Why are advertising social networks so dysfunctional?
1. Why do the vast majority of the people in these networks end up as lurkers? Most of the people in our network do not actively or consistently participate.
2. Why don’t these networks attract more people from our business? Social networks attract just a minuscule fraction of the entire population of the people working in our industry.
3. Why do only a few people out of the total population have anything to say? We are in the communication business, why don’t we know how to communicate with each other?
4. Why do only a few people out of the total population actively post or comment on other people’s posts or profiles? There are thousands of members, but only a few posts with a few comments.
5. Why do only a few people out of the total population make friends or network in a social network of their peers?
6. Why do only a few people out of the total population stay, while most just stop by for a while, then move on, or rarely check in from time to time?
7. Real life operates one way, and virtual life operates another, why is that? For example, in real life when you say hi to someone, or welcome someone, or make the first move to speak with someone, they will usually respond to you. Not true here. People will often avoid contact in a social network after they have been approached. So why do they come to a social network in the first place?
8. Are most of the people in our business really that boring, or have nothing to say?
9. Are most of the people in our business really that shy or rude?
10. Are most of the people in our business really that unfriendly towards each other, envious of each other, intimidated by each other, not care about each other, or are afraid of each other?
11. Are most of the people in our business really that fucked up?
(Help me out here folks, please. I can’t figure this out??????????)
2. Why don’t these networks attract more people from our business? Social networks attract just a minuscule fraction of the entire population of the people working in our industry.
3. Why do only a few people out of the total population have anything to say? We are in the communication business, why don’t we know how to communicate with each other?
4. Why do only a few people out of the total population actively post or comment on other people’s posts or profiles? There are thousands of members, but only a few posts with a few comments.
5. Why do only a few people out of the total population make friends or network in a social network of their peers?
6. Why do only a few people out of the total population stay, while most just stop by for a while, then move on, or rarely check in from time to time?
7. Real life operates one way, and virtual life operates another, why is that? For example, in real life when you say hi to someone, or welcome someone, or make the first move to speak with someone, they will usually respond to you. Not true here. People will often avoid contact in a social network after they have been approached. So why do they come to a social network in the first place?
8. Are most of the people in our business really that boring, or have nothing to say?
9. Are most of the people in our business really that shy or rude?
10. Are most of the people in our business really that unfriendly towards each other, envious of each other, intimidated by each other, not care about each other, or are afraid of each other?
11. Are most of the people in our business really that fucked up?
(Help me out here folks, please. I can’t figure this out??????????)
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Greg Hollingsworth on -
I don't know about you, but I don't generally consider politics to be public service work, certainly not in the United States. But that's a whole different topic for an entirely different social network.
We are all narcissistic to some degree. You are correct that everything we do starts with "me", but it is not what I think we are trying to get at in this discussion. What is a social network after all? It is a group of people with similar interests that group to exchange stories, ideas, etc... Social networking via the internet simply provides a much broader forum.
I'm sure that there were plenty of lurkers in the salons of Paris during the renaissance. There's no difference between that atmosphere and this one, the lurkers are here to listen and gain knowledge through osmosis, while the rest of us are here to engage others in discussion.
-
Permalink Reply by Buddy 'Friendly' Wachenheimer on
-
It is no doubt doable, but not something one would want to do.
The vast majority of most social networks are lurkers. Just like in the real world most people are just existing rather than living. If you eliminate the non-participates there will be no audience for the participates to talk to or talk about.
-
-
On second thought George, why not. Kill em all. ;-)
"The secret to productivity is the elimination of waste."-Michael Iva
-
-
NO. We do not want to eat the people that you suggest we get eliminate. (Nasty!)
Perhaps a fertilizer might be more appropriate, something along the lines of a "Soybean-Green."
-
Permalink Reply by Jim Powell on
-
Buddy said "one" he he - "are you royalty Buddy "..he he he =- *giggles like a girl and runs off*
-
-
Hmmmmmmm, must be some type of Pommie inside joke, huh litttle girl?
-
-
Speaking of jokes, COULD SOCIAL NETWORKS END UP BEING ANOTHER WEB 2.0 JOKE?
Another next-big-latest-and-greatest-thing… that wasn’t?
Another fad that never turned into a trend?
Why do I say this? Think about these key factors:
1. Because as we all know the vast majority of social network MEMBERS ARE NOT ACTIVE PARTICIPATES, they are lurkers.
2. Social networks also suffer A HIGH TURN OVER RATE in their memberships. The vast majority of the vast majority of these lurkers get bored easily and either find other places to lurk, or only lurk from time to time.
3. MANY SOCIAL NETWORKS LOOK LIKE THEY HAVE HEALTHY GROWING MEMBERSHIP NUMBERS, BUT DO THOSE MEMBERSHIP NUMBERS REALLY REFLECT REALITY? Members were here once, but are they still here? Or perhaps members might just rarely return ever so often. Does either circumstance accurately reflect an active membership rooster?
-
Permalink Reply by Kelly Sheehan on
-
Honestly, I simply think that it mirrors the general consumer population. If you take note of the people that are actively creating and participating, I would imagine it would begin to resemeble the 80/20 rule. Although this skews more to the 95/5 rule in my book.
-
-
Agreed. Maybe even the 99/1 rule.
-
Permalink Reply by J.S. Gilbert on
-
I'm still having difficulty with the "eliminating people is wrong" point.
So, now what's wrong with eliminating people?
-
-
Shuuuuuu, nothing.
-
-
WHO PARTICIPATES AND WHAT ARE THEY DOING http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_24/b4038405.htm
© 2008 Created by Steve Hall
