Comments on: Debate: social media changes business basics?

By: Richard Stacy

Richard Stacy — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 14:47:34 +0000

I think you are confusing the internet with social media. They are very different things.

A good debate though – as my starting contribution i would point you to http://richardstacy.com/what-is-social-media/

By: There’s a social media evolution – Part 1 — NevilleHobson.com

There’s a social media evolution – Part 1 — NevilleHobson.com — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 12:32:43 +0000

[...] Aug 20 / Paul Seaman: Debate: social media changes business basics? [...]

By: Lisa Lomas

Lisa Lomas — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 09:51:30 +0000

I am not inclined to agree but see how you could think this way. I agree that business are about businesses providing solutions, some solutions (not all) can be delivered via the internet. I believe there are some businesses that will not be online in the sense of selling, but merely a point of reference. As the New Age is bringing instant gratification with youngsters this is creating a internet environment, so searching for something would be on the internet first choice. Would a company wish to be seen? Would that company wish to be recognised as keeping with the times? Would that company like to see increased revenue?

By: Social media and a fundamental shift — NevilleHobson.com

Social media and a fundamental shift — NevilleHobson.com — Sun, 30 Aug 2009 14:47:18 +0000

[...] Paul Seaman says social media can’t change the rules of old-world business. Moreover – I’m summarizing rather loosely the various arguments he makes in a rather good post some ten days ago – he says that social media is an irrelevance to business. [...]

By: When it Comes to Social Media, Does Apple’s Success Provide a Counterintuitive Reality Check?

Sat, 22 Aug 2009 17:43:20 +0000

[...] on both sides of the fence. So I was pleasantly surprised today to see Neville Hobson and Paul Seaman engage in an online debate about social media, its use, and the impact on “old world” [...]

By: Cody Brown

Cody Brown — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 21:16:32 +0000

Lots is off here.

My reply is on Twitter:

http://twitter.com/codybrown

By: Jo Jordan

Jo Jordan — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 08:45:13 +0000

@Scott responds to my initial reaction. Implicit – unstated- in your approach is the presumption that business=finding a return for financial capital.

If you re-titled this piece – finding a return for financial capital in a networked world, you will have a good product to sell!

Now turn that presumption around, what are the opportunities for financial capital in a networked world – investing in Facebook for a long term return? But I get the impression you are interested in short term returns.

You are asking – where is the platform where I can take my wares and flog them. Definitely not social media. They will hound you out.

Let me explain it like this. 50 years ago, if you mentioned “trade” in a “drawing room” in UK, you would be ostracized. Mention “trade” in a social setting today in Australia, you are ostracized. Social media is our “drawing room”. Tawdry hawking is taboo.

Still hawking needs to be done and is done. In the physical and social spaces reserved for hawking. The question is not whether it will be done.

The question is how the presence of this new “drawing room” changes the hawking game. Where we sell, who we sell to, how we sell, etc.

People looking to give their financial exercise may or may not need to be aware of what is happening. But this is not a matter of generalities – it is a matter of specifics? Like all business, the case is more important than the general rule.

PS as you are flouting a social media rule and not acttvating back links for us, I blog at http://flowingmotion.wordpress.com

By: Twitter Trackbacks for Debate: social media changes business basics? | 21st-century PR issues › Paul Seaman's online review [paulseaman.eu] on Topsy.com

Fri, 21 Aug 2009 02:21:06 +0000

[...] Debate: social media changes business basics? | 21st-century PR issues › Paul Seaman's online revi… paulseaman.eu/2009/08/debate-social-media-changes-business-basics – view page – cached I recently left a comment on Neville Hobson's blog saying that so called social media do not change the rules of old world business. He responded by challenging — From the page [...]

By: Scott Karambis

Scott Karambis — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 21:17:32 +0000

Nice start to a well-needed debate. I’d add or emphasize two points: 1) a business is not a business until you can get someone to pay more for your product than what it costs to produce. People still want newspapers. They have never had more readers; they just can’t support their work with a business model. Right now, much of the activity of the social media sphere is fueling itself on the debt generated by the professional news organizations. It’s like the housing boom with all of us taking home equity loans out to pay off our credit cards and hoping it will all just work out. But lots of commentary isn’t that interesting when there is no one producing the content to comment on. 2) As they promote new social media tools, many marketing companies are essentially trading down from more profitable modes of communication to cheaper ones. Rushing into an easily commodifiable business has never been a great recipe for survival. I wouldn’t be so eager to declare that one of my most profitable products is “dead.” I do, however, agree that we are in the midst of a major transformation of how information is created, valued and paid for, the like of which we haven’t seen for a long time. (Maybe since Defoe managed to do without patrons and sell his books on an open market). A new model will eventually emerge, but it will likely take a long time. In the meantime, I’m inclined to agree with you on the old fashioned business basics.

By: Neville Hobson

Neville Hobson — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 20:53:21 +0000

A great start, Paul, thanks!

I want to consider what you have to say so I’ll be back with you in a few days with some thoughts on my blog.