More than words
Doc Searls doesn’t like hearing the internet referred to as a ‘medium,’ something that chaps my hide as well…but his reasons for disliking it - and the term ’social media’ (which I use) - aren’t ones I think much about:
Yes, packets go through the Net. In an almost-literal sense, Senator Stevens is right that it’s a system of “pipes”. But the Net is pure infrastructure. We work on it, just as we work on the electric power grid, the road system and our water and waste treatment systems all of which also support the transport of stuff (electrons, cars, water, waste). Getting clear what the Net is, and what it supports, is critical to finding common ground in what has become a private vs. public debate, and should go deeper than that.
My main objection to the terms ‘medium’ and ‘media’ is that they smack of pipeline-style delivery of ideas and ‘messages’, which is not what our web is about at all. And yet, I use ’social media’, mostly because it’s a term even the pipleliners can understand, and even though I hate and resent dumbing these things down. Ideas for resolution of such dilemmas would be welcome.
Filed under: Blogging, Communication, Life, Technology
[…] Via Jackie I read this by the ironically named Doc Searls: I’m tired of hearing the Net referred to as a “medium”. Same goes for “social media” such as blogs, wikis and IM. Yes, packets go through the Net. In an almost-literal sense, Senator Stevens is right that it’s a system of “pipes”. […]
Strictly speaking the Internet is infrastructure and the web and social media are media (all three things are networks, but that’s by the by) - but when someone mixes definitions in conversation and I jump in and correct them I’m in danger of condescending to them, losing their engagement, and getting off the more important point we are discussing.
To communicate effectively we have to understand the language that the people we’re communicating with effectively. Arguments about definitions can sometimes become distracting and are very often exclusive.
We have to sometimes not get too precious about technical definitions - as you recognise in your willingness to use “social media” as a phrase - and remind ourselves that all language, including definitions, grammar and acceptability - is as complex and adaptive and owner-less as the communities and networks and media we are trying to describe.