Lately I have been thinking a lot about channels. Every day it seems there's a hot new Web 2.0 site that captures our attention.
In 2003 it was Friendster and Linked In.
Then in 2004, thanks in part to the election, blogging began to get really big.
The year 2005 brought us photocasting (Flickr) podcasting (iTunes) and vodcasting via YouTube. By the way note the headlines "Internet craze" headlines listed here circa 2005.
In 2006 we saw a big revival in social networks with MySpace (a client) as well as the virtual world boom.
This year it's all about micro - Twitter, Jaiku, Pownce plus little web apps everywhere, on widget platforms, Facebook, the iPhone.
All of this leads me to the photo above. The Web 2.0 construction boom is bigger now than it ever was. Techcrunch, Scobleizer and Mashable leave me all breathless. It's like watching the cranes of Dubai rise. We're a million monkeys running on treadmills, chasing the latest banana. Myself included! The breathing apparatus in the photo above reminds me of my Google Reader stream!
Surely, channels are where the action is at. However, it's important to remember they are just that - and they change. Circa 1998, perhaps when many of you were 10, The Globe.com, GeoCities and Tripod were all the rage. They faded from our horizon over time. The same thing will happen to many of today's hot sites. In fact, I advise marketers not to invest too much time in creating "a Facebook strategy" as much as they don't have "an NBC strategy" or "a New York Times strategy." Instead, I encourage them to people watch, learn and then plan based on their audience and the big picture.
The most interesting action is in sociology. In other words, how does technology change our culture and how we interact with media, the web and each other - and to what end? This was a major realization for me a few months back and you have probably noticed it in my writing, which is less channel focused. These days, I am far more interested in what people do with technology rather than on what the latest new "shiny object" is. My friend Brian Reich calls this "Shiny Object Syndrome." That's why I am writing longer pieces once per day rather than many short posts.
For an example, consider this new study by the Shorenstein Center (PDF) that tracks how teens interact with news. Most of them do not make it part of their day. Surely new channels brought about the change but it's the shift itself rather than the technology that's most important and interesting here.
So my advice is definitely play with new sites. Channels are good and so is curiousity. But the bigger story in the long run is how these sites change business and our society.
(PS: For more on the monkey, read this related piece!)
