purple motes

The decline of mass media doesn't necessarily imply the decline of mass culture. Social networking services can create mass circulation without mass media. iLike, a music sharing application, acquired one million users on Facebook within a week of its introduction there. Observing that Paris Hilton was mentioned more often than Facebook, iPhone, and Google at a spring 2007 tech conference, a venture capitalist declared:

A bunch of blogs that I don't read, like TMZ, are newly winning the traffic wars. What such sites generally have in common is that they don't even have passing acquaintance with technology, geek-ish stuff, and early adopters. Instead, they are oriented toward the sort of inane pablum that fills supermarket glossies, 7pm TV shows, and such. They are, in other words, all about celebrities, gossip, and entertainment.

And that is, in a word, awesome. Why? Because it is unassailable evidence of the arrival of the web as mass, popular media.

Gossip and entertainment are primordial features of human societies. Celebrity across a human population of three hundred million persons is not. Whether new communications technologies will support celebrity or diffuse it remains an interesting question for analysis.

Offer Comments

Steve Outing observes:

For years, sports enthusiasts have read about their sports in magazines, mostly — with advice and celebrity profiles written by professional journalists and freelancers, and the occasional athlete. But what we’re seeing with the EG sites [here] (which are primarily about climbers/bikers/runners/et al sharing their own stories and images) is that people like being the writers and photographers themselves, and viewing the amateur musings of fellow enthusiasts who they can interact with easily and directly.

Some recent research is consistent with this view:

Advertisements featuring endorsements by celebrities such as David Beckham are less effective than those featuring ordinary people, new research suggests. This is because keeping up with the Jones's rather than with famous people is the main motivation behind many people's choice of which product to buy.[1]

Personally, I'm keen to keep up with my brother Dwight. But he is, in fact, a celebrity.

Note:

[1] Quoted from University of Bath press release (separate paragraphs condensed). The research that is the basis for this press release seems to be Torsten Tomczak, Daniel Wentzel, and Martin Brett, "Consumer Susceptibility to Normative Influence," forthcoming in Journal of Advertising, 2007. While that journal bills itself as "the premier journal devoted to the development of advertising theory and its relationship to practice," not making the paper and associated data freely available on the web makes this research less credible.

1 Comment