Big media’s crush on social networking
Cory Bergman January 21st, 2007
The NYT has a decent overview of the efforts by major media companies to add social networking functionality to their sites, like Disney.com, or acquire social destination sites, like Hearst’s recent acquisition of eCrush. Of couse, all this is getting more attention in the last few days now that MySpace has been hit with a lawsuit. But like I’ve written before, social networking should not be feared, and it will soon become a component of nearly all online content. Some users will want it, others won’t. But it will become a user expectation, especially in the younger set. NBC Digital’s Sab Kanaujia has a similar take, which he posted on his personal blog before it was removed a short time later. “My team at NBC Universal Digital Media is currently leading a major social networking initiative,” he writes, as quoted in Techcrunch. “(It) will provide various tools and functionality on all our major properties to enable users to self-express and find, interact and share with other like-minded users.” He continues, “We’re not launching separate stand-alone destinations. The current valuations… do not provide an attractive cost/benefit proposition for ownership.” So in short, social networking is moving away from destination to integration — a connection engine that allows interested users to communicate and share via similar content across similar networks. Isn’t that what the internet is all about?
5 Comments Add your own
1. Nick Geidner | January 21st, 2007 at 11:02 am
I think you missed a part of what the Internet is or at least should be. It shouldn’t just be a way for “users to communicate and share via similar content across similar networks.” It should also be used to open a user to new information and allow them to interact with different ideas and concepts.
But beyond that, I think including social networking aspects into news sites, especially on the local level is imperative. Local TV and newspaper sites need to start building community through their sites by engaging users in stories from the community, connecting them to other people in the community, and allowing users to get involved in the community. Just an idea.
2. discreet_chaos | January 21st, 2007 at 4:37 pm
“Social Networking” has to be THE preferred buzzword for the new year. I don’t know, maybe it’s because I’m old and cynical, but I read the fellow’s post to say that they’re going to make their show sites more supportive of the product, by adding forums, live chats and stuff along those lines. Well, bully for them and if they do successfully provide changing and interactive content, then perhaps there will be an increase in return traffic.
Hopefully they’ll avoid the old Didney kids thing of charging for membership and perhaps they’ll make their content more valuable to the viewer. After all, as a blogger, I do find it kind of ridiculous that I often find a better reference to a specific episode or show on non-NBC sites and by using the resources of iVillage, they may have a leg-up on some of what the other networks are currently offering.
Otherwise and finally, I will say that among all the official NBC show sites that I’ve seen, I do like the improvements to the one for SNL. And, I also have to wonder if the referenced “first launch on one of our biggest properties early next year” is the “Heroes: 360 Degrees” that we’ve seen a few ads about and I’m gathering will go live tomorrow.
3. discreet_chaos | January 21st, 2007 at 4:51 pm
OK - This is getting ridiculous because this marks the third time that I’ve tried to point toward a reprint of the “Heroes: 360″ press release. The first two times, I tried coding my name and neither time worked, so now I’m using brackets. Once again, if this eventually ends-up being a dupe with or without moderation, I apologize.
superherohype[dot]com/news[dot]php?id=5110
4. discreet_chaos | January 21st, 2007 at 4:57 pm
Whew - That time my post took, but now I see that you do need the www in front for the url to work, so if you cut and paste, you’ll need to add it.
And, as I said in my first attempt (where I had simply coded my name, but today marks the third and fourth time that recoding my name caused the messageboard to eat my comment), but anyway; I googled-up a random reprint of what looks to be an official release because it was quicker and easier for me to use Yahoo!, rather than go to the horses’ mouth.
5. Jeff Bailey | January 22nd, 2007 at 9:33 am
I thought “(blah-blah) 2.0″ was still the preferred buzzword, or is that soooooo 2006 of me and am I behind the times?
Leave a Comment
(Please keep URLs out of the comment body or the spam filter will block you.)Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed