and equal manner. But it works better when you engage. In twitter
People, companies, and other organizations are very EQUAL. There is a greater amount of democracy between different actors and even between tweets. No matter how much money you spend you still only get 140 characters, so it puts a ceiling on actors who have a higher amount of surplus than others (time&money). And you get such a small narrow foothold in this space that a BIG company can't front any more brand image than my kid brother.
Not sure if that made sense – but -In a nutshell it provides a way for these different actors to come together in a very easy and equal manner. But it works better when you engage.

]]> By: Dennis Schleicher http://blog.michaelleis.com/2009/06/myspace-promote-facebook-friends-twitter-people/comment-page-1/#comment-478 Dennis Schleicher Fri, 26 Jun 2009 18:32:32 +0000 http://blog.michaelleis.com/?p=418#comment-478 In twitter<br>People, companies, and other organizations are very EQUAL. There is a greater amount of democracy between different actors and even between tweets. No matter how much money you spend you still only get 140 characters, so it puts a ceiling on actors who have a higher amount of surplus than others (time&money). And you get such a small narrow foothold in this space that a BIG company can't front any more brand image than my kid brother. <br>Not sure if that made sense - but -In a nutshell it provides a way for these different actors to come together in a very easy and equal manner. But it works better when you engage. In twitter
People, companies, and other organizations are very EQUAL. There is a greater amount of democracy between different actors and even between tweets. No matter how much money you spend you still only get 140 characters, so it puts a ceiling on actors who have a higher amount of surplus than others (time&money). And you get such a small narrow foothold in this space that a BIG company can't front any more brand image than my kid brother.
Not sure if that made sense – but -In a nutshell it provides a way for these different actors to come together in a very easy and equal manner. But it works better when you engage.

]]> By: Dennis Schleicher http://blog.michaelleis.com/2009/06/myspace-promote-facebook-friends-twitter-people/comment-page-1/#comment-490 Dennis Schleicher Fri, 26 Jun 2009 18:32:32 +0000 http://blog.michaelleis.com/?p=418#comment-490 In twitter<br>People, companies, and other organizations are very EQUAL. There is a greater amount of democracy between different actors and even between tweets. No matter how much money you spend you still only get 140 characters, so it puts a ceiling on actors who have a higher amount of surplus than others (time&money). And you get such a small narrow foothold in this space that a BIG company can't front any more brand image than my kid brother. <br>Not sure if that made sense - but -In a nutshell it provides a way for these different actors to come together in a very easy and equal manner. But it works better when you engage. In twitter
People, companies, and other organizations are very EQUAL. There is a greater amount of democracy between different actors and even between tweets. No matter how much money you spend you still only get 140 characters, so it puts a ceiling on actors who have a higher amount of surplus than others (time&money). And you get such a small narrow foothold in this space that a BIG company can't front any more brand image than my kid brother.
Not sure if that made sense – but -In a nutshell it provides a way for these different actors to come together in a very easy and equal manner. But it works better when you engage.

]]> By: Michael Leis http://blog.michaelleis.com/2009/06/myspace-promote-facebook-friends-twitter-people/comment-page-1/#comment-460 Michael Leis Fri, 26 Jun 2009 18:14:55 +0000 http://blog.michaelleis.com/?p=418#comment-460 Thanks for leaving the comment, Dennis. What I'm saying is that to many, Twitter as a "platform" is often too abstract for people to grasp enough to use and enjoy -- as opposed to Facebook, which is ostensibly the same service presented in a singular Web experience.<br><br>I think that most people just aren't experimenters. Unlike you or I, they're not wiling to even go clicking around to see what happens, to search out and follow people they don't know. It feels creepy to them. It's really a shame though, because unlike any other social network, Twitter really does act as a catalyst for people to make real-life connections -- in ways I've never seen before, anyway.<br><br>I'm curious on your insight though -- what is it in terms of placemaking that brings some people together in a very real way in Twitter, while not keeping the activity alive for people just getting their feet wet? Thanks for leaving the comment, Dennis. What I'm saying is that to many, Twitter as a “platform” is often too abstract for people to grasp enough to use and enjoy — as opposed to Facebook, which is ostensibly the same service presented in a singular Web experience.

I think that most people just aren't experimenters. Unlike you or I, they're not wiling to even go clicking around to see what happens, to search out and follow people they don't know. It feels creepy to them. It's really a shame though, because unlike any other social network, Twitter really does act as a catalyst for people to make real-life connections — in ways I've never seen before, anyway.

I'm curious on your insight though — what is it in terms of placemaking that brings some people together in a very real way in Twitter, while not keeping the activity alive for people just getting their feet wet?

]]> By: Michael Leis http://blog.michaelleis.com/2009/06/myspace-promote-facebook-friends-twitter-people/comment-page-1/#comment-477 Michael Leis Fri, 26 Jun 2009 18:14:55 +0000 http://blog.michaelleis.com/?p=418#comment-477 Thanks for leaving the comment, Dennis. What I'm saying is that to many, Twitter as a "platform" is often too abstract for people to grasp enough to use and enjoy -- as opposed to Facebook, which is ostensibly the same service presented in a singular Web experience.<br><br>I think that most people just aren't experimenters. Unlike you or I, they're not wiling to even go clicking around to see what happens, to search out and follow people they don't know. It feels creepy to them. It's really a shame though, because unlike any other social network, Twitter really does act as a catalyst for people to make real-life connections -- in ways I've never seen before, anyway.<br><br>I'm curious on your insight though -- what is it in terms of placemaking that brings some people together in a very real way in Twitter, while not keeping the activity alive for people just getting their feet wet? Thanks for leaving the comment, Dennis. What I'm saying is that to many, Twitter as a “platform” is often too abstract for people to grasp enough to use and enjoy — as opposed to Facebook, which is ostensibly the same service presented in a singular Web experience.

I think that most people just aren't experimenters. Unlike you or I, they're not wiling to even go clicking around to see what happens, to search out and follow people they don't know. It feels creepy to them. It's really a shame though, because unlike any other social network, Twitter really does act as a catalyst for people to make real-life connections — in ways I've never seen before, anyway.

I'm curious on your insight though — what is it in terms of placemaking that brings some people together in a very real way in Twitter, while not keeping the activity alive for people just getting their feet wet?

]]> By: Michael Leis http://blog.michaelleis.com/2009/06/myspace-promote-facebook-friends-twitter-people/comment-page-1/#comment-489 Michael Leis Fri, 26 Jun 2009 18:14:55 +0000 http://blog.michaelleis.com/?p=418#comment-489 Thanks for leaving the comment, Dennis. What I'm saying is that to many, Twitter as a "platform" is often too abstract for people to grasp enough to use and enjoy -- as opposed to Facebook, which is ostensibly the same service presented in a singular Web experience.<br><br>I think that most people just aren't experimenters. Unlike you or I, they're not wiling to even go clicking around to see what happens, to search out and follow people they don't know. It feels creepy to them. It's really a shame though, because unlike any other social network, Twitter really does act as a catalyst for people to make real-life connections -- in ways I've never seen before, anyway.<br><br>I'm curious on your insight though -- what is it in terms of placemaking that brings some people together in a very real way in Twitter, while not keeping the activity alive for people just getting their feet wet? Thanks for leaving the comment, Dennis. What I'm saying is that to many, Twitter as a “platform” is often too abstract for people to grasp enough to use and enjoy — as opposed to Facebook, which is ostensibly the same service presented in a singular Web experience.

I think that most people just aren't experimenters. Unlike you or I, they're not wiling to even go clicking around to see what happens, to search out and follow people they don't know. It feels creepy to them. It's really a shame though, because unlike any other social network, Twitter really does act as a catalyst for people to make real-life connections — in ways I've never seen before, anyway.

I'm curious on your insight though — what is it in terms of placemaking that brings some people together in a very real way in Twitter, while not keeping the activity alive for people just getting their feet wet?

]]> By: Dennis Schleicher http://blog.michaelleis.com/2009/06/myspace-promote-facebook-friends-twitter-people/comment-page-1/#comment-459 Dennis Schleicher Fri, 26 Jun 2009 18:00:14 +0000 http://blog.michaelleis.com/?p=418#comment-459 Hi Mike, I really like "My only explanation so far is that Twitter works best when used with applications that sit apart from the singular Website experience: this may be too much experimentation over too long a period of time for Facebook users to endure."<br><br>2 questions<br>1- Are you saying that people see/understand twitter as a "platform?" And if so, then what do you think it is that allows to be so successful as a platform, other than just having nice APIs?<br>2- Any insights as to why do you think they aren't willing to experiment long enough? Hi Mike, I really like “My only explanation so far is that Twitter works best when used with applications that sit apart from the singular Website experience: this may be too much experimentation over too long a period of time for Facebook users to endure.”

2 questions
1- Are you saying that people see/understand twitter as a “platform?” And if so, then what do you think it is that allows to be so successful as a platform, other than just having nice APIs?
2- Any insights as to why do you think they aren't willing to experiment long enough?

]]> By: Dennis Schleicher http://blog.michaelleis.com/2009/06/myspace-promote-facebook-friends-twitter-people/comment-page-1/#comment-476 Dennis Schleicher Fri, 26 Jun 2009 18:00:14 +0000 http://blog.michaelleis.com/?p=418#comment-476 Hi Mike, I really like "My only explanation so far is that Twitter works best when used with applications that sit apart from the singular Website experience: this may be too much experimentation over too long a period of time for Facebook users to endure."<br><br>2 questions<br>1- Are you saying that people see/understand twitter as a "platform?" And if so, then what do you think it is that allows to be so successful as a platform, other than just having nice APIs?<br>2- Any insights as to why do you think they aren't willing to experiment long enough? Hi Mike, I really like “My only explanation so far is that Twitter works best when used with applications that sit apart from the singular Website experience: this may be too much experimentation over too long a period of time for Facebook users to endure.”

2 questions
1- Are you saying that people see/understand twitter as a “platform?” And if so, then what do you think it is that allows to be so successful as a platform, other than just having nice APIs?
2- Any insights as to why do you think they aren't willing to experiment long enough?

]]> By: Dennis Schleicher http://blog.michaelleis.com/2009/06/myspace-promote-facebook-friends-twitter-people/comment-page-1/#comment-488 Dennis Schleicher Fri, 26 Jun 2009 18:00:14 +0000 http://blog.michaelleis.com/?p=418#comment-488 Hi Mike, I really like "My only explanation so far is that Twitter works best when used with applications that sit apart from the singular Website experience: this may be too much experimentation over too long a period of time for Facebook users to endure."<br><br>2 questions<br>1- Are you saying that people see/understand twitter as a "platform?" And if so, then what do you think it is that allows to be so successful as a platform, other than just having nice APIs?<br>2- Any insights as to why do you think they aren't willing to experiment long enough? Hi Mike, I really like “My only explanation so far is that Twitter works best when used with applications that sit apart from the singular Website experience: this may be too much experimentation over too long a period of time for Facebook users to endure.”

2 questions
1- Are you saying that people see/understand twitter as a “platform?” And if so, then what do you think it is that allows to be so successful as a platform, other than just having nice APIs?
2- Any insights as to why do you think they aren't willing to experiment long enough?

]]> By: Joan Vermette http://blog.michaelleis.com/2009/06/myspace-promote-facebook-friends-twitter-people/comment-page-1/#comment-449 Joan Vermette Mon, 15 Jun 2009 23:20:12 +0000 http://blog.michaelleis.com/?p=418#comment-449 Per the US Census Bureau, in 1910, 71.6% of Americans lived in rural areas; by 2000 that figure has dropped to 19.7%. In 1900, 41% of the country's workforce was employed in agriculture; in 2000, 1.9%.<br><br>See <a href="http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/censr-4.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/censr-4.pdf</a> for the former statistic (calculated from chart on p. 37) and <a href="http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/eib3/eib3.htm#changes" rel="nofollow">http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/eib3/eib3....</a> for the workforce statistic.<br><br>The second great wave of European immigration to the States is seen by various sociologists to have taken place variously from 1850/1880/1890 – 1920. They all agree, however, that it ended around 1920, and it so it only accounts for a decade of the population distribution change noted above. Immigration since has slowed dramatically. Therefore, I think there's no question that the 20th century meant a sea change in our culture from rural life to urban life, and with it an accompanying radical change in the way that people in this country relate to each other. <br><br>The flight to the suburbs reached full force post-World War II. The small ideological pockets thing you're describing I think is the outcome of that wave. <br><br>All that only to say that this is the landscape of social change into which we now see social media arising, and I think it’s important to maintain a broad historical view when we talk about the nature of people’s sociability. As for what I was saying above regarding people’s adoption rates of Twitter, I think we’ve been battling this question of openness/anonymity within the American and perhaps the Western psyche for a good century or more, so it doesn’t surprise me that people right now are preferring to just sit and watch even though the capabilities are there for them to do more. It’s certainly safer on the sidelines. <br><br>Make sense? Per the US Census Bureau, in 1910, 71.6% of Americans lived in rural areas; by 2000 that figure has dropped to 19.7%. In 1900, 41% of the country's workforce was employed in agriculture; in 2000, 1.9%.

See http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/censr-4.pdf for the former statistic (calculated from chart on p. 37) and http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/eib3/eib3…. for the workforce statistic.

The second great wave of European immigration to the States is seen by various sociologists to have taken place variously from 1850/1880/1890 – 1920. They all agree, however, that it ended around 1920, and it so it only accounts for a decade of the population distribution change noted above. Immigration since has slowed dramatically. Therefore, I think there's no question that the 20th century meant a sea change in our culture from rural life to urban life, and with it an accompanying radical change in the way that people in this country relate to each other.

The flight to the suburbs reached full force post-World War II. The small ideological pockets thing you're describing I think is the outcome of that wave.

All that only to say that this is the landscape of social change into which we now see social media arising, and I think it’s important to maintain a broad historical view when we talk about the nature of people’s sociability. As for what I was saying above regarding people’s adoption rates of Twitter, I think we’ve been battling this question of openness/anonymity within the American and perhaps the Western psyche for a good century or more, so it doesn’t surprise me that people right now are preferring to just sit and watch even though the capabilities are there for them to do more. It’s certainly safer on the sidelines.

Make sense?

]]>