Brit social computing expert, Euan Semple, is someone whose opinion I respect. He produces amazing material about the relevance of social computing in business and is always on mark. And now, my estimation of Euan has been ratcheted up another notch. He has just Twittered the following:
thinking nielsen has lost the plot http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/6653119.stm
And people say Twitter’s 140 character limit can’t convey meaning!
Euan is talking here about Jakob Neilsen’s assertion, among other things, that social computing sites are the “latest fashion” and that:
“Most people just want to get in, get it and get out,” said Mr Nielsen. “For them the web is not a goal in itself. It is a tool.”
I’m sorry Jakob, but frankly, on social computing you’ve missed the boat completely. It used to be that you were the go-to guy on all things usability and web punditry, but it looks like you’ve exceeded your use by date. You’ve utterly failed to realise that today, being on the web, in a community, collaborating or socialising is exactly the goal of very many people from teens to seniors.
Neilsen is right on matters of usability. It is an important consideration and often, it is done badly.
As someone who works with the web all day, every day, I see it. People want to use the web to connect and belong. To be with people (albeit virtually). Yes, the web is a tool, but it’s also rapidly becoming the third place.
Jakob, you need to come join us in the 21st Century.
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
I blogged recently on Li’s demographic taxonomy of users of social computing. While perhaps we can see Nielsen’s in-and-use-and-leave types as spectators, it’s certainly not the whole picture of what all user types want to do.
I do think Nielsen’s point that the web is just a tool, though, is essentially correct. The social web provides a means of being social – a tool for communicating, and sharing. Socialisation itself, though, and not the web, is the goal.
M
Steve,
there’s been a lot of discussion on SIGIA-L on this – my take on participation level was this:
“Apropos participation as a percentage of total population: when youwrite for some external publication, who are you writing for? Is it the 95% of the people who don’t get your work and never will, or is it the 5% or less who do, or at least get it enough to pay your salary and act as your peers? This isn’t elitism, it is just the way it is – content without context is piffle, and only those with context (be it IA or stamp collecting) will find it valuable.”
I agree with Euan and yourself. We do owe Jakob, but sometimes he says dumb things – I like to compare him to the uncle who we all love dearly but who sometimes breaks wind at the dinner table
Cheers, Andrew