Wordyard

Hand-forged posts since 2002

Scott Rosenberg

  • About
  • Greatest hits

Archives

Wordyard / Blogging / The hive mind migrates

The hive mind migrates

September 3, 2014 by Scott Rosenberg 20 Comments

You are viewing an old revision of this post, from September 3, 2014 @ 15:27:51. See below for differences between this version and the current revision.

empty hive

So with all this noise — all right, murmur — about a blog revival, I say, let’s talk about social networks. Because the whole discussion about blogs and social networks has always posited them as a zero-sum game: if social wins, blogs lose. And things are just way more complicated than that.

In one huge dimension, at least, the world of social networks is absolutely identical to the world of the blogosphere: Their value derives from the people who write, post, share stuff there.

Whatever is good in services like Twitter and Facebook — whatever we go there for — comes from all of us. Without people posting their thoughts and pictures and links, these platforms are nothing, nada, zilch.

There’s a whole “digital labor” conversation that tries to analyze the place of digital work in the global economy. That’s important, but I mean something far simpler: that if you and me and millions of other people stopped posting, Twitter and Facebook would spiral down towards worthlessness — a network effect in reverse.

I’m not predicting any kind of mass exodus or espousing a boycott. But there is a less dramatic sort of abandonment that happens to digital platforms more organically over time — like over-farmed turf that gradually enforces its own need to lie fallow, or hives that have served their purpose but lost their inhabitants.

Any successful community-based online enterprise — from the Well to Flickr to the fertile blog community of a decade ago to Twitter — takes off when an enthusiastic group of early adopters embraces the service and starts tinkering with it, inventing new practices and putting its functions to new uses its creators never imagined. There’s a period of excitement and delight and innovation, then a wider adoption. Cue the collective wow.

Then something happens. The early users begin to burn out, or feel neglected, or resent how the platform owner is changing things, or just chafe at problems the service has never been able to fix. Eventually, they lose the love. They start looking for a new home. If there is a hive mind at work in these matters — and there’s almost certainly not just one but many — it rouses itself and, at some critical moment, moves its energy center elsewhere.

This is a natural process, probably an inevitable one, and not cause for mourning. It is how the tech industry has worked for decades, as “developer enthusiasm” moves from one realm of technical spadework to the next.

It might be happening to Twitter right now. That’s what Alan Jacobs says: “For many of the really smart people on Twitter, it’s over.” He’s echoing Adrienne LaFrance and Robinson Meyer of the Atlantic, who wrote a “eulogy for Twitter” last April.

So yes, first, the obvious: Twitter is huge; it isn’t going anywhere. But the Twitterati are definitely restless, at least in the circles I heed. It’s a thin line between “everyone else is there so I’d better go too” and “nobody goes there anymore — it’s too crowded!” All the link-sharing trackers and analytics and tools will cease to hold our interest if the people we’re interested in move their contributions away from the platform that supports them.

This dynamic is actually heartening: It means that, in a digital environment that seems to privilege big platform owners over individual users, we have more power than we think. Another way of making the same observation can be found in Tim Carmody’s recent essay on OKCupid’s defense of its manipulation of user profiles for testing and research.

They’re all too quick to accept that users of these sites are readers who’ve agreed to let these sites show them things. They don’t recognize or respect that the users are also the ones who’ve made almost everything that those sites show. They only treat you as a customer, never a client.

This is an incredibly important point! And one that the people running today’s Web have a strong interest in blurring. In fact,this insight is so critical, so worth holding onto, that I would like to give it a label so we can’t easily forget it.

How about this? Carmody’s Law: The users of Web platforms today are also the creators of almost everything you’ll find on them.

And the inevitable corollary: They are free agents, even if they sometimes feel trapped.

So where does this leave the blogging revival? I don’t think that personal blogging will somehow become the new hotness again; you only get one lap round that track. I do think that as waves of smart people hit the limits of their frustration with Twitter and Facebook, many will look around and realize, hey, this blogging thing still makes a great deal of sense.

Post Revisions:

  • September 3, 2014 @ 15:27:51 [Current Revision] by Scott Rosenberg
  • September 3, 2014 @ 15:27:51 by Scott Rosenberg

Changes:

There are no differences between the September 3, 2014 @ 15:27:51 revision and the current revision. (Maybe only post meta information was changed.)

Filed Under: Blogging, Features, Project

Comments

  1. Tim Carmody

    September 3, 2014 at 3:01 pm

    @scottros what? whoa.

  2. Scott Rosenberg

    September 3, 2014 at 3:02 pm

    @tcarmody check it out, you’re right up there with Gresham and Godwin and Metcalfe and Moore…

  3. Tim Carmody

    September 3, 2014 at 3:04 pm

    @scottros It’s a good law. You honor me by it, although I don’t deserve the credit.

  4. Scott Rosenberg

    September 3, 2014 at 3:04 pm

    @tcarmody that’s what they always say!

  5. UA Journalism

    September 3, 2014 at 3:16 pm

    RT @scottros: Networks work because of you and me and everyone we know. But we’re mobile. wordyard.com/2014/09/03/the…

  6. mcburton

    September 3, 2014 at 3:25 pm

    @scottros your “digital labor” link points to emptyness, there some kind of hidden meaning?

  7. Scott Rosenberg

    September 3, 2014 at 3:28 pm

    @mcburton no probly bad coding which I will now fix, thanks for the alert. Link is to digitallabor.org

  8. TCWriter

    September 3, 2014 at 10:02 pm

    >>The early users begin to burn out, or feel neglected, or resent how the platform owner is changing things, or just chafe at problems the service has never been able to fix. Eventually, they lose the love.<<

    Or perhaps they start recognizing there's significant value in their contribution to the service, and start to chafe under the realization that someone else is harvesting that value.

    After all, even the much-maligned free internship eventually ends.

  9. Ben Werdmüller

    September 4, 2014 at 9:08 am

    The hive mind migrates (from social networks) http://www.wordyard.com/2014/09/03/the-hive-mind-migrates/

  10. Cliff Figallo

    September 8, 2014 at 8:09 am

    Let’s not forget the influence of new generations moving into the social environment. They invent new tools, favor alternative ways of adopting existing tools, bring different perspectives to the status quo and lead the flight away from establishment technology and practices.

Trackbacks

  1. Tim Carmody says:
    September 3, 2014 at 3:03 pm

    retweeted this.

  2. Andria Krewson says:
    September 3, 2014 at 3:17 pm

    favorited this.

  3. Constantin Basturea says:
    September 3, 2014 at 3:18 pm

    favorited this.

  4. jamshid says:
    September 3, 2014 at 3:32 pm

    favorited this.

  5. Josh Stearns says:
    September 3, 2014 at 4:00 pm

    favorited this.

  6. Noah Chestnut says:
    September 3, 2014 at 5:08 pm

    favorited this.

  7. Mike Pence says:
    September 3, 2014 at 6:29 pm

    retweeted this.

  8. Mahendra Palsule says:
    September 3, 2014 at 9:19 pm

    retweeted this.

  9. Legal Web Watch September 2014 | Internet Newsletter for Lawyers says:
    October 1, 2014 at 1:55 am

    […] similar vein Scott Rosenberg on WordYard writes about social media burnout and the revival of […]

  10. Big Internet? No thanks « Binary Law says:
    October 6, 2014 at 2:03 am

    Big Internet? No thanks
    By Nick Holmes on October 1, 2014 Leave a comment Filed under Big Internet, Blogging, Twitter

    Reblogged from Legal Web Watch September 2014.
    The early adopters have been getting restless lately. I’m with them. This is not what we signed up for.
    Alan Jacobs, writing for The New Atlantis, predicts The End of Big Twitter. Twitter used to be like your front porch, now it’s the middle of Broadway and he’s getting out:
    I don’t like this change. I made friends – real friends – on Twitter when it was a place for conversation. I reconnected with people I had lost touch with. Whole new realms of knowledge were opened to me. I don’t want to foreclose on the possibility of further discovery, but the signal-to-noise ratio is so bad now that I don’t think I could pick out the constructive and interesting voices from all the mean-spiritedness and incomprehension; and so few smart people now dare to use Twitter in the old open way.
    In similar vein Scott Rosenberg on WordYard writes about social media burnout and the revival of blogging:
    Then something happens. The early users begin to burn out, or feel neglected, or resent how the platform owner is changing things, or just chafe at problems the service has never been able to fix. Eventually, they lose the love. They start looking for a new home. If there is a hive mind at work in these matters – and there’s almost certainly not just one but many – it rouses itself and, at some critical moment, moves its energy center elsewhere.
    Brent Simmons on inessential is also fed up with the exploitation by social media companies, but keen to keep blogging:
    What I do care about is that my blog isn’t part of a system where its usefulness is just a hook to get me to use it. It works the way I want to, and the company running the servers (DreamHost) doesn’t care one fig what I do.
    Nick Carr on Rough Type takes these arguments further, considering the wider picture of Big Internet, and concludes:
    These trends … stem from a sense of exhaustion with what I’m calling Big Internet. By Big Internet, I mean the platform- and plantation-based internet, the one centered around giants like Google and Facebook and Twitter and Amazon and Apple. Maybe these companies were insurgents at one point, but now they’re fat and bland and obsessed with expanding or defending their empires. They’ve become the Henry VIIIs of the web. And it’s starting to feel a little gross to be in their presence. So, yeah, I’m down with this retro movement. Bring back personal blogs. Bring back RSS. Bring back the fun. Screw Big Internet.
    The web we want
    So what kind of web do we want? 25 years ago, Sir Tim Berners-Lee gave the web to the world. To mark the 25th anniversary of this turning point Web We Want is running a three-part festival at Southbank Centre, London. The Web We Want movement is calling on everyone, everywhere to play their part in shaping and enhancing the web.
    As part of the festival Tim Berners-Lee spent an evening in conversation with SCL President Richard Susskind on September 27, reported by Roger Bickerstaff on the SCL site:
    Susskind asked what worries Berners-Lee most about the Web. His main worries relate to the extent to which the open and collaborative nature of the Web is being challenged. He mentioned the problems over State censorship limiting Web access in various countries. He said that this had been a concern for him well before Snowden and he talked at some length about State surveillance. He commented that in countries where Web access is not limited, the Web can be monitored to track the activities of political opponents and dissidents and be used to ‘round them up’. He also discussed the risks associated with large company Web ‘silos’ and the lack of exposure this brings to the benefits of the Web if people simply use a single site. (Presumably Facebook – but Berners-Lee is very careful not to mention any specific names). Web users then don’t experience the range of opportunities that the Web has to offer. The increasing lack of ‘net neutrality’ and the prioritisation of net traffic is also a concern.

    Image by Anonymous9000 on Flickr

    Leave your comment
    Filed under Big Internet, Blogging, Twitter
    Tweet

    window.___gcfg = {lang: ‘en-GB’};

    (function() {
    var po = document.createElement(‘script’); po.type = ‘text/javascript’; po.async = true;
    po.src = ‘https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js’;
    var s = document.getElementsByTagName(‘script’)[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s);
    })();

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *