Today morning while reading TOI, I was wondering there are around 60% news that I am not interested in. And on TV, there are around 80% programs I won’t prefer to watch. The percentage is too high as compared to my mailbox where only 10-15% mails are the ones I would delete before opening.
So why is it that we name these mails as SPAM but we don’t consider the useless news or TV programs as spam? The logic given is “Even if I’m not interested in them, there are some other people who might be interested”. Isn’t it same with the e-mails? Even if I’m not interested in the mail, there can be some other person who may find it interesting. And obviously the person sending out the mails doesn’t know who will find it interesting and who won’t, he will play safe game by forwarding it to all..
So why do we discriminate in social media and mainstream media? Why is it that one thing is called as SPAM in social media and not in mainstream media? Why do we still tend to justify whatever happens in mainstream media and we reject in social media?
Dinesh Soni speaks on Entrepreneurship, Business, Politics, Technology, Social Media and all you can think of…!!!
Counter
Associated With
yeah I agree…
Social media is much more targeted than conventional media as you pointed out!
true.. social media does involve spamming.. coaxed conversations .. people poking in for no reasons.. I have had such experience on twitter many times..I hope we could tag tweets as spam or relevant . this can be another app that could help in filtering tweets.
@vivek:- There are already apps like flittr which can filter out tweets based on a particular word or hashtag.. you can easily ignore those #magpie tweets now…