Friday, August 28, 2009

Look at me! - Part Two

I had an brief but interesting discussion with a much more accomplished writer about this article .  I am not going to use his name, in case I misrepresent his position (it's hard to have a reasonable discussion in 140 character bursts.)  He said that he agreed with the data, but disagreed with the conclusion, saying, "Ultimately, my take is that people love to talk about themselves and showcase expertise. Soc.media enables that."

Perhaps because I have narcissistic tendencies, I agree with the article's conclusions that there is a strong attraction for people to use Twitter and Facebook as a tool for validation.  In fact, in my post "Look at Me!" I used the same phrase as the author does - "The Age of Entitlement."  I believe that social networking tools provide a benefit.  I'm very happy that I have been able to re-connect with friends with whom I've lost contact over time, although I have to say that I could do with less updates about their kids, but maybe that's just me.  I find Twitter to be very useful, as I always have been more adept at coming up with funny headlines or one-liners, while writing a full story can be arduous.  I find Twitter's 140 character limit freeing.

I believe that I disagree with my writer Twitter friend on the benefit of people being able to "showcase expertise."  Lately, there has been a trend towards relying on regular people giving their opinion for content.  For example, on "The Lost Podcast with Jay and Jack," much of the content comes from listener phone calls, emails, and tweets.  I think that this format of utilizing input from "regular people" can work very well, as it does in this podcast.  However, I believe that there are times when the viewer or listener has a negative experience due to this format.  The VS. show "Fanarchy" showcases regular sports fans who send in webcam videos, which are then played on the show.  I don't know about you, but if I'm getting sports analysis, I want it from someone who has experience, either as a player or broadcaster.

Similarly, I place reviews from a professional movie critic on a different level than most regular moviegoers.  However, it depends on the type of information that I'm looking for.  If I just want to get a sense of how popular a movie is, reading reviews from non-professionals will do just fine.  If I want to read about Tarantino's use of music in his latest film, I'd rather read an article by someone who has studied film, specifically music's role.  Now, I am not trying to say that you have to be a professional critic to have an informed opinion on a movie.  I'm not trying to say that your opinion does not matter unless you have a degree in the field.  In my opinion, there is a low signal-to-noise ratio and it is difficult to separate the two.

When I was the editor for The Fake News, I would receive several submissions a week.  With one exception, the quality of the stories submitted was horrendous.  I am not perfect when it comes to proper punctuation, but some articles seem to have commas randomly inserted.  In addition, and I realize this will sound elitist, I believe that being funny is something you either have or you don't.  I believe that the people who submitted articles sincerely believed that their articles were at least humorous; sadly, they were mistaken.  Yes, comedy is subjective, but I heard from the editors of enough other sites to which these people submitted articles to conclude that it was not just me.

I read some very good analysis of the financial meltdown by people who were not economists.  However, these people read a great deal of information from experts in the field before writing their analysis.  Their opinion is of a different quality than someone who is just repeating something a television personality said.  Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but all opinions are not created equal.  Social media allows knowledgeable people who might not have previously had a forum to share their input.  It also makes it very easy for people to indulge their narcissistic tendencies.

What is your reaction to the article?

No comments: