Nearly every news article, portfolio, business... practically every webpage, has the social networking badges we've all come to know. Even if you aren't familiar a specific badge (visit an Asian webpage), you understand the concept, the what's what. It's like if you go to another country, you can at least appreciate the function of road signage. Actually, you're more likely to decipher what the signs mean, even if they're in another language (*I'll return to this idea later). Social media hubs are not just the cultural norm, they are becoming (if not already) a standard of web-life.
What I'm trying point out is this hub concept- Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, (take your pick), and now even LinkedIn- are not just networking tools, like a phone book of email addresses and web identities, anymore. They've basically become self contained ecosystems. They don't necessarily rely on linking to offsite content to spread their hubs, their branding. They may have started that way, and still fulfill that role, but they're not outreach tools anymore. They're full board publishing systems of content. This is the idea of blogging- or micro-blogging. These platforms don't need to get content listed in a search query database. Say you want to search for someone you just met; you'll search they're name up in a search engine, but you're also likely to jump straight to a site like Facebook to search his/her name. This the reality of the Web2.0. Big deal.
Web2.0 is (at least) the idea of an internet that is substantially more advanced, and near un-recognizable compared to an earlier iteration. My point is that Web1.0 exclusively relied on the interlinking of content (web-pages) in order to create a network. Like a advertising a trade show with billboards, posters, flyers, TV and radio ads, across town for everyone to see. To some, Web2.0 is a proliferation of sharing and inter-connectivity through new technologies. But I think what should define Web2.0 from 1.0 is the loss of linking between dissimilar (or at least different brands of) content platforms. Ecosystems are living and non-living components interacting, growing, evolving- but are worthy of defining as a system (like the Floridian everglades and the South African desert) because they vary substantially enough that components of one ecosystem are separate and different from another environment. This is a different idea from the first iteration of the internet. New content is growing, evolving, and it is not always being linked in the great interlink that is the World Wide Web.
Visit a tumblr page, look around, click a link. How often, or will you even, leave the tumblr experience to another real website? Pick your favorite search engine and look for a fancy teapot- will you end up on a Pininterest page? I've never been directed to a Facebook post while in a search engine, unless someone posts a link to that specific Facebook post on a site other than Facebook.
The Web2.0 is different than Web1.0 because, even though still a network, the best way to explore information (almost) requires knowledge of the web itself. A user needs to know (even more so now, than before) where to look for what. A user doesn't need to know specifically of where to look (that is an impasse), but a user needs to appreciate functions of vehicles (steering wheel, blinkers, windshield wipers, door locks, gas...) and function of signage in order to explore any road system, regardless of whether the user has seen a specific vehicle or road system before.
(*pickup) In the Web2.0, efficient users need to be able to decipher how to navigate the wide web, and the ecosystems of the web (especially as they become more diverse and lose interconnectivity). If the World Wide Web is a representation of the world, then how can a user be expected to know it all, do it all, see it all-- yet the magic of the web is that you don't have to be a construction contractor to learn how to repair a garage floor, or be in Siberia to appreciate the Aurora Borealis. You only need to the skill and know how to find something. -- A side step, you only need to understand the fundamentals of modern tablet computing in order to efficiently explore use of iPads, Android, and Windows devices despite all their dis-similarities--. Unfortunately, if you don't have this knowledge, or neglect to update this skill, you can easily be lost, or give up from frustration. I feel that is a self-defeating outcome of web evolution. The promise of the web was universal access to knowledge- instead it is becoming a confusing, endless maze. It may not necessarily seem that way to you or me personally, but I sort of understand why some elder folk may have a lot of trouble browsing the web, or at least venturing places they're not familiar with.
Where has all this gotten me? Well, I guess I've answered my own lingering question: 'Why does everyone need a page on every social media site?'
So does that mean I should put posts on every social media platform? I don't have the time nor the drive... What I am interested in achieving with this blog though is the retention of information and ideas, in a searchable form, that can be useful not only to myself, but potentially to others. Actually, if there was an easy way to make my own Wiki, I would... For personal note-taking (which often involves weblinks) I use Microsoft OneNote or similar software... but again, there isn't a simple, platform independent, means of deploying and readily advancing a knowledge-base of anything I deem fit.
Blogger may not be as fast as Tumblr, especially on the mobile scene, but it is a good, searchable, resource. On the other hand, Adam Rifkin at TechCrunch, back in February 2013, posted an interesting view of Tumblr that I didn't necessarily ignore, but defiantly didn't think about so clearly. Blogger user Gilligan Newton-John detailed his own experiences with tumblr back in 2009 with his blog, retrospace.
No comments:
Post a Comment