What the f**k is Social Media? by @mzkagan
From which I am stealing several slides:
Click = big
I can understand why it's only 32% of bloggers being trusted. Too many are sell-outs. I scourged this issue at my old blog:
I’m Beginning To Think There Isn’t A Single Tech Site That Can Be Trusted
Blog Notes: Aiiiiieeeeee!!
So This Is The Future? I Don’t Think So!
You Suckers. I Told You And Told You And Told You.
My Response To “10 Things Your Blogger Won’t Tell You”
There are slicksters -- as well as dim mouth-breathers -- in this world who will sell out their own souls for a bit of spotlight or money.
Fuck that shit.
If something is good -- I will rave about it.
If something is shit -- the company will wish it was never put on sale.
That's how it should be.
I have little patience for dimwits who are "afraid to offend." Open your eyes: Companies need us to spread the word. Their ads no longer do it.
I have no patience for bottom-feeding scum who will sell their readers an image of honesty yet actually sell them out by disguising bad reviews in couched terms ("Well, we're sure hope v2 will be better!" -- translation: v1 is shit, but we want the free loot and egotastic access to this company to continue!).
Fuck that shit.
I don't believe in reviews. I don't believe reviewers.
Who is this person standing there passing judgment? What is this person's ongoing record? How did he get access to what he's reviewing? Who does he work for and who does he want to work for?
Bloggers can build up a trust and a record no reviewer can. Because we have a constant stream of past commentary and opinion to see and judge.
What makes me laugh about the straits the dying dinosaurs of print find themselves -- justifiably! -- in has been their reliance upon "official reviewers."
I spit on those reviewers.
Who the fuck are they?
Some other writer whose own work doesn't sell yet is getting a few bucks to pay his rent by trashing someone else's work? Reviewing another writer whose work is actually better -- but, as a "reviewer," there can't be all praise, can there? No. That'd make the "reviewer" look like a pushover.
Fuck that shit.
As I wrote in Print Book Publishing: DOOMED:
Reviews? Do you know how many books I discovered via the New York Times Book Review? Probably less than ten. Because the so-called “reviews” were invariably more about the reviewer and how allegedly “smart” he (and it was always a he) was than the book under review. Face the fact that the NYTBR was — and still is — nothing a but a circle-jerk fanzine for your little clique. It had little to do with gaining new book readers.
And in the source article, the dying dinosaurs of print are clutching their pearls and whining:
“Media doesn’t matter, reviews don’t matter, blurbs don’t matter[.]”
Welcome to the twenty-first century, baby!
We've overthrown your Top-Down Command-and-Control system.
I don't kid myself that the people I exchange words with over the Net are "friends," but they are people whose judgment I would give more weight to than any "review" or promotion or ad.
Because they all have track records with me.
And I have one with them.
And you, dying dinosaurs of print? Your record is one of FAIL.
You can't even get social marketing done right.
Nor can you manage a simple pickup of a review book copy.
And yet you wonder why the layoffs continue and sales plummet?
Your companies aren't being killed. They're committing suicide!