The Absurdity Of Yielding Your Presence To The Stream
You would have to be crazy to completely yield your digital presence to services owned by other people. There are so many reasons you should maintain an independent presence, and most of those who have been active digitally well before the popularization of privately (vs. independently) owned web services know this.
Yet still, there are tech-savvy people who get caught up in the hype and forget the benefits gained by maintaining an area all their own. Leo Laporte recently succumbed to this, as noted in a recent post at his blog. What happened is his content accidentally stopped being imported into Twitter from Buzz for 16 days (he stopped using Twitter and was just bringing content over from one service to the other). And not a single person noticed. Not one email or comment to Leo about it. Even Leo didn’t notice.
It makes me feel like everything I’ve posted over the past four years on Twitter, Jaiku, Friendfeed, Plurk, Pownce, and, yes, Google Buzz, has been an immense waste of time. I was shouting into a vast echo chamber where no one could hear me because they were too busy shouting themselves.
Indeed. While there are many reasons to maintain an independent presence (as linked in graph 1) Leo is experiencing the poor signal to noise ratio within these networks, and the fact that they simply are not places to carve out a voice for yourself.
The best part about this, Leo has a wildly popular digital radio show that is produced and broadcast via its own network. And he clearly articulates how the benefits of this have increased over time:
Thank God the content I deem most important, my Internet and broadcast radio shows, still stand. I believe in what I’m doing there, and have been very fortunate to have found an audience. I’m pretty sure I would have heard from people if there had been 16 days of dead silence there. Hell, if we miss one show I get hundreds of emails. But I feel like I’ve woken up to a bad social media dream in terms of the content I’ve put in others’ hands. It’s been lost, and apparently no one was even paying attention to it in the first place.
You would think that due to this, Leo would understand the importance of self-publishing all his content and simply using things like Twitter as outposts to grow interest there. Building up outposts is not nearly as important as maintaining a place where you control the vertical and horizontal (this builds both equity and leverage). Anyway, let’s wish Leo luck on his journey back into self-publishing and not simply working in a space where even with 200,000 followers he’s not listened to.
Meanwhile, The Next Web reported on this story and missed the point entirely:
Laporte says that from now on he’ll be concentrating on his blog….
It’s hard to believe Leo will stay away from social media for long. As someone who makes a living from discussing the latest developments in the tech sphere, he simply can’t maintain credibility is he isn’t active on at least some social media platforms – how will he know what he’s talking about if he doesn’t take part?
What? Yet again more writers don’t understand that blogs are social media. In fact, a majority of links in both independent and public platforms simply work to drive links and traffic to blogs. Wouldn’t you rather be what the end goal is rather than just someone else pointing to that content?






Martin Bryant replied | Aug 23, 2010 (1 comment)
Hi, I didn’t miss the point, it was purely a ‘slip of the keyboard’. I perhaps should have said ‘microblogging’ – blogs are indeed social media. That said, Leo himself argued that “social media was a waste of time” so he made the same mistake ;-)
Adam Singer replied | Aug 23, 2010 (599 comments)
Fair enough, there does seem to be a disconnect among many (not just your slip of the keyboard) re: blogs not being social media.
Katie Morse replied | Aug 23, 2010 (2 comments)
Hey there, Adam!
I don’t personally follow Leo so missed the entire thing, oops. I don’t necessarily think that the perception that blogs aren’t social media is entirely a bad thing. Yes, they are, and they should be recognized as such… but does this overall signify that the businesses that “don’t get it” actually do “get it”, at least in part? In other words, does this show that some people have evolved and are starting to embrace this “social media thing” as not just something that teenagers do, but something that is genuinely applicable for businesses? Correct me if I’m misunderstanding the point, please!
The whole echo chamber concept is interesting to think about. I know that out of the people I follow and follow me, I regularly interact with a handful of people. Others? I may never send a single @ message or DM to – and who knows if they’re paying attention to what I say? Long-term, what can be done to prevent this, and how’d it end up this way in the first place?!
Katie
Community Manager | Radian6
@misskatiemo
Hazel Nieves replied | Aug 23, 2010 (3 comments)
Adam, such a good point you raised here. I find the idea of not realizing the absolute importance of owning your space in the grand scheme of growing and nurturing your digital voice or brand, weather it’s through a website or blog, is a costly mistake in many ways. Your owned space is nothing less than a very valuable digital asset that should be viewed as YOUR personal ‘front door to the world’. All the other popular digital outposts used by the masses are just tools and access points you should use to lead everyone back to your own front door. It’s like I always say…he who owns the customer wins and you can’t do that unless you have your own space to attract, cultivate, and win over customers who care if your lights are on and if you are at home!
I wrote more on this on my blog (my front door) and I would love your feedback. ‘Why You Better Stop Treating Your Website Like a Redhead Step Child!’ http://www.strategicbusinessdesigner.com/2009/05/why-you-better-stop-treating-your-website-like-a-redhead-step-child/
Hazel Nieves
nas replied | Aug 29, 2010 (1 comment)
Meh lame, just another blog post discussing Leo’s blog post, offering nothing new to the situation.
Even Leo’s back to tweeting and Buzzing so your whole point of reference is invalid.
Yes it’s true that storing everything on another service risks the fact that it could all disappear, but most of what people say on twitter is only relevant for the day it is tweeted anyway. Proper in-depth discussions and news articles are on user-owned sites, always have been, always will be.
Joel Libava replied | Aug 30, 2010 (1 comment)
Adam,
You are right on the money. The fine folks over at Facebook already told us that the stuff we post there is not ours. Plus, in the case of Facebook, there’s those nagging privacy concerns.
The Franchise King®
Thom Mitchell replied | Sep 2, 2010 (17 comments)
Leo simply discovered that the emperor has no clothes. It’s not that social media (in this case Twitter) isn’t important and useful, but having followers in the Twitter-verse doesn’t necessarily equate to people who actually care about what you have to say. Any service that is used because you “have” to use it to be taken seriously has issues.
Facebook is beginning to face the same issue even as their number of users continues to skyrocket. Increasingly people who were formally very active users, now feel obligated to check content periodically and are beginning to disengage. Relevancy to people’s real lives and needs is key. I appreciate and use Twitter/Facebook/LinkedIn and other services but I increasingly find myself un-following people whose content I see as noise. I’m sure others are doing the same to me. I don’t know what this will mean for the future of Twitter and similar social media sites but it will be interesting to see what happens.
Janelle Fields replied | Oct 29, 2010 (2 comments)
Amen and amen. Keep watching, stay tuned, do what you can but don’t stress when self-perceived social media inactivity or disengagement takes over because…well….life keeps getting in the way. The world continues to spin and new developments will come on the horizon with opportunities for all. Not to be a naysayer, just residing in the realists’ camp.