Social Media not fully Adopted and Blowing the smoke away

Claim: Social Media is Dead
Steve Rubel of Edelman (who’s firm has been the posterboy of how to botch up Social Media this year) proclaims that Social Media is no more. (many a juicy comment) He suggests that Social Media is moot, as nearly all online vehicles have two way mechanisms.


Community Response to Claim:

Brian Oberkirch suggests that Steve has jumped the shark on this one:

“…I use Rubel as an example all the time of someone who blogged his way into big things. Whatever you think about his views on PR & social media, he blogged and blogged and blogged and assumed a central position in the discussion. I think with his new role, maybe he’s just too busy to be as engaged, but the blog has suffered. This post is a marker of just how off the path it is.

Maybe it’s also a data point about why Edelman’s social media programs (Walmarting, the Vista outreach hullaballo, the shiny object Second Life and social media release stuff) feel so off the mark as well…”

Brian Solis shines some light on global usage and mainstream adoption.

“…Is it me, or am I the only one here that sees the blaring differences between blurred and dead? Yes, he’s correct that in 2006 most, not all, media went social. Many of the tools he described are globally deployed and utilized. But the last time I checked, only a small portion of the global population is was actually socializing using “social media tools” and, most importantly, these tools a merely creating the framework for a broader, more sophisticated social media platform for the future…”

“…So if anything, 2007 becomes the year where social media is a respected, official, and recognized media channel, but it is by no means mainstream, traditional, broadcast, etc. We still have a lot of work to do to get the rest of the world to join the conversation and what it will become is the real story here… “

David Armano provides a handful of reasons why traditional media has not fully accepted social media, so why should we?

“… I still hear journalists speaking skeptically of Social Media even though they now openly reference it in their stories. Plus, I’ve worked in Newsrooms in both print and broadcast years ago, many of the same people still remain in power at the top…”

“…Most of the people I work with are vaguely familiar with my blog (some not at all) and usually only perk up when they hear about the BusinessWeek/Boston Globe mentions…”

“…Many mainstream media outlets have their own versions of blogs, podcats etc. but this isn’t Social Media—it’s the MSM using technologies…”

“…Whether we like it or not, us content creators are still fighting for credibility. It’s getting better—but we don’t have the clout of a New York Times/WSJ piece etc. There’s a distinction there. Sorry…”

I can’t but help wonder if this is a diversionary Smokescreen in light of the Microsoft Laptop fiasco.

Jeremy Pepper elludes this is a classic PR smoke screen, if you’ve not heard Edelman is yet under fire for this latest Ferrari Laptop Microsoft fiasco where they’re been accused of bribing bloggers.  Has Steve responded yet to this mix up?

“So, you create a Maileresque statement that such and such is dead (think, oh, the press release is dead or maybe social media is dead).”

What do I think?
My focus is on Corporate deployment of Web Strategies. I promise you, Senior Management at many Fortune 1000 companies still lack awareness, strong belief in Social Media or resources a large percent of budget.

Social Media is more than adding trackbacks and comments to a press release, it’s about accepting that bottom up knowledge from the masses can be greater than top down control.

I myself am wanting Social Media to be accepted in many forms across the enterprise and up and down the ladder, but to this date, Social Media is not dead.