Ever thought about how we make this place sound cool to other people?
Spoiler: It's not 'Fedi'-anything.
https://forbetter.ghost.io/the-normal-response-to-the-social-web/
Replies:
19
Boosts:
7
@saskia I like to use the pub/club analogy. Here on the social web you can choose multiple 'local's because of the people who frequent them, because you can have conversation about topics you choose and precisely because it is _not_ chock full of corporate marketing or influencers forever trying to improve 'reach' or sell things.
You choose. You support the pub/club as you see fit. You get to speak to the owner/operator if someone is behaving unacceptably to you. You can also leave if you want.
@saskia
The trouble I see with the term "Social Web" is that it seems easily confused with "the sum of all social media websites", as opposed to referring to a specific connected collection of them.
@saskia It’s a Kevin Federline fan club
@saskia I ran a mini “Intro To The Fediverse” wirkshop recently. I’ll change the name for next time. :-)
It would be super interesting to ask attendees their thoughts on the naming system and see if there's a difference between 'Fediverse' and whatever you choose to replace it with.
@saskia Love this.
I was pondering what more approachable language I could use when I blogged about it, and opted to only refer to "Mastodon". I think normal people these days expect the brand-aligned app on their appstore, and the whole "choice of different software" thing is definitely a layer of weirdness they're not used to.
o O (but Harry, don't you understand? There's an open protocol!)
Shhhh... marketing
I 100% agree on the idea of brand-aligned social media. I think that's one of the reasons Bluesky has done so well in comparison (plus, the connotations of a blue sky are a lot clearer than Fediverse or Mastodon).
@saskia One of the worst things you can do with technology is to get too excited about it.
@saskia what a great post Saskia! I feel seen, given the title of my blog and the fact I have managed to get so few people on board, ugh.
Just two things.
One: please do NOT underestimate the power and voice you have in this space. I’m super grateful for your fantastic work and advocacy.
Two: maybe setting up a contrast with Big Tech social platforms by saying “non commercial” social media could help people understand? How making money off of advertising and data harvesting is NOT done here?
That means a lot, thank you ❤️
Definitely setting up as a contrast helps.
But, I've found myself having to over-explain a few times when I've brought up non-commercial aspects. Some people hear that and panic, thinking it means they won't be able to use the platform for their business like they do on Big Tech. I think the idea of non-commercial social is so crazy in our world it takes a while to understand.
That means a lot, thank you ❤️
Definitely setting up as a contrast helps.
But, I've found myself having to over-explain a few times when I've brought up non-commercial aspects. Some people hear that and panic, thinking it means they won't be able to use the platform for their business like they do on Big Tech. I think the idea of non-commercial social is so crazy in our world it takes a while to understand.
Mostly agreed, but I’d be wary of the ‘non-commercial’ framing, for a couple of reasons:
First, it immediately raises the question of ‘what is it if it isn’t commercial?’ And ‘where does the money come from?’ These are both important conversations to have later. They aren’t the first conversations you want. The thing you probably do want is some framing (as you said) about it not being an advertising / data-mining platform. I think getting the media to refer to data-mining platforms as ‘social media’ is one of most impressive piece of marketing of the last couple of decades, there’s a lot of work needed to undo that.
Second, the Fediverse (sorry!) isn’t intrinsically non-commercial. A few news organisations run their own instances, for example. These exist as a commercial channel for them. If they provided a mechanism to pay to follow some of their accounts, that would be completely fine! If a company wants to create its own instance to better engage with its customers, that’s wonderful but also 100% commercial.
I think the messaging needs to focus a lot more on agency: you are in control of what you see. But for that to be a strong message, there need to be better discovery mechanisms. It was easy for me to find people here interested in (at least some of) the same things as me, but my partner wanted to find content about music, linguistics, education, and assessment, and gave up. I occasionally see posts that are relevant to these interests but I have no idea how to find them. The tradeoff for the data-mining platforms is that you see a bunch of things you want to see, in exchange for seeing things other people pay for you to see. The Fediverse needs to capture the advantage part of that without the down side. I’d love to see an onboarding flow that gave you a big list of things you might be interested in and made you follow the hashtags, as long as much more overt ‘you are seeing this because you follow this hashtag / person’ above every message so people understand how they are in control.
@david_chisnall @_elena @saskia "No ads. No algorithm. Personal. For you."
@david_chisnall @_elena @saskia "No ads. No algorithm. Personal. For you."
@bms48 Having a bad day?
@saskia "Social Web" is a completely meaningless combination of words. It says nothing. I LOLed when i saw that.
The web is inherently social, to some degree, after all.
Thank you for reading carefully and clearly missing the point 🙂↔️
@saskia Been saying this for years. Hell, even I didn't really want to join something that called itself "Mastodon" for a few years.
The whole fedi sucks at naming everything, sans a few exceptions. E.g. the loops project which doesn't feel the need to shove "fedi" or a weird obscure whatever in the name.
💯
The amount of times I've seen someone's interest instantly evaporate when you start adding these complicated words
