Our Blog
Who owns Social Media?
Recently, Digg hired Allen & Co. to “explore its options” which is how Investment Bankers say “for sale”.
For a site like Digg it is natural that the managers and investors would be looking for an out. What is unusual is that its users feel they have a right to tell Jay Adelson and Kevin Rose how to run their business.
In sites like Digg where users create almost all of the value of the site, do they have a say in the future of the site?
Companies love the idea of social media because their users do the work. They create the content, they create the network effects, they create the page views. But they also gain a sense of entitlement. They feel like they created the site.
Compare this to other current mergers. In the Microsoft Yahoo merger, most users don’t really care (except Flickr users who protested). I bet no one other than Wall Street really cares about Delta’s proposed merger with Northwest.
This is the dilemma of social media. What obligations do sites have to their users when it comes to business decisions that impact the user experience?
Hey Jon
This question has come around a few times in many of the ‘camps’
Simply put, the ‘users’ populate the content, the company provided the ‘tools’
Ya but do the companies have any obligation in this relationship beyond providing tools?
Social Networking sites are being valued on a per user basis (http://blogs.forrester.com/charleneli/2008/03/aol-buys-bebo-w.html) not the “tools”. Seriously, what is Digg’s technology worth? Not much. Its value is its users.
It’s an interesting point, but let’s be honest – the users might keep the lights on but the company built and owns the building.
In other words, while I might watch a particular tv show religiously, I certainly wouldn’t pull a Costanza and catch members of the cast in the hallway to tell them what they should do a show about next. And I certainly wouldn’t expect them to share profits with me for being a loyal watcher.
Is it the same sort of thing? I don’t know, but it feels the same to me.
You only consume a TV show, you do not write it or produce it.
I consume Digg and may have “Dugg” a story or two but by no means feel any ownership. But some Digg users have higher algorithmic rankings making them de facto editors.
In both the Flickr and Digg examples you have users who feel passionately enough to let management know how they feel about a potential deal. In the past sometimes employees/unions would complain about potential suitors for companies but rarely would customers. In the social media world I think we will continue to see users feel a sense of entitlement in the direction of sites they have invested time and energy creating. It is a paradox of social media.
Word.
I think the faceless nature of the internet, while giving everybody a voice, also keeps the unruly at bay. Aside from disgruntled forum posts & emails, facebook petitions, etc. those running Digg can rest assured that their building won’t be surrounded by an angry mob after changing the colour scheme of the site.
Or maybe that’s the future? Imagine if Digg added a revenue sharing platform on stories…