What is Wrong with Social Media?

Over the last few days, there have been several discussions around Social Media and social media tools, with discussions ranging from its definition and intent, to its manipulation by marketers and whether it needs to be reclassified as something else.

Dave Obasanjo sparked the meme in his Social Media...WTF
Then Frank jumped on board with a rather extensive look at the social media landscape. "When I say "social media" or "new media" I'm talking about Internet media that has the ability to interact with it in some way. I don't really care what you call this "new media" but you've got to admit that something different is happening here..."

Stowe Boyd offered an impressive
Marianne Richmond also analyzed the Social Media phenomenon and
Chris Heuer also held a
Jeremiah Owyang also recently
And, not too long ago, Steve here. "It is my conviction that the phrase 'social media' is moot."

Many within the echo chamber blame "opportunistic" marketers for hijacking social media and cry for its demise. But, some of us (believers in Social Media and its ability to change the world) need to step-up to prevent it from losing its soul, while carrying the flag forward for the need, and reasons, to change media.

Let's take a step back and ask ourselves, is Social Media really losing its value around the rest of the world and among those who truly believe that it can change how we communicate?

I think we've only just begun, and there's still much to learn.

So, what's wrong with Social Media then?

It's an emergent term that as Stowe put it, defines the socialization of information (Social Media) as well as the tools to faciliate conversation (social media). With those descriptions, and the collective support from some of the most visionary edglings, I'm not sure why there has to be anything wrong with the name. Seriously.

What needs to be changed is the Wikipedia entry so that those new to the conversation, will understand what's really going on. Otherwise, we're doomed to continually run through these cycles of explanation and defense instead of focusing on foward-thinking and development.

Social media, in principle, is important, as it relates to the democratization of news and information. As long as it's embraced by people who believe in it and used responsibly...what's the problem?

Only a small fraction of the global population is actually socializing and, more importantly, these new tools are merely creating the framework for a broader, more sophisticated Social Media platform for the future. It is inspiring those (the people) that actually make it social, and not to have its current state or future dictated by those who don't engage.

Everyday, the conversation expands - without regression.

There are many driving the evolution while defining the Social Media landscape: Doc Weinberger, Stowe Narain, J.D. Oberkirch, Giovanni Owyang, Todd Israel, Chris Stone, Jay Saad, and wrote, "'devil's advocates and naysayers provide important checks and balances as part of a team, but they are not the one's LEADING positive and meaningful transformations within their organizations, or broader revolutions in their industry, their community or society as a whole."

The key point here is that Social Media has yet to reveal its true impact among those around the would who have yet to embrace it and participate.

The way we consume and share information will only continue to change until it completely transforms from one-to-many to many-to-many.

Consume. Produce. Share. The revolution will be socialized.