OurBlook interview with blogger Sasha Pasulka.
Editor's Note: Prepare yourself to be dazzled with the wit, charm and snappy brilliance supplied by Sasha, the founder and writer for several news and entertainment web sites including Evil Beet Gossip, Zelda Lily and more.
 How do you use social media in your line of work?
SP: I don’t know that I use social media so much as I am social media. I run a celebrity gossip web site, www.EvilBeetGossip.com, where we have a very active base of commenters who come to the site not only to read up on celebrity news but to discuss it. Over time, the commenters have come to know one another and enjoy bantering with each other, and it’s one of the qualities of the site that adds a lot of “stickiness.” The women’s issues web site I launched in April, www.ZeldaLily.com, was created specifically as a place for women (and, as it’s turned out, men) to discuss their viewpoints on a variety of topics without feeling judged. That site was built from the ground up with community as a focus, and so far it’s been successful in that goal, although we’re still looking forward to a lot of growth.
As far as other forms of social media, I use Twitter (@evilbeet) as a way to give my readership additional insight into who I am and what my life looks like. It’s yet another way to add “stickiness” ... the more opportunities your readers have to “e-bond” with you, the more likely they are to remain loyal to your web sites. Facebook serves the same purpose ... and I’ve been fortunate enough to have readers set up Facebook fan pages for me, which are amusing to visit every now and again.
Do you foresee much impact from social media in major news operations such as newspapers and TV news, or in the future of journalism generally?
SP: We’re seeing a lot of news operations ... from CNN to small local organizations ... set up Twitter accounts to keep audiences abreast of the news and to drive traffic to their web sites, and we’re certainly seeing audiences take advantage of that. CNN’s Breaking News Twitter account (@cnnbrk) has over two million followers ... that’s a lot of potential to drive traffic.
It works perhaps less effectively on a local level; for instance, KOMO News in Seattle (@komonews), where I live, has a little over 2,000 followers. That’s a result of the younger, Twitter-using generation taking less interest in local news in general than the generation that preceded them. However, each of KOMO’s individual news anchors has their own official Twitter page and following, and it’s an innovative way to build loyalty with viewers.
The other angle to this involvement is news-gathering, and that’s perhaps where we’ve seen the biggest impact. The conflict in Iran has put a spotlight on how news organizations use Twitter and Facebook to get up-to-the-minute information when they can’t or don’t have people on the scene. It’s just now starting to gain attention, but this form of news-gathering is nothing new ... during the November attacks on Dubai, Twitter was one of the primary sources of information for the major news networks.
There seems to be a quick turnover/burnout rate in Twitter, and devices such as Facebook and YouTube seem used mainly by the young. Whether these devices can become or remain profitable is in doubt. Do you see these, or anything else, as permanent limitations on the scope of social media?
SP: The burnout rate on Twitter is extremely high, and the ratio of valid, active users to spammers is probably lower than anyone on their end wants to admit. Twitter hasn’t done an especially good job of figuring out how to retain users or monetize their service, but there’s definitely value being created there, so they’ll either figure out how to capture it or they’ll sell to someone who will.
The age range of users for Facebook and YouTube is expanding rapidly. A recent survey by www.babycenter.com indicated that, today, 63 percent of moms participate in Facebook, Twitter and/or blogs. Only 11 percent were active in 2006. From a personal standpoint, I’m seeing more and more of my friends’ parents pop up on Facebook ... it was at one time surprising to get a Facebook friend request from the woman who drove my carpool in second grade, but now I’m getting used to it. Even my 82-year-old grandfather learned how to use the Internet so that he could read my blogs, although he still calls me on the phone to discuss them ... he has a stronger working knowledge of Paris Hilton’s day-to-day life than any octogenarian on the planet.
Frankly, I think that social networking has exploded much faster than advertising and marketing teams can keep up. There’s a steep learning curve there that hasn’t exactly been scaled by staffs of professionals who learned how to sell and place ads in more traditional media. There’s a lot of value to be captured by consultants and teams who figure out how to navigate these waters and make these sites profitable, and I believe we’ll see that happen in the next five years. So, in summary, I think these are temporary limitations, not permanent limitations.
Of the various social media, do you see any one in particular as having the greatest potential on the media or generally in society? Any that will fade?
SP: We’ve already seen sites like MySpace and Facebook have an enormous impact on society. They allow us to stay abreast of news and events around the world. They allow us to share our photographs, our good news and our frustrations. They allow us to keep in touch with friends and to rekindle relationships with people we thought we’d never hear from again. They allow us to stalk our ex-boyfriends and their new girlfriends in ways we’d never before dreamed possible. “Social media” has come to be a staggeringly broad term, but sites like these are the truest form. People put their entire lives online and share it with a broad network of friends and associates. There’s a high “switching cost,” as it were, and a great deal of emotional attachment, and so sites like Facebook have staying power. You could make a similar, if less powerful, argument for Flickr or YouTube.
Another very cool aspect of social media is wikis, and I don’t think they’ve come close to reaching their potential. Wikipedia.org is wildly successful and useful, but there’s a ton of applications possible within large (and small) organizations for wikis as a form of information-sharing and for capturing “tribal knowledge.” I expect we’ll see growth there in the corporate world.
And while all eyes have been on Twitter and Facebook, “virtual world” applications like Second Life have been quietly creating huge profits, both for their parent companies and for companies who buy and sell real estate and product in these worlds. The gamer community is large, growing, dedicated and willing to put a lot of disposable income into their hobby, and there will continue to be huge profit potential for the (very small) group of people who understand how to operate within this space.
Any that will fade? No, none of these will fade. They’re here to stay. We may see them merged, we may see them take on new names and new management and new homepages, but there is no major form of social networking that’s going anywhere anytime soon.
Which would mean more to you, a Twitter message from someone or an old-fashioned handwritten note from that same person? Do social media represent a chit-chat dumbing down of America, a liberation of new possibilities, or both, or neither?
SP: My goodness, I can’t remember the last time I got a hand-written note from somebody other than my mother (who spent about five minutes on her Twitter account before declaring it a “time-suck” that she couldn’t manage). I don’t know that it really matters to me at this point. I check my mailbox approximately once every fiscal quarter, so unless you want to deliver the hand-written note directly to my doorstep, you’re going to have better luck reaching me through Twitter.
I strongly disagree that social media represent a dumbing down of America. It’s the opposite ... it’s a way for us to become more informed, more connected and overall less ignorant. It’s a way for us to experience different lives, different worlds and different points of view in a way that’s never been possible, quite literally, in the history of the world. To call this tremendous capacity and facility to share information a “dumbing down” is to miss the forest for the trees.
Tennessee women's basketball coach Pat Summit complained that players on the team bus were texting each other rather than speaking face to face. Your reaction?
SP: Well, did they win?
Big-name athletes and entertainment celebrities seem to have taken to Twitter because 1) they can control their message, 2) the message is short and nontaxing, 3) they bypass reporters, 4) they can have "contact" with fans that really isn't contact and 5) fans end up thinking they have contact though they really don't. The Obama campaign used social media for organizing and a means of getting out the message. Can you see an expansion of uses of social media, perhaps taking a serious turn with politicians and public officials using them to create better policies?
SP: First off, I’d disagree with the assertion that “fans end up thinking they have contact though they really don’t.” Many celebrities on Twitter interact directly with their fans, often replying to their questions and retweeting information they send along. Demi Moore is extremely involved with her fans on Twitter, as are Shaquille O’Neal, Lily Allen, Samantha Ronson, Giuliana Rancic, Paris Hilton, Rainn Wilson and hundreds of others. Twitter has been an exceptionally effective tool for celebrities to connect with their fanbase.
I don’t exactly foresee politicians using Twitter or Facebook as a way to create policy, although it is a good way for them to keep their finger on the pulse of public opinion and to hear the demands of their constituency. Plus, it’s yet another way for people to speak up and draw attention to problems with public officials. Will it matter now more than it has in the past? I don’t know ... it’s still politics, after all.
There have been abuses in the social media such as parody sites allowed on Twitter that pretend to be a celebrity's thoughts but really aren't. Is there much abuse in your opinion and if so, how can it be prevented?
SP: Twitter’s rules indicate that if you make clear you’re a parody of a person, they will let your account stand. I think that’s fair ... we’ve always made exceptions for obvious parody in our legal system, and for good reason.
It’s still a huge problem facing social media, and Twitter doesn’t come close to having the capacity to deal with it. I had my own impersonator on Twitter ... the photo of “me” was a stripper ... and it took the company over a month to remove the page. There’s currently another impersonator misrepresenting one of my brands, and Twitter has yet to deal with that. They have begun to deal with the situation by introducing “Verified Accounts” for celebrities, but it’s still a long way from resolved.
We’ve also seen the reverse situation ... Lindsay Lohan threw a very public fit when MySpace deleted her account because they thought it was an impersonator. I doubt we’ll ever have a perfect system in place to address these issues ... there will always be some give-and-take, and we’ll work within its confines and within the confines of the legal system, as we always have with similar issues.
Do you have any other thoughts on social media you wish to share?
SP: I think you’ve probably heard plenty from me by now!
Trackback(0)
 |
TrackBack URI for this entry
