Should the term social media be killed?

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to our RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

This was the proposition expressed by Steve Rubel on his Micro Persuasion blog. The basis for his argument being that the evolvement of media which has created terms such as social media and user generated content should all be encompassed under the single heading of ‘media’. Rubel writes, “It’s like we’re a separate entity from the rest of the so-called "mainstream" journalists, filmmakers, photographers, etc. who do what we do and get paid more for it. We sit in a special dish like leftover meatloaf so we need a special name.”

I can see where Rubel is coming from in that bloggers and mavens alike want to be given equal credit for their reporting of news, information and opinion. However, I do not agree with him. These categories exist for very good reasons. Take the term ‘user generated content’ which envelops all manner of material from photos to articles, much of which can be extremely entertaining. However journalists, filmmakers and photographers earn their money for a reason. This reason being their knowledge. As a broadcast journalism student I have spent three long years training in a specific field, which could be stretched further by a masters, or an internship, or experience in working for a news network. Therefore I would hope that after three years of training and possibly, twenty years in the industry (if I were to enter into a career in journalism) I would know more than the average Joe. This is why terms such as ‘user generated content’ exist and similarly I feel my colleagues would hope their skills were honed, and perhaps even superior, to professionals working in other fields. I’m sure there are a number of photographers out there who couldn’t navigate their way around the blogosphere to the same effect as an accomplished blogger.

For another view see Helena Makhotlova’s blog.