Image via WikipediaAs the growth of the social web accelerates, I keep hearing of efforts that will bring our social graphs into one united place, and I find myself increasingly questioning why that will be the case.
From the mass community sites like MySpace and Facebook, and associated connectivity apps (Twitter, Friendfeed, etc), as I connect with increasing numbers of people, I lose any ability to have meaningful conversations or relationships with any of them. Deep conversations about specific subjects are not of interest to the masses, and I find that attention spent on the mass sites drives the conversation to the lowest common denominator, which tends to be giggly not serious.
I’ve become a big fan of linkedin as an entrepreneur– the business focus keeps me more productive, and less prone to the distractions that come from the mass social sites with their glittery or seductive appeal.
Generalizing it out, I think we’ll see a growth of “channels” relevant to different parts of our lives over the next few years, and that each of these will have different (but somewhat overlapping) friends, colleagues, and community bents. Just as you expect different things from shopping at WalMart, Bloomingdale’s, H&M, and Victoria’s Secret, why would we present the same recommendations and discussions to all of our friends? While we filter these heavily in offline life, online life hasn’t yet caught up. This would contradict the approach taken by OpenSocial and other “friend aggregators”, as they assume your group of contacts and friends as applicable to any situation.
Where today, major aggregators are losing the signal to noise battle (due to legitimate differences in people’s opinions and interests in addition to spam), vertical channels providing relevant context will be the norm. We’re seeing some evidence of this in the growth of news amplifiers (from tech focused Digg to other communities like Reddit, StumbleUpon, NewsVine, etc). Ning is enabling deep conversations in various interest communities, and blog conversations are increasingly creating communities around topics. The next gen of search will be figuring out how to find these vertical winners– which may mean platforms will have to splinter their databases and engines to optimize around smaller contextual units.
In our offline lives, relevance is associated with channels, and few go to the general store or mainstreet– instead we have rich retail experiences in grocery, electronics, movies, etc through specialized stores. At the end of the day, massive choice needs to be directed at solving particular jobs, and we want the best solution for a pressing problem, not the best solution on average for anything (else we all would carry swiss army knives).
It’ll be interesting to see when the ad agencies, the bigger corporations, and the VCs begin to understand this– its not about owning the most users or sign-ins, but creating deep engagement highly relevant to small groups of individuals at a time. Mastering these deep conversations and helping others looking for this increasingly relevant content will be the next wave in the constant battle of signal vs. noise in a world of limitless distribution.

Recent Comments