Chris Anderson is a smart guy, but he has clearly been running a big magazine too long to understand the new social realities of media.
In their latest episode of For Immediate Release, Neville Hobson and Shel Holtz spoke about the article “The Micro Threat to Big Social Networks” on the PC Magazine site. In it, Anderson (Wired Magazine editor-in-chief and author of The Long Tail) claims “the problem with the social-networking destinations like Facebook and MySpace is that they’re not about anything—they’re about Facebook and MySpace.”
What a strange statement! I wasn’t aware there was a new rule that popular and successful websites were now required to be “about” something specific. Someone better tell Google…
I guess Mr. Anderson, as the editor of an old media publication (albeit a forward-looking one) hasn’t yet clued into the fact that the world is no longer defined exclusively by a small group of editors-in-chief. Increasing it is defined by our social connections with people and information.
Facebook and MySpace are about their members. Unlike a magazine, where content is the focus, social networks don’t need an editorial point-of-view. People define their experience based on who they connect to and how they use the service.
When I go to the “home page” of Facebook, my experience is different from anyone else’s. My Facebook News Feed presents updates from my friends on the site. Sometimes I see that one of my friends has joined a group that I wish to join. Sometimes I see that they have posted some photos I’d like to see, or have RSVPed to an event I’d like to attend. THAT’S what Facebook and other general social networks are about.
In the PC Magazine article, Anderson goes on to talk about niche social networks, like his own DIY Drones. I think niches are useful and important, but personally I don’t see niche sites replacing general social networks. Niche sites are, well, niche. If you want to create a dinner invitation exclusively for people who are into unmanned aerial vehicles, I guess Anderson’s DIY Drones is the place to go. If you want to create a dinner invitation for a group of friends and family who’s only common trait is their relationship with you, you’re probably still better to set it up in Facebook or MySpace.
Popularity: 8% [?]

Related Articles
4 users responded in this post
[...] Now, I don’t have the context for this quote, but apart from the somewhat dubious suggestion that older users inherently demand higher quality content (I won’t go there) what stuck out for me was the idea of ‘content’ in Facebook. Moller-Nielsen seems to share the same disease as Wired magazine editor Chris Anderson. Anderson, as I noted here several months back, has said “the problem with the social-networking destinations like Facebook and MySpace is that they’re not about anything.” [...]
I believe in Niche social networks, because they add more meaning to the network suppose you have a biotech student who wants to be friends with another biotech guy, why should he meet a asian, a electrician and an carpentar along the way to a another biotech guy.
Niche websites give him the opportunity to connect direct. That is the difference I think the big networks will break down into smaller niche specific networks and more people will be involved
I totally agree that niche networks can have value, but the real point is all social networks (niche or otherwise) are ABOUT the connections. Biotech guys could connect via a biotech-focused social network, and then end up talking about hockey or their kids or whatever — they aren’t limited to a topic, the “content” is defined by the relationship. That’s the part that Chris Anderson seems to miss with his old school content-guy blinders on.
I believe in niche marketing as part of internet marketing sphere.”Facebook” for example is a great place to find people you already know and those that you dont. Facebook is about everything about it’s members….not about facebook
Leave A Reply
Please Note: Comment moderation maybe active so there is no need to resubmit your comments