In the last week I have had two different invitations to join two completely unrelated social networks, but both are hosted on the same service – Ning. Ning offers ordinary mortals – people who wouldn’t know where to start if they were told to configure their own webserver – a chance to create their own social networks.
This sounds like a great idea. People can start their own networks for their own interests – vintage cars, stamp-collecting, train-spotting – or their own business needs – customers, distributors or suppliers.
Ning is a clear example of a “Web 2.0″ phenomenon – distributed control, open access, and user-generated content. (I am actually a sceptic about whether there is anything new in “Web 2.0″. It could just be all marketing hype.) But there are two big dangers inherent in all this. The first is related to quality. The content you are reading might not actually be of any value, and might easily be bogus or deliberately misleading. How can you verify the credentials of the person whose page you are reading? In a commercial environment, a successful Wiki has participants from all levels of the company, not just the geeks. Knowing that the CEO is reading what you write can help keep you on track. And in non-commercial environments, you need to achieve a high level of participation for a user-generated knowledge network to be self-regulating.
The second problem is quantity. I barely have time to read my email, and once I start looking at the networking sites I can lose hours of productive time without noticing it. There aren’t enough hours in the day to keep track of everything, which means I constantly need to make decisions about what messages to open, what links to follow and what articles to read. Sometimes, it feels easier just to switch off.
Top 10 TechComm Influencers 2011
Most Influential Tech Comm Bloggers 2010
Pages
Blogroll
- 2moroDocs
- A Techie Tech Writer
- Communication Cloud
- Conradiator
- CyberText Newsletter
- DITA XML org
- ffeathers
- Firehead Blog
- Gryphon Mountain
- I Heart Tech Docs
- I'd rather be writing
- Just Write Click
- Less Work, More Flow
- Mardahl.dk
- Michael Priestley
- One man writes
- Palimpsest
- RJ Jacquez
- RoboColum(n)
- Talks like a scientist
- techcommdood
- The Agile Technical Writer
- The Content Wrangler
- UAX (User Assistance)
Archives
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- May 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- July 2006
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005

p>






Quality wise I understand your fears but a lot of the advantages of these social networks (if they work properly) is that they are self-correcting/governing. If someone posts something in error it is usually corrected by others.
As for quantity, yes it’s an issue but I’ve learnt to not stress about things, I monitor too many ‘things’ for me to deal with, but I just check the MUSTS before the COULDS, and some months the SHOULDS never get a look in.. lol
Hi David,
One of the funny things about Web 2.0 tools is that you basically can’t plan user behaviour. I’ve set up a Ning network and invited some of the smart folks I’ve met as a professional (persons that couldn’t meet otherwise), just to be there.
intersting discussions arose. They “stole” some time, but I think they provided some “unvaluable value” in return. It’s a lot like “random seeding”, if the soil is fertile something will grow.
Alberto