Having been a member of Google+ for (only) a few months, or any of the social media for that matter, I have noticed that the most prolific bloggers are those who pass on information from another source.
Some have developed a following sufficient to sustain advertising, a source of revenue for themselves, but who equate to the retailers, rather than the inventors and manufacturers of ideas. They succeed through volume, rather than quality, similar to Woolworths or Walmart.
I think that there is a place for that, however I am disappointed that some people with some great ideas, concepts, art or photography, who represent the quality of the contributions, are robbed of the credit they deserve by the slavery of the relatively mindless to the easily seen or understood, (it is easier to look at a picture than to tax the mind by having to read something,) rather than to the new concepts or brilliant ideas or art occasionally seen.
There are some on Google+ who try to raise the standard by introducing rules to their circles which are to be followed before participation is allowed. Admirable concept, but a failure judging by their number of followers. It is wonderful to have a forum to which all can make a contribution according to their view and ability, but the judgment upon the contributions, such as how many +1's, may need some tweaking to reflect the quality of the contribution rather than its (effortless) appeal. I am not sure how this could be done, but what I am trying to find is some views on improving and encouraging new thinking, rather than recycling of the same ideas, science or art.
The solution to these problems is that which would make Google+ way superior to any other social medium. I would expect some strident criticism of these comments, particularly from those with a vested interest in the status quo, but think it worthwhile, nonetheless, to express some ideas which may lead to a better forum.
No comments:
Post a Comment