Ambient streams are an interesting framing for that.

Twitter with a viable working folksonomy (aka “hashtags”) is a decent proxy. At a minimum, its a great training ground.

Props to you, Mandy, for reigning this in, and to Edo for his ambitious write-up of next generation delivery technology. It wouldn’t be the first time science fiction helped us glimpse the future.

Feels to me like a future that’s just around the corner.

Justin… Idealistic to say passion wins? Probably. But I still believe that passion will trump mere influence because long term other people, the ones whom we want to influence, will respond to passion (emotion) more readily and more fully than they’ll respond to influence (logic or who we’re supposed to listen to). In the case you reference (celebrities, for instance) I see the value of the influencer argument. You are right that we’re talking as PR pros, insiders, about how a world that is looking on from the outside views these ideas. Thanks for reminding me not to let the echo chamber resonate too loudly!

Thanks to both of you for reading and commenting!

Also agree that the network I’ve developed is the true value of Twitter and social media for me. My ideal would be a search of Twitter that yields results as fast as Google does. But I guess that’s not truly possible since what I find most valuable from the comments I get when I pose a question on Twitter is thought and perspective, both of which can’t be instantaneously formed and delivered like an algorythm-based search.

Finally, going to play devil’s advocate on passion versus influence just a bit. I champion the “brand fan” idea, that brands should engage people who have formed a true affinity to their org or product. But I do think it’s a bit idealistic.

People buy things, promote ideas, share opinions as fact based on influence all the time, especially when it comes from celebrities. There is a place for “pay to play” if you’re talking straight impact because it does work to influence a certain audience. Back to Mack’s point…remember we’re comparing our POV as PR pros who live and breathe this stuff every day to the mainstream. We’re on different playing fields with different visions — at least for now.

Thanks for the post. Very thought provoking.

Justin Goldsborough
@JGoldsborough

I think a lot of what is happening on Twitter and other social sites is still being pushed by the bleeding edge. And by the time that technology reaches the point where the mainstream uses and is familiar with it, HOW we use it could have changed drastically.

But I will say this, I don’t think filtering information and sorting it is as useful as filtering the SOURCES of that information, such as my networks. I think that’s the promise of social media, it gives more people access to each other. And I think these networks will form organically, as people find each other.

But in general, I think when early adopters talk about the future, we need to remember that if it REALLY becomes the future, it will have to go through the mainstream, and that often REALLY changes the final outcome.

Nice post Mandy!

Spike, you’re welcome. Enjoyed the convo. And yeah… I’m guessing as PR and movement-focused promotion continue to converge, the Holy Grail will be figuring out how to ignite new passion within trusted influencer communities… And knowing who those influencers in question really can reach.

And I find this line particularly interesting: “I can only be influenced by those people or messages I choose to pay attention to.” That’s a good point, but who is influencing them? It would be fascinating to chart that. Then again, I guess that’s what those companies that aim to identify influencers try to do.

Nice post.

You touched upon something here that was not touched upon during blog chat, or I did not see if it was. We are influenced by who we allow into our stream. That is more of what influencing is about. Take Mack for instance he is Dr. Pepper so Pepsi trying to get him to do anything more than be annoyed by them is a waste of their time. You are Godiva, I am M&Ms. Godiva can send me free choc for a yr and they would go uneaten (sent to you of course). It is not that I do not trust them so influence is not about trust in that sense when it comes to product but what about service? Does trust play a role in that area?

Nicely done here to bring out what more influence is. Social media channels are permissive and we let in who we feel connected to in a certain way. That leads to trust and loyalty.