Some more thoughts on SoDOMM - the Social Distribution of Mass Media...

Some more thoughts on SoDOMM - the Social Distribution of Mass Media...

Summary: Social media has become a link sharing channel that amplifies rather than challenges the established order of big media...


Earlier this week I pointed out how "social media" has changed from its original promise of challenging the established order of mass media.

Where are the brigades of citizen journalists? What's become of the hope of the grass roots revolt against the gate keepers in our national and local media?

When I left the Financial Times in mid-2004 to become the first journalist to leave a major newspaper and become an independent "journalist-blogger" there was a lot of hope in the air. I felt I was joining a small but very spirited band of media pioneers, a nascent "Homebrew Club" of sorts, which might help usher in a new era in media.

Just as the Homebrew Computer Club, whose members such as Steve Jobs, Steve Wozniak and Bill Gates, took a hobby of building microcomputers and helped build a new industry that toppled the behemoths of their age, there was a similar feeling in the air.

No longer did you need to be a Press Baron, buying ink by the tanker, and having hugely expensive printing plants. The printing press was now virtually free. The distribution system was equally free.

If you produced media content of value the world found it, there was no need to Tweet it out or spam anyone with your latest stories.

At the time it felt l like a meritocracy, that if you had a better mouse trap the world did indeed beat a path to your door.

But over the years things have changed considerably. Just because the printing press is free means little if the access to audience is constrained. The mediasphere has expanded to include blogs and other forms of citizen journalism/media but it doesn't seem to have expanded very far.

Citizen journalism hasn't led to a revolution in media, or changed much about the old order. Mass media is still massive and in the hands of a small number of owners.

And "social media" now represents a tiny sliver of the mediasphere, one that deals primarily with product or service recommendations among friends. That's very mundane revolution.

If you look at the links people are sharing through social media, much of it is links to the same newspapers and big media organizations that people were reading, listening to, and watching before the advent of social media.

You still see a minority dominating the production of the social media consumed. For example, Yahoo Research recently published a report that showed just 20,000 "elite" Twitter users (out of 150 million) produced 50% of all Tweets consumed. Mass media produced by a minority - and most of that content is shared links to big media.

The term "social media" has lost much of its meaning.

Social media seems to have become just a distribution channel for mass media content -- there's very little media produced by the masses.

To be accurate in our use of words, I propose that the term social media be changed to describe what is actually happening: Social Distribution Of Mass Media (SoDOMM).

But I am an optimist. There are big cracks in the edifice of mass media. The business model transition to a digital world is still in flux and there is no good solution.

There's still a long way to go before mass media, and its small number of owners, can relax and get back to business as usual.

There's a good chance that SoDOMM might fail to arrest the fall of mass media, and that it might just be a transitionary phase on the road to real social media.

I've got my fingers crossed.

Topic: Social Enterprise

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.


Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Some factors at work

    Being a journalist of any kind requires a bit of talent or skill, I hope we agree on that point! Even with free tools, not everyone is able to produce a wholly new work of interest.

    Mass media is sometimes difficult to quantify. If I use a website forum to get nutrition information instead of looking it up in Harcourt's "Human Nutrition and Dietetics", does that mean I have used "social media" instead of mass media? Besides the gigantic Wikipedia site, there are hundreds of thousands of smaller sites that serve similar functions for specialized interests.

    By subjective measure, I spend about 50 percent of my time on non-conglomerate websites, and 50 percent on sites like Yahoo and Google. I include Youtube in this category even though the site is mostly composed of user-supplied media. A lot of it is derivative from mass media, but there is a fair amount of original media as well.

    My current favorite:
    terry flores
  • RE:Some more thoughts on SoDOMM - the Social Distribution of Mass Media...

    Thanks, and enjoy <a href="">replica watches</a>