Web 3.0 – MSM got no rep!

 A great piece by Jemima Kiss over at the Guardian as she lays out her case that Web 3.0 is all about rank and recommendation

If web 2.0 could be summarised as interaction, web 3.0 must be about recommendation and personalisation. While the Tim Berners-Lees of this world work out how to make the language of the web function more effectively behind the scenes, our front-of-house task is to get stuck in and intelligently work these technologies into our businesses. It is not enough to understand the strategy behind these new applications, such as Twitter and Reddit – they rely on participation. Tokenism won’t do.

Josh Catone over at Read/write web agrees that the Web 3.0: Is It About Personalization?.

He echoes what Jemima says with a reference to a contest they held last year:

Last April, we held a contest asking readers for their web 3.0 definitions. Our favorite came from Robert O’Brien, who defined Web 3.0 as a “decentralized asynchronous me.”

“Web 1.0: Centralized Them. Web 2.0: Distributed Us. Web 3.0: Decentralized Me,” he wrote. “[Web 3.0 is] about me when I don’t want to participate in the world. It’s about me when I want to have more control of my environment particularly who I let in. When my attention is stretched who/what do I pay attention to and who do I let pay attention to me. It is more effective communication for me!”

A great definition. Decentralized me. Love it.

And according to Kiss, this web3.0 thing is good news for the MSM as well.

Above all, the most reassuring trend is that the values of credibility and trust are more important than ever in the ocean of information we have to navigate every day. The technology is not enough on its own, and that should be a comfort to editors everywhere.

I agree with that in principle but the heart of that question comes from what defines that credibility. How is that trust measured?

Looking at the habits of people on facebook and other social sites, I get the impression that trust and credibility are different currencies to the traditional, more paternal, idea of trust that we associate with the MSM.
How many people would recommend a newspaper as a friend?

So if Web 3.0 is going to be about recommendation the question is are the MSM investing enough in their rep now to be able to punch their weight in a world where trust and credibility means ‘just like me’.

3 thoughts on “Web 3.0 – MSM got no rep!”

  1. Oh dear. Too many MSM media journalists are struggling with the idea of being reccomenders as it is. The idea that peer to peer recommendation can route right around them is going to upset them even more…

    I really don’t think this is going to be reassuring for editors. A good reputation in the print world palpably does not translate into an online reputation, and you’re always going to trust a friend more than a faceless MSM journalist.

  2. I agree Adam. I think a lot of msm people believe that the way to avoid being routed round is to get in the way. They want to be in the flow but they don’t add value or participate. Not all of them but enough to make me think that’s why social networks and web3.0 are there because of them not inspite of them.

Leave a Reply