Social media, Social Marketplace, Social News, Social Bias?

Here's some statistics:

Facebook reports that it has broken 300 million users, with about half of them logging on at least once a day.

Twitdir, a twitter search directory, reports the ability to search over 5 million active twitter users.

And here's more:



This video is courtesy of Socialnomics.net--pretty interesting blog.

Ever heard of a microtransaction marketplace?

Apple and Microsoft are already doing it with iTunes Apple Store and Xbox Live, respectively. The world has yet to find the silver bullet to the broader marketplace question--Amazon and Ebay are trying very hard, but we'll see if they stay on top after this shift is over. Answers may lie in Video Games like World of Warcraft, Aion, and others which employ all kinds of quick marketplace exchange systems inside and outside the virtual world.

There are more specific market-need and referral websites popping up. Ever heard of ReferQuest (general services) or salesconx (sales)?

I believe there is another side to this evolution that should be addressed, that is, how we get our information about the world. Is news viable anymore? What are the social implications for older, more venerable outlets of information? We've already seen the decline of newspapers as a popular medium. Most of them have long already built an online presence to compensate, replicating the newspaper experience to varying degrees..but is that the right strategy for them?

When I go to a news website like New York Times or CNN, I read the headlines and look for small bits of info that might catch my eye, but I don't feel connected to the information. Socially, I am less interested in news that says, "look what is happening to those people." I do find it tragic that someone got murdered, or that a tornado hit some town in the mid-west, but I want more than that. I want to know how I can get involved if I want. I want news that, on a social level, affects me and informs on how I might be able to get involved from where I am (if I so desire).

Admittedly, in some ways, this idea presents a risk of adding bias to the news. This is the elephant in the news room. Editorial news IS biased--and editorial news is all any of the big channels/websites can do to attract viewers. News these days can't just report what happened, because they are getting beaten to the punch by people with cellphones and wi-fi. Editorial news offers (or should offer) explanation, interpretation, and a call to action. It's old-hat to call the media biased, because they can't survive these days without it. Besides, how many people these days go directly to the Associated Press for news?

Here's what I think. News is malleable (this is easily proven by watching MSNBC and FOX News cover the same subject). Lets frame news in such a way that it promotes connection among people and creates a dialogue. Journalism in the traditional sense may not be the career track it used to be, but there is a huge need for the 'Social Journalist'--someone who can take public discourse and information and make it accessible, fact-based, and interactive. It might also be good to make the people feel like they matter, while we're at it.

Side idea: What about quick play-by-play news story blog-chains like what they do for conference seminars? Update frequently throughout the day as events occur, then provide side analysis and feedback for people who want to explore further.

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google
  • Furl
  • Reddit
  • Spurl
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati