As we grow up, we’re constantly testing and refining our social interactions with others. And at the same time our social peers are correcting us when we step out of line. For instance, my 2 year old nephew thinks it’s natural to interrupt a conversation by declaring ‘Mom, I gotta POOP!’. Of course, at his age that is not only valuable information but on some levels really funny. But eventually my sister will start correcting him as he gets older. This social correction will be a natural part of his growth as a social human being.

Because of the infancy of the internet and social media, we’re still trying to define this social education. Sure we still apply our own personal “social rules” to our communication, but by and large we’re still unsure. Is Twittering about your favorite bagel really that important? I would suspect that if Larry proudly announced this in the green room at the studios, the other people would have a wtf(?) look on their faces. And Larry would instantly get that feedback and probably keep that to himself in the future. Why? Because those people are real to him and he doens’t have to face the social consequences of not be accepted. But Twittering about it is ok because the audience isn’t real to him. They are simply pixels on his assistant’s screen.

What social media lacks is well-defined social consequences. The masses simply are not real to us. They are just pixels on a screen. In fact, with the millions of people connected on the internet, every personality quirk, fetish, annoyance, or trait is not only represented, but probably organized and encouraged by someone. So what naturally serves as a filter in our “offline world” only exists if we are communicating with people we actually know and care about. So in some ways anything goes o nthe internet.

In other words, social structures we have built over 1000s of years of societal evolution are non-existent on the internet. These social structures that aid and also protect us socially in the offline world are still being defined and built in the online world. For now awareness of the deficiencies is about the best it gets.

I think you’re spot-on about social proof being at play in the trajectory of ‘useful’ sites on the web. As you point out, it explains why so many people (celebrities included) seem to abuse the latest and greatest internet tools like Twitter and MySpace. They simply don’t know how to use it. The spammers are outright abusive in the sense that their both their intent and behavior is sinister. But the spammers are a minority; the masses simply just don’t know any better.

I also think your analogy of the three year old is fantastic. It explains a lot of what’s going on. I’ve had a tendency to (rather lazily) blame the sites themselves for going from cool to crap. But your analogy got me to see that it’s not really fair to blame the hammer for the racket created by a bunch of three year olds banging on stuff.

You’ve got me now wondering if there’s something(s) inherent in the nature of social media on the web that makes it transient. My two primary suspects are (1) the scale of the web that seemingly overnight can make online social networks become unwieldly large and (2) the fact that it’s not that hard to find (or even create) another new toy to replace the old. If there was nothing to move on to after MySpace, we (i.e. the social network on MySpace or the MySpace “community”) might have taken better care of it.

In response to the questions with which you end. I think I’m annoyed by both. Nevertheless, I have to admit that I am envious that the celebrities can get away with dishing out vapid content. That they’ve got it so good, allowing them to get away with it, does annoy me more than the mindless chatter itself. Non-celebrities do the same and I’m much less annoyed by them and sometimes just tune them out. Still the mindless prattling is annoying in itself. And when it gets too much for me I’m glad that the web hasn’t completely rendered Gutenberg obsolete and I can still pick up a book to read some Plato or Dostoyevsky.

If you want to get your mind blown and your life changed – @kevinfederline Booyah!

There’s a theory called Social Proof that I think is in play here with Twitter, Hollywood, and Internet Marketing in general. Social Proof says that when we’re uncertain about how to act, what to do, or what to say, we look around and see what everyone else is doing and assume that they must know the answer. This I believe plays a large part in why many ‘useful’ things on the internet quickly go from obscure to cool to crap so fast. Eventually everyone’s doing it, but no one knows why.

Twitter is simply a tool. And like any tool, in the wrong hands can produce bad results. Think of Twitter as a hammer and the masses running around like a 3 year old hitting everything in site just because. Eventually they will tire of the hammer and it will take it’s place next to the other toys (Myspace) in the closet.

Before I’m off to watch MI-5 on Netflix, I have couple more questions inspired by one of my favorite movie quotes from As Good as it Gets. Are we annoyed because the masses have ruined something useful? Or are we really annoyed because once again we’re reminded that celebrities have got it so good in this country?

Keep up the good work. We’ve been admiring your team from a distance for some time.

touch??

I suspect Jack is an ardent admirer of Larry King and wanted the world to know he doesn’t share my sentiments.

I on the other hand am so desperate for comments that I’ll respond to anything.

Oh wait.. I know why…. it’s because you want it to look like people actually give a crap what you post on this lousy blog. The joke’s on me!

Pretty pathetic if you ask me…

I don’t see much difference between Larry telling me his thoughts on yoga and corn muffins and finding out that P-Diddy just landed at the Atlanta airport. What’s he doing “righter”?