Library 2.0: An Academic's Perspective

« Our Culture of Optionalities | Main | Go Where Users Are - On Your Web Site, Too »

A Cautious Person's Guide to the Social Web

Web 2.0 beckons. There's been a breathtaking proliferation of social networking sites that offer us all kinds of opportunities for interpersonal interactions. We can forge both personal and professional contacts on these sites and serve users in the bargain. Web 2.0 is our pathway to Library 2.0. Del.icio.us. Flickr. Ning. Twitter. LinkedIn. Facebook. And many others. It's been a scramble to keep up, join in, and hang in there.

I've been thinking about how new movements produce the phenomenon of both stubborn resistance and zealousness. Not surprisingly, this is happening with Web 2.0. While I worry more about the resisters in this case, I also wonder how I'd manage my life if I jumped head-first into every Next Great Thing.

This is not to put down the early adopters. Far from it. We need them. We admire them. We learn from them. But thankfully, we all aren't required to be them.

I know that things are moving fast. It's an important part of our professional obligation to get out there and play with new social tools. Besides, you don't want to be left behind, do you?

I guess it depends on your definition of "left behind." There is nothing intrinsically wrong with taking a guarded approach to participation in social networks. Some of us are naturally cautious. We want to study, to observe, to weigh our options. We're on top of things, but we take care to protect our energies and our time. We need a good reason to make our move.

Rather than consider the far sides of the participatory spectrum, I'm interested today in the middle ground. What follows is a Cautious Person's Guide to the Social Web.

  • The social Web may be new, but the social Internet is not. So relax. E-mail discussion groups, Usenet News, MOOs (remember them?), and other networked social phenomena are more than a decade old. What's new with 2.0 is the proliferation of socialization over HTTP. This has brought about explosive and creative growth in opportunities for online interaction. But the same rules of engagement apply. What we've got now are variations on a theme. If the rest of your Internet world is under control, there's no reason why the same can't apply with Web 2.0.
  • Speaking of rules of engagement, don't "friend" anyone unless you want to. I'm interested in the fact that this is even an issue. As I've already mentioned, managing online relationships on the social Web isn't much different from what we've been dealing with on the Internet since the first e-mail was sent. There is nothing new about the fact that online relationships need to be carefully managed. And so: think before you "friend" anyone. Do what's right for you. Individualism is the name of the game with Web 2.0. This is your world, and you have the right to control it as you wish.
  • Don't follow leaders, watch your parking meters. In some circles, peer pressure to join social networks can be strong. Proceed at your own pace. I've already weighed in about bandwagons. Don't join anything because of the buzz unless you're really attracted to the service. If you want to hold back and see how things unfold, that's fine. Have an identifiable reason for joining a social network, one that works for you. If things don't work out, quit.
  • Don't be a slave to cool. A 140 character limit on Twitter? Puh-leese! I know this sounds harsh, but extremely limiting rules really stick in my craw. Maybe this is just my freedom-loving self rising up. Apparently for many of you, the quickie messages have their use and their charm. Maybe some of you see the beauty in the limitation, as if you were constructing haikus. I realize that a character limit makes sense for text messaging and IM communications. But truly, it worries me to observe how people submit to 140 characters without an uprising of protest. (Yes, longer messages can be posted to the Twitter site, but I haven't found one yet.) I'd be much more comfortable with a service that offers a user-configured choice. Might this be a possibility?
  • Don't put too much stock in any particular social service. Most of the famous - and not-so-famous - services of today will be gone within the decade. Many will be gone much sooner. Enjoy the moment, but don't get too caught up in the wonder of any social networking site. It's not going to last.
  • If you don't want to lose the material you post to social networks, make backups. Save your blog posts, your comments, your documents, your photos, your podcasts, your bookmarks, and anything else you want to preserve. Third-party sites can go belly-up in a flash, and all your contributions will be gone, forever. Count on it.

This list turned into a number of "don'ts." Well, what do you expect when caution is the context?

In case you couldn't tell, I'm a bona fide Cautious Person. I live within the middle range of the participatory spectrum that keeps me involved in social networking but at my own pace. For me, it's a comfortable place to be. Any of you are welcome to join me there.

Comments

Hi Laura,

I think it's great that you're providing some much-needed reassurance to other Cautious People. And I congratulate you on confidently finding a comfortable place that suits you.

In what's becoming my regular role in these comments... I'm going to have to challenge you though - are you sure you're a Cautious Person? Because I don't think you are!!

Perhaps you're just a Very Well-Informed Cautious Person (VWICP!), or maybe a Very Curious Cautious Person (VCCP!).. but the people I know who have as good a grasp of the latest web developments as you (or are even in a position to give advice about it) *have* to be part of the early-adopter crowd.

I'd count myself in that group, and I do sign up to an awful lot of new services - but that doesn't mean I use all of them down the line. I use the ones that turn out to be useful or have a particularly good USP for me. I'd say no more than 500 people in the world actually subscribe and then really use all the services that are coming out at such a fast pace these days. And they're either famous bloggers or high-profile service providers looking at their competitors.

James

ps. for many people, twitter's character-limit is its USP.

 

James, I always enjoy your challenges. They make me think!

I appreciate that you consider me to be a VWICP, or even an VCCP. I'm honored! This exactly gets to the point of my post: that one can be on top of things but still not be an immediate, active participant. This is my happy middle ground.

I think I'm a little right of center. Here is the spectrum:

Resister----------Cautious Person----------Early Adopter

You're even farther to the right, and obviously have maintained both equilibrium and perspective. Fantastic.

 

Aha! I see what you mean about being on top of things but not being an active participant, and I think that's exactly the position that a change-advocate or project-manager should be in. Well, it's the only position possible because of time and knowledge constraints. The customer and consumer don't necessarily need to be there either (unless they're particularly interested) since they'll want to wait and see how it all pans out, get the best deal etc.

I know this might seem a bit silly, and that we all know it's always more complex than one can put into words, but I've never thought about this spectrum before so I'm going to suggest a vertical axis. What do you think??

^
Time constraints
|
|
|
Resister----------Cautious Person----------Early Adopter
|
|
|
Relevance & Interest
\/

 

James, You understand exactly.

Your vertical axis illustrates what I've been trying to explain - and does the job better! For "time constraints," I might try something like "equilibrium" or something similar. There are all sorts of fun possibilities here.

I realize that the HTML didn't quite lay it out in the way you intended. I'll try the "pre" tag, and see if this helps:

                         ^
                  Time constraints  
                         |
                         |
                         |
Resister----------Cautious Person----------Early Adopter
                         |
                         |
                         |
               Relevance & Interest
                         \/

 

Much better! The pre tag works the charm. It looked good in the comment box!

I may actually utilise this little chart in my next blog post, if you don't mind. It's something I've not really thought about before. I may also go completely bonkers and add a z-axis which incorporates industry sector! We'll see what I end up with...

 

James, go for it! A z-axis: this I've got to see!

 

|    /
|   /
|  /
| /
|/
-------
Just joking... will use photoshop!

 

Post a comment