Everyone is in an uproar today (gee does anyone smell a bitchmeme in the works?) over a post by Noam Cohen at the New York Times about how <gasp> all those famous people on Twitter might just be ghosts of themselves. Gee do you think – what a conclusion to come to.
I’ve been saying since the beginning of this whole follower or friend malarkey that anyone who thinks that people like Barak Obama or any one of those fancy ass stars are actually writing those messages need to check their grasp on reality.
In essense, Guy is saying that when you see something under his byline on the web may not be actually penned by him. He is more like Newsweek than a person, and that’s ok, but should be made very very clear.
From my perspective, his personal identity has been hollowed out into a brand, like Colonel Sanders or Aunt Jemima: there may not be a person there at all.
But don’t worry, he says, its the content that matters: content is king.
Uh, sorry, Guy. Content isn’t king, except to media mogul types who are invading the edge. Connectedness is king: it’s social media, right? The social is supposed to equate to real live human beings communicating with each other. Not ‘bots, and ghosts, and things that go bump in the night. People.
I’d be more inclined to say something like your rep just hit the toilet (where it belongs)
But here’s the thing.
If you are hiring someone to pretend to be you – whether you disclose the fact or not – and con people into following you on all these suddenly cool social media site then I am sorry – but you are nothing more than a social media
Hey, like this post? Why not share it with a buddy?Tweet