Social Media Is Lexical Deviation

Posted byMax Kalehoff 6 Comments on Social Media Is Lexical Deviation

In my last MediaPost Column on “social-media best practices,” Dave Evans challenged me on my growing rejection of the term social media. He then unpacked his argument into a ClickZ column. He said:

At its core, social media both encompasses and provides a set of tools that enable members to share and share in the information around them. It is a precursor, but not a guarantee of community. The social web, a facilitator, enables me to ask you or anyone else in my distributed network about something and facilitates you telling me and anyone else in your distributed network about it.

Dave’s a very smart guy, and I agree with his underlying marketing principles. But I still don’t like the term social media. To me — and in the literal sense — it’s the mechanical infrastructure which MEDIATES relationships and interpersonal communications. It’s the MEANS to an end, and certainly NOT the core issue which so many “social media” references attempt to tackle. The core issues that really matter are precisely relationships, interpersonal communications and community. Social media at its best is a tactic to a higher calling, and too often a lexical deviation.

Published by Max Kalehoff

Father, sailor and marketing executive.

Join the Conversation

6 Comments

  1. Pingback: Planet Social Media Research
  2. Pingback: Data Mining: Text Mining, Visualization and Social Media

  3. Contemporary discussions around social media tend to define social media, in contradistinction to traditional media. Does that mean that traditional media i.e. pre-Internet media are unsocial? I think that every communications medium is social in so far it achieves its essential role, that is, to successfully mediate communication between two people. Then it is by definition social. Unsocial media are broken media.

    The most oft quoted distinction between social and traditional media has been the direction of communication. Social media are two-way while traditional media are one-way. But communication does not have to be two-way to be communication. That is why we speak of one-way communication; because it involves the successful communication of one person’s message to another. But then pre-Internet media are also social. Then why is everybody talking about ‘Social Media’? What is new about them? Visit my blog post at http://agoraplace.wordpress.com/2008/01/15/the-social-role-of-the-internet-part-i-the-origins-of-web-20-and-social-media/ that deals with question.

  4. Contemporary discussions around social media tend to define social media, in contradistinction to traditional media. Does that mean that traditional media i.e. pre-Internet media are unsocial? I think that every communications medium is social in so far it achieves its essential role, that is, to successfully mediate communication between two people. Then it is by definition social. Unsocial media are broken media.

    The most oft quoted distinction between social and traditional media has been the direction of communication. Social media are two-way while traditional media are one-way. But communication does not have to be two-way to be communication. That is why we speak of one-way communication; because it involves the successful communication of one person’s message to another. But then pre-Internet media are also social. Then why is everybody talking about ‘Social Media’? What is new about them? Visit my blog post at http://agoraplace.wordpress.com/2008/01/15/the-social-role-of-the-internet-part-i-the-origins-of-web-20-and-social-media/ that deals with question.

Leave a comment