Social networking is about connecting people, which Lemmy as a forum does. You could argue that the function of Lemmy as a link aggregator is more social media like, but I doubt people would consider an RSS feed reader to be social media either.
Social media is like TV, a one-to-many medium, usually with some sort of feed curation to promote certain topics.
That’s a totally made up definition from your part. Media is the plural of medium, which means “intermediary”. A social media is just the middleman that allows people to socialize. Lemmy is a social media, as well as a social network.
You forgot the “from your part” that is quite important. Language is a consensus, you just invented your own definition and pretend that it is the consensus.
And anyways, if “social media” and “social network” is the same, why have two different terms for it?
They’re not the same, it’s the square/rectangle thing. A social network is a kind of social media, all social medias are not social network. You could argue that Whatsapp is a social media but not a social network (but the frontier is getting blurry with groups and these kind of things).
Wat? Sorry, but your definition is even further from anything that could be called a consensus. You could maybe argue that WhatsApp is a social network, but it definitly isn’t social media and it is completly outlandish to claim so. Where do you even get the “media” part in it? You know, compound words are still made up of individual words that have a meaning by themself. Kinda funny that you accuse me of “making up definitions” 🙄
But sure there are some blurry edges between them. For example, Instagram is primarily used for social media, but the direct messages are more used like a social network.
I’ll quote myself because I already answered that: « Media is the plural of medium, which means “intermediary” ». That’s the textbook definition of the word media, and the consensus about what it means.
Whatsapp is the middleman/platform, thus intermediary (= “medium/media”), between two people socializing. I don’t understand what you don’t understand.
A social network is social media that allows to form groups or communities. Two people communicating is not a network, the whole point of a network is interconnection between members of a group.
No, that is not what “media” means. That might be what the original word in Latin meant, but in English it is used to refer to things like newspapers, TV channels and so on, and “social media” is a direct reference to that.
A social network is social media that allows to form groups or communities. Two people communicating is not a network, the whole point of a network is interconnection between members of a group.
Indeed, and that is why I don’t really agree to classify WhatsApp as a social network, but it has groups, so it is closer to a social network than social media.
There are lot of synonyms, people just choose some words in different contexts based on how they sound. Why use the word “begin” when the word “start” exists?
I have never heard anyone refer to TV as social media, I have always heard it in context with facebook, twitter and co.
a better objection, which makes me uncertain whether lemmy is social media, is that this is a pseudonymous forum where its not common for users to become friends or know each other, and discussion is not around a specific news site or a specific person, but around specific topics
I didn’t say TV is social media, I said social media is like TV is the sense that it is a one-to-many medium. I could have also used TikTok to explain the difference, but people here are clearly confused about the destinction and it would have been less clear.
pseudonymous forum where its not common for users to become friends or know each other
This isn’t really true for regular commenters. There are even feuds between specific users and so on. I agree though that there are constant attempts by some people who try to make Lemmy more like social media by advocating for dissolving the destinction between communities and instances to turn Lemmy into a dumb meme and news posting app for entertainment purposes.
Of course it is an pseudonymous online forum, so it isn’t about making friends in real-life, but you can make plenty of connections with people online via it.
That isn’t a problem, it is by design. I don’t want to follow you or anyone else. I don’t want to promote myself either. I absolutely do not want to make any connections with people here. I read the aggregated subject feeds, I get clarity or insights from the comments. And that is where it ends. Anonymity makes this all work.
Yes, and that is what connecting people means… talking to each other. NOT promoting oneself in a one-to-many fashion like what social media is about. Anonymous or not is of lesser relevance but it works either way.
Annonymity is extremely important. I don’t know you, you don’t know me. Nothing I say matters, nothing you say matters. There is no tone, no personality, just words. You could be a liar or a bot, it makes zero difference.
Eh? It is what I say that matters. You have a very strange world view if you think just because there is only a pseudonym attached it doesn’t matter. And of course conversing with others is social 🙄
No, it is a social network. That’s different from social media.
Its not a car, its a vehicle!
There is a difference between the two terms as well, so thanks for supporting my point /s
What would you define social media as?
Oxford says.
That definition certainly matches Lemmy.
Social networking is about connecting people, which Lemmy as a forum does. You could argue that the function of Lemmy as a link aggregator is more social media like, but I doubt people would consider an RSS feed reader to be social media either.
Social media is like TV, a one-to-many medium, usually with some sort of feed curation to promote certain topics.
That’s a totally made up definition from your part. Media is the plural of medium, which means “intermediary”. A social media is just the middleman that allows people to socialize. Lemmy is a social media, as well as a social network.
Every definition is “made up” 🙄
What I explained is how these terms are commonly used on the fediverse.
And anyways, if “social media” and “social network” is the same, why have two different terms for it?
You forgot the “from your part” that is quite important. Language is a consensus, you just invented your own definition and pretend that it is the consensus.
They’re not the same, it’s the square/rectangle thing. A social network is a kind of social media, all social medias are not social network. You could argue that Whatsapp is a social media but not a social network (but the frontier is getting blurry with groups and these kind of things).
Wat? Sorry, but your definition is even further from anything that could be called a consensus. You could maybe argue that WhatsApp is a social network, but it definitly isn’t social media and it is completly outlandish to claim so. Where do you even get the “media” part in it? You know, compound words are still made up of individual words that have a meaning by themself. Kinda funny that you accuse me of “making up definitions” 🙄
But sure there are some blurry edges between them. For example, Instagram is primarily used for social media, but the direct messages are more used like a social network.
I’ll quote myself because I already answered that: « Media is the plural of medium, which means “intermediary” ». That’s the textbook definition of the word media, and the consensus about what it means.
Whatsapp is the middleman/platform, thus intermediary (= “medium/media”), between two people socializing. I don’t understand what you don’t understand.
A social network is social media that allows to form groups or communities. Two people communicating is not a network, the whole point of a network is interconnection between members of a group.
No, that is not what “media” means. That might be what the original word in Latin meant, but in English it is used to refer to things like newspapers, TV channels and so on, and “social media” is a direct reference to that.
Indeed, and that is why I don’t really agree to classify WhatsApp as a social network, but it has groups, so it is closer to a social network than social media.
There are lot of synonyms, people just choose some words in different contexts based on how they sound. Why use the word “begin” when the word “start” exists?
I have never heard anyone refer to TV as social media, I have always heard it in context with facebook, twitter and co.
a better objection, which makes me uncertain whether lemmy is social media, is that this is a pseudonymous forum where its not common for users to become friends or know each other, and discussion is not around a specific news site or a specific person, but around specific topics
I didn’t say TV is social media, I said social media is like TV is the sense that it is a one-to-many medium. I could have also used TikTok to explain the difference, but people here are clearly confused about the destinction and it would have been less clear.
This isn’t really true for regular commenters. There are even feuds between specific users and so on. I agree though that there are constant attempts by some people who try to make Lemmy more like social media by advocating for dissolving the destinction between communities and instances to turn Lemmy into a dumb meme and news posting app for entertainment purposes.
Well Lemmy is not about that at all. I know absolutely Zero people from lemmy.
That seems to be a you problem.
Of course it is an pseudonymous online forum, so it isn’t about making friends in real-life, but you can make plenty of connections with people online via it.
That isn’t a problem, it is by design. I don’t want to follow you or anyone else. I don’t want to promote myself either. I absolutely do not want to make any connections with people here. I read the aggregated subject feeds, I get clarity or insights from the comments. And that is where it ends. Anonymity makes this all work.
Yes, and that is what connecting people means… talking to each other. NOT promoting oneself in a one-to-many fashion like what social media is about. Anonymous or not is of lesser relevance but it works either way.
Annonymity is extremely important. I don’t know you, you don’t know me. Nothing I say matters, nothing you say matters. There is no tone, no personality, just words. You could be a liar or a bot, it makes zero difference.
That isn’t very social at all.
Eh? It is what I say that matters. You have a very strange world view if you think just because there is only a pseudonym attached it doesn’t matter. And of course conversing with others is social 🙄