Comments on: Why Social Media is Better Than the Blogosphere: Gay Marriage, Drug Legalization, and Ron Paul

By: Robert Morris

Robert Morris — Wed, 16 May 2012 09:58:00 +0000

Absolutely. That is how most people engage with these issues. In depth discussion of issues was never going to reach that broad an audience. Most people prefer to have their information spoon – fed to them. These tools allow those who care to to compete with TV to a degree that was not possible before. Spoon-feeding is always to be lamented, but a broader range of people doing it is a good thing.

By: Sophie Roberge

Sophie Roberge — Tue, 15 May 2012 19:28:00 +0000

…assuming people take the time to go beyond the image, the 140 characters and actually link from a FB posting. We loved the news ticker at the bottom of CNN pre-social media – and now it manifests via social media. I think a constant variable is surface level subscription of ideas or the lack of depth into issues – however you choose to see it.

By: Stephen VanDyke

Stephen VanDyke — Tue, 15 May 2012 18:51:00 +0000

Everything is image memes, links to blogs (ha) and news articles, or youtube videos when I hit the social media networks. Which isn’t to say that’s a bad thing, but it’s not a terribly good selling point for abundant original content coming from social media either.

Blog are evolving as well, but I never really ascribed to the term (which became a pejorative in the hands of the establishment media who feared the potential of online media to eat their lunch). The last thing I would want to do is start calling HoT social media either. The fact is “social media” is any site people of similar opinions or interests gravitate to generate momentum.

As always, the internet falls victim to the old problem of dodgy hierarchies and ignoramuses preaching to the choir. And since most people won’t go out of their way seeking contrarian opinions to challenge them and it’s ultimately up to the preachers to get out of THEIR comfort zones.