Social Networking: A brief comparison. (I swear it’s not as dry as it sounds)

JOSH GAMBLE/THE ARBITER

The internet is a wonderful, magical place. Sometimes that magic takes a dark turn, other times it works wonders. However, it’s usually pretty mundane magic. One specific form of this average brand of magic has been called many things: the blogosphere, Web 2.0, high school all over again or, as it’s commonly known, social networking.

Within the realm of social networking, there are thousands of styles and sites. These could be forums, blogs, information aggregators, or just chat sites. However, the highest concentration of users seems to center on three iconic sites. No, none of them are pornographic; I’m talking about MySpace, Facebook and Twitter.

Each of these sites offers variations on the same product, hinging on a few key differences. Even though the concept is basically the same, most users have preferences to a specific site. Here’s the rundown.

The oldest of these sites, Myspace, is actually a direct descendant of the now-deceased Friendster. Since it’s founding in 2003, Myspace as been a cornerstone of the social networking movement, drawing millions of 13-year-old girls and designers of epilepsy- triggering “glitter graphics” into the open meadow of the internet. Of the three sites, Myspace features the most bells and whistles. Users can post blogs, blurbs, bulletins, status messages, and music. It also allows users to create customized profile pages using HTML coding.

While many users have drifted away from Myspace, it still boasts turnout of 666,205,499 visitors in August 2009 according to Compete.com. It has become, however, more of a place more music than “a place for friends” as its slogan suggests. Any group can create a profile on Myspace Music to introduce their sound to the world or to record companies.

Facebook is the most used site of the three, with 2,202,528,780 visitors in August 2009. Like Myspace, Facebook allows users to update their statuses, as well as post notes, which are like Myspace’s bulletins. Facebook users can’t create high customized pages for their profile, but the site’s homepage is much more intuitive, featuring, in real time, the status updates, posted note and links, and application updates of one’s friends list. Facebook also provides filters for these updates so that users can search for specific types of posts. Recently, in order to keep up with the growing popularity of Twitter, the owners added a feature letting users update their status and receive messages via their mobile phone.

Social networking’s newest rising star, founded in 2006, is the mobile micro-blogging system Twitter. Catering to America’s special brand of attention deficit disorder, users update Twitter with 160 character “tweets”. The twittersphere is an amazingly streamlined place, letting users post statuses, send messages, add comments and post pictures all in one little text box or from a mobile phone. Because of its intuitive and simplistic interface, as well as numerous celebrity endorsements, Twitter has experienced an impressive 583 percent growth since August 2008.

So there you have how they’re different, now here’s how they’re all the same. Each one is an absolutely perfect procrastination tool or time waster, yet each one provides a now essential level of connectivity. Social networking is the next evolution in communication, entertainment, and information media. That being said, (shameless plug time) you can follow me and other Arbiter staff members on Twitter or on Facebook. As someone probably once said somewhere of Betamax, “It’s the wave of the future, man!”

Short URL: http://arbiteronline.com/?p=29509

Posted by Josh Gamble on Sep 30 2009. Filed under Columns, Culture, Multimedia. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.