The other day I had a discussion with @amandachapel about the prevailing sentiment in regards to the “great social media revolution” (the conversation was mostly about social media marketing, but the prevailing sentiment carries over). “Amanda” suggested that the prevailing sentiment is becoming pessimistic. I disagreed with her then, and I still do. I am not going to get into that argument again, but the conversation got me thinking (well before she called me an amateur) about the things that social media brings to the table that are less than savory.

Peddling Snake Oil

As with any form of media there is an ugly underbelly to social media, and I’m not talking about pictures of drunk people plastered all over Facebook and MySpace (although those certainly do not help). In a world where content is king, who gets to decide which content producers rule the proverbial roost? “Amanda” often tosses this point out to those of us who she deems to be social media evangelists. Her suggestion, while often hyperbolic, holds some merit. In a medium where content is being created on a continual basis, who is to say what is and is not good quality content?

The best and worst example of this paradox is played out on the front page of Digg on a daily basis, where the latest update on the situation in Myanmar (or more recently China) can be quickly bumped off in favor of some drunken idiot falling out of a shopping cart into a fountain. In a world where toilet humor is evaluated on even footing with breaking news about a major world disaster, is there a way to truly evaluate what content is the best? Or more importantly, are we, as media consumers, the best qualified to choose the content that is most important?

Social media has created the ability for the average person to become a journalist, a smut-peddler, a whistle-blower or a snake-oil salesman. Up to this point, unfortunately, it seems that we have equal numbers on both sides. The monetization of social media can only serve to continue that trend, as there will always be money to be made, and some sucker’s money to take. So in many ways, I agree with Ms. Chapel. Where we differ is in our evaluation of the overall outlook for social media both in and out of the marketplace. The monetization of social media has certainly led to it’s fair share of swindling, but that’s not any different than any other form of media.

My argument to Ms. Chapel (who is, for those of you who are unaware, a fictional character created by an ex-Advertising Exec.) was that the mood is not pessimistic, but rather it is cautious. In my day job I do marketing work for a software company and in that capacity I often have to play the role of social media evangelist, simply because it is new and many of my co-workers/bosses have little or no experience with it. It is not strange for anyone to be cautious with something that they do not understand or have not experienced. Companies are wary of giving up any measure of control over their brand message, and it is their right to be cautious. I do not advocate the wholesale replacement of direct marketing with social media marketing, far from it. I advocate for augmentation, not systemic revolution, and measured augmentation at that.

As a blogger & social media junkie, I see the massive potential that this form of communication brings to the table. However, that vision is well informed by my job within the marketing industry that has shown that social media marketing can be a very dangerous game to play, just ask Wal-Mart. One bad review on Consumerist.com can lead to a lot of controversy and god forbid it hits the front page Digg. In a world where information moves at the speed of light, ramifications can be nearly instantaneous. Add that to the potential for brand hi-jacking, it would make anyone a little wary when it’s their livelihood on the line.

In my experience the issue is a lack of education. These are new technologies that are still far from ubiquitous. There are millions of users, with millions of agendas, and the crowd chooses who gets to speak the loudest. In essence, social media users have a responsibility to the wider world that is often overlooked. If we are the audience, and the audience decides who lives and who dies, than we have a serious responsibility to take some time before we make a decision. I hate ending on an analogy, but I’m going to anyway. If content is to be king in this little world of ours, would you prefer Shakespeare or Chocolate Rain?

Greg Hollingsworth is a marketer and blogger who also writes about politics on Devil’s In The Details.

(Image) (RSS)