This morning I came across the text of a Q&A session with Andrew Keen that got my attention. For those of you who filter out anti-social-media news (it's hard not to these days), Andrew Keen is a former entrepreneur who has backed off from his enthusiasm of Silicon Valley and even gone so far as to oppose Web 2.0 (gasp!).
Referring to Web 2.0, Keen suggested that "the experiment’s ended. Five years ago there was an optimism that there would be a simple transition from a professionally run media to the idea that anyone could create content and be paid for it. It simply hasn’t happened."
Keen's reasoning includes the observation that YouTube--the third most trafficked site on the Internet--still isn't making money. Fake Steve Jobs (a popular blogger) also left his blogging experiment in the dust recently when he discovered it simply wasn't going to bring in the dough.
The social media sniper aimed his biggest guns at Facebook, which he describes as "a narcissistic product that devalues the notion of friendship."
It's easy to see why Keen creates controversy. We just happen to find ourselves at the peak of the social media hype, and everybody who's anybody devotes a good portion of their day (ahem...) to Facebook. It's much more than just a site for connecting and reconnecting with friends; like it or not, Facebook is becoming a virtual reality for friendships. A toned-down version of Second Life, perhaps. But I digress...
Even if Keen is right, the big question is: does it matter? True, social media is usually not the online-money-making jackpot some make it out to be. But at its foundation, it was never meant to be about money. Web 2.0--social media--is about people. Connecting, participating, authoring, creating. And when the people are given influence over the way things run, they usually win.
To be fair, Keen does provide one exception to the social media doomsday: Twitter. Surprised? Read his reasoning here.
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment