Writing Machines is the course website for English 170L at Pomona College in Claremont, California.
A rather meta-post
Submitted by silversprung on 17 November 2006 - 11:08am.
I’ve been thinking about a question we posed in class last week but never really answered: Does the term “social software” encompass so many different programs and venues as to render it meaningless?
I kind of want to argue both ways on this one. First, it does seem that “social software” covers almost everything we do on the internet, from AIM to blogs to MMORPGs to wikis. So in one sense, no, the term isn’t a very useful one if our goal is to distinguish between the different ways in which we use the internet.
However, in another sense, the term “social software” helps identify the common thread between the seemingly disparate things we do on the internet. It’s really all about socializing and communicating, isn't it? Email and blogs and AIM? Obviously about communicating. But wikis? They spark intellectual (and not-so-intellectual, depending on what the entry is) discourse between strangers. Games? They set up characters through whom players communicate with each other. Hypertexts? They communicate an author’s creative vision to readers, who in turn interpret that vision and talk about it with others who have read the hypertext. This came as a revelation to me, although it sure sounds obvious now that I type it out.
Now, maybe the term “communication” is, like “social software,” too broad to be all that meaningful/helpful. But I think there’s something here about how the purpose of the web is to socialize and communicate with others.
»
- silversprung's blog
- Login to post comments
hmmm
I agree that the term is rather broad, but maybe you are broadening it here too much? I don't know if I would call hypertexts "social"-Landow seems to believe that they can empower the reader and disempower the writer... but is that communication? Or powerplay? And how are hypertexts, if they inspire conversation between their readers, any different than books in general, sans the computer? Further, while some games are about communication--the giant, mass-role-playing games--what about Adventure, or Zork, or even Facade? I would argue that they are not about communicating with anyone else--the player sits alone at her computer and plays them.
So, what am I doing here besides nitpicking? Good question! I guess I feel that while the term is broad, there are limits to it. Not everything is social.
But now that I've nitpicked, I'm having a change of heart. For what, after all, is the internet? It's a net--a series of connections--a way of facilitating communication.
Yeah-- I go back-and-forth
Yeah-- I go back-and-forth on the idea of socializing and communicating, too. But I take your point about hypertexts (and some games, although I think you could argue that Facade is about communication, albeit not with real people) being not-so-much about communication-- although maybe a theorist more astute than myself could make my hypothesis work for hypertexts, too.