The disconnect between interests and people
Over the years I've written about what I call the "implied social contract" between creators and their followers - whether a creator feels obligated to provide more of what prompted people to follow them or disregard this and do whatever they want.
Sometimes they are the same, a creator will work within a theme meaning their output is consistent. On other occasions someone might create a one-off that resonates, goes viral and amasses followers only to return to their "normal" work and leave those new followers disappointed.
It can be a hard choice and can sway the creator.
Nitin turns this on its head, looks at it from the perspective of the follower and asks "why do we follow people around?" Why do we hit that button? Why do we suddenly align ourselves with complete strangers and follow them from network to network, blog to newsletter?
As he says, we take a risk "liking someone’s current content, and expecting their future content to be the same, or better, or interesting enough." It's the other side of the implied social contract.
Using our mutual friend Chris Lovie-Tyler as a case in point, Nitin explains how he found something interesting then when back to see if this was typical, consistent, and ended up reading all of Chris' posts. Hitting subscribe was an easy decision, just as it was for me.
Personally, I almost never follow someone on the basis of one thing, one post, or one tweet when I was still on Twitter. I try to establish prior art before committing.
Social networks, however, make it too easy to hit the button. The prominent display of metrics such as likes and follower counts might act as social proof for the creator but they are enticements for any potential follower. They scream popularity and that you'd be stupid to miss out.
"So it’s comfortable, easy, accepted to see something interesting and just hit follow. We’ll worry about the content later." - Nitin
These concerns, however, stem from the reason we follow someone and highlight the disconnect between a people-centric network and an interest network. The two aren't compatible.
For years, people have called for ways to filter their networks, just view the posts from those they follow that relate to specific topics - aspects of the person. It highlights the problem that social networks are structured as people-centric yet used as interest networks.
In a true interest network we would not follow people, we would follow topics and ideas. Yet this is not how our networks are constructed and we like to build relationships around those ideas.
We can build lists but these are, again, people based. We can conduct searches or look at hashtags but these are secondary functions and cannot be followed. So we create interest based groups to narrow our focus, some of which can be incredibly useful and a vital part of people's lives. Groups, however, are still people based, they rely on people joining rather than being an holistic view of that topic across the wider network.
I think this disconnect is partly what fuelled my change in focus, my move from seeing those I follow as a series of "social units" in a feed to recognising them as people. Rather than wishing I could filter their posts to only those on specific subjects I look to embrace the whole person behind the posts.
Their reasons, their interests, their struggles and successes.
I think it's a healthier approach.
Comments
# Liked: You know that thing called blogging – Om on Tech ...
"What people don’t realize about blogs is that they are never a complete story. They are incomplete and by nature more mysterious, more episodic, and thus more interesting. Blogs are meant not to leave you with everything. The whole idea is to think to deliberate, and to come back again and again, to finish what was started a long time ago. But there is no end, just a pause, for a voice to start, talking again."
This from Om reminded me of something I previously quoted from James Shelley:
"Conversations don’t 'end' in any absolute sense. They are just temporarily punctuated by the silence of distance until we reconvene."
I've said in the past that we write our stories day by day, chapter by chapter, with each new post being more of a paragraph or continuation.
When visiting someone's blog we may merely go to listen to the next part of their story. Perhaps we might want to interject, query a point or start a discussion. Regardless, we only ever do so one chapter at a time.
Our lives are made up of a series of tales: some short, some long, and some punctuated by silence until reconvened. Those tales might be related or seem entirely unconnected but they are all parts of the larger story.
Each new post helps to fill in the gaps as we slowly paint a picture of the person behind the words. A picture we will never finish but that’s not the point.
# I love this follow up to Om from Brent Simmons:
"to read a good blog is to watch a writer get a little bit better, day after day, at writing the truth."
"Rather than wishing I could filter their posts to only those on specific subjects I look to embrace the whole person behind the posts... Their reasons, their interests, their struggles and successes."
I really like this, Colin. I think if more people did this it would humanise the Net a lot more. While the filtering/customisation/personalisation features offered by social networks and search engines can be helpful, I'm more and more convinced that they also have a very dark side.
Filters and customisation certainly can be useful but they can trap us in echo chambers and epistemic bubbles.
Exactly. They allow us to piece together some kind of 'perfect' puzzle and avoid all the uncomfortable, messy, contrary, or seemingly irrelevant bits that make up the whole picture or person—or real life.
It's been hot, at least it's been hot for us in the UK. An uncomfortable, muggy heat that really drains you. I want to blame this for not writing much lately but I know it's only one factor. There has been an apathy stemming from other matters (read work) and a change in focus. I've been struggling with the "book" for a while (apologies for the lack of updates to those subscribed to my newsletter, I must remedy that) since it started heading in a different direction to how I set out. But, again, it's my ongoing problem with not being able to do "big things." Work, or rather the commute, is wearing me out and while I want to use that time constructively I'm not usually in the right place to do so. I'd love to get a job closer to home but I'd be looking at a step down and losing about 30K a year. Not an option. The step down wouldn't bother me but keeping a roof over my family's head does. I deliberately don't play any games on my phone because they are a time-sink (and I get bored of them very easily) but re-subscribing to World of Warcraft has been like hooking up with an old friend you haven't seen in years, instantly rekindling that old relationship as though you'd never been apart. It's just so easy to get lost in this other world, to escape into something else away from the dissatisfaction. It's a bit hypocritical that I eschew mobile gaming but dive so headlong into this. Now, it's not all pleasure - as I mentioned before we're working towards the launch of a channel on Twitch and an accompanying site - so it's partly business. While I won't be a primary streamer (I'll usually be at work during go live times) I had an idea for a specific feature that would include posts and possible videos. This has also distracted me from day-to-day blogging. I get obsessed with things, almost to the point where nothing else matters. When an obsession strikes I can lose myself to it, disappear into it and forget there are others around me. It's like entering a mental "flow" state. My wife has said for years that I'm probably a bit autistic and I have other traits including a degree of social awkwardness that often holds me back. I'm introvert but when in a socially awkward or unfamiliar situation can grossly overcompensate, become excessively extrovert, almost as a shield or defence mechanism. My obsessions, however, tend not to last. Just like with mobile games I'll dive in, completely absorb myself in something until I burn out and have to move on. I think this might have happened with the book. I've always had a low boredom threshold; an obsession can hold this at bay for a while but I still reach the point where I just have to get out, let it go. When blogging I normally have to finish something in one take or I struggle to go back to it. It's like flicking a switch, something inside me says "nope, had enough of that now" and I have to move on. I can't control it. That's why I've always struggled with longer writing and why I've always struggled with seeing things through. I want to finish the book but it's like my mind won't let me right now. Re-working and tweaking the blog over the past 18 months or so has definitely been an obsession but one I realise is coming to an end. It's been fortunate that this has coincided with the current move towards ownership that has pervaded the "post-social" web, I've had a lot of people come along for the ride. I know this is a personal blog and it's therefore up to me what I do with it, yet I worry that my obsessions, my shifts in focus, might make it an unattractive prospect. I write for myself but I am well aware that I have an audience - even if only small - and worry about alienating it because of a sudden shift. I love to see the whole person behind the words rather than focusing on a single topic but fret when the shoe is on the other foot, when I am that person but the words have suddenly changed. I worry about building relationships based on context only to feel like I'm letting the other person down when I flip. I think that's why I've had breaks from blogging in the past, why I have moved to a different medium (little m and big M) or platform - so that I can start again with a fresh audience. It's as though I would rather sever ties with them completely than risk going in a different direction, wondering if they'll follow. I've been lucky over the past 18 months, lucky that others have shared my obsession and lucky with many of those I have met on the way. I have gotten to know some truly wonderful, intelligent, insightful people. People I don't want to alienate because of a change in obsession, almost like I'm a completely different person. There is an inherent contradiction: while subject to an obsession I abhor change, fear it, but when that switch flips I want nothing more, I'm compelled to seek change and it's the status quo that terrifies me. My mind is already racing with the possibilities of what I could write or do with my next obsession but this spark is tempered by the knowledge that, in six months or a year, it could have burnt out, exhausted. I face it with a good dose of trepidation but know I'll dive in all the same, consumed by a passion, blinkered to almost all else. Perhaps this is as much a warning as an explanation.