PurpleCar

Data, Media, Rice, Water. Emerging language and winds of change.

Language changes. It grows. It adapts. Nouns are turned into verbs (e.g. “friend”), words take on many meanings (e.g. “peer”) and subject/verb agreement transforms. Scholars know that the phrase “correct English” is a misnomer at best, a downright falsehood at worst. Languages are living things that grow and change.

We are on the cusp of one of those changes now. It truly could go either way. For a language geek, it’s an exciting event to watch. How will the now-ubiquitous words “data” and “media” be treated? Will the educational system catch up and drill the original usage of “data” and “media” as being plural nouns that require a plural 3rd person verb agreement? Or will colloquial usage overwhelm the textbooks and the subject will be simple, single and quick?

Let’s go over some details.

Datum is a single piece of data. Data are more than one datum.
Medium is a single type of media. Media are all the mediums lumped together.

The subject/verb agreement with these words traditionally went like this:

The datum is written on a piece of paper.
The data are enclosed in the report.

The medium was radio.
The media were newspapers.

(Or, in the case of journalists as a group of people: “The media report a storm coming up the coast.”)

Usage of “data” has morphed into the singular subject/verb agreement for many colloquial speakers (that means “regular people speakers and not specialized people like academics, scientists, etc.) “Data” and “Media” are being treated as mass nouns, like rice (e.g. “The rice is in the cooker”) or water (e.g. “This water is cold!”). Now we are seeing usage like “The data doesn’t support your claim.” and “The media isn’t welcome in the courtroom.”

We are seeing the singular subject/verb agreement usage more with the word “data” and with the word “media.” I don’t think most people would have “medium” on the tip of their tongue if they were asked to name the singular of media, but journalists have been drilling us with their self-referential phrase forever. So we know what “media” is supposed to sound like in a sentence, for the most part (If “data” usage changes, then I think “media” won’t be far behind. But we’ll leave “media” be for now).

“Data” is another problem entirely. I’ve been intimately aware of the usage rules around the word “data” for my entire adult life. When I was 18, I started at the University of Pittsburgh in a Psychology major, and I was quickly treated to a grammar lesson I didn’t soon forget. After years of psychology and biophysics research, then on to business research, I knew the expected plural subject/plural verb conjugation for the word “data.”

But here we are at the crossroads, where seemingly everyone else besides the hardcore researchers use “data” as a mass noun. Sure, the Twitterati will do their best to knock you back into their supposed knowledge and comfort zone as soon as they see a wayward “data is” or “data was.” But they aren’t looking at the big picture. Let’s think for a moment about data. This is a perfect example of why language changes. A cultural change happens, then language reflects that change. (I am now going to start using “data” as a mass noun. That means I will be using it in the singular, so those of you who are grammar-feint-of-heart, I suggest you stop reading now. But I do wish you would just hold your breath for a second and hear me out.)

Data is everywhere. It is coming at us from all sides. We have many convenient ways to get data. We have to make an effort to avoid data. We are data junkies. All of us. But in the end, we see data as a separate entity from ourselves. It is something we consume, like water. We choose to step up to it like we walk to the ocean’s very edge. We make the choice to dip our toes into it, or run away. We have our favorite ways of getting data, just like we have our favorite shoreline beaches. But we see it as a huge mass, almost one big entity of which we take small parts. We make distinctions on its bits. The grains of rice are in the container, but my rice is already cooked. No drops of water are on the window but water is leaking in everywhere. Bits of data are scattered around the internet but my data is on my blog. Wikipedia defines as mass noun as such:

“In linguistics, a mass noun (also uncountable noun or non-count noun) is a common noun that presents entities as an unbounded mass.”

An unbounded mass. Think about that. Think about all the info on the internet. Doesn’t it feel like “an unbounded mass” to you?

(ok grammarians, you can let out that breath. wasn’t too bad, was it?)

See what I mean? Which way will this go? Will data be accepted as a mass noun in the general culture? Or will everyday speakers be exposed to the word in its plural form so much that the phrase “the data are everywhere” sounds right to them?

Let me know what you think in the comments. Your data is/are important to me.

-Christine Cavalier, PurpleCar

Tags: cultural changes, data, data are, data is, mass noun, Media, proper english, rice, usage, water, what is correct, which is proper

Today I sparked a whole conversation in Twitter about the term “social media.” Here is the edited (for ease of reading) conversation. Weigh in with your own opinions in the comments (or tweet me at http://twitter.com/purplecar).

My comments are in bold.
++++++++++++++++++

PurpleCar: Getting a little sick of the term “social media.” Networks are social by definition. All recorded communication is media. It’s antiquated.

mikeyil: agreed

greendeeds: agree with you. The term “social media” is just so generic.

charleshope “social media” is a dumb term anyway.

PurpleCar: @charleshope agreed.

mleis: It’s the only term society could agree upon to describe making the adjustment to ubiquitous computing. Is what it is. Cliches are good. They hurt but they’re good. We all know what they mean.

PurpleCar: The time for calling the phone system “Ma Bell” is over. The time for calling communication online “social media” is over too. @mleis

PurpleCar: RT @deanwhitbread: calling it “social media” is like calling the telephone the “telephonic interpersonal talking machine”

potsie: Shall we re-introduce consumer generated media?

PurpleCar: @potsie I don’t see why, in general conversation, we need to identify who made the media. Unless it’s relevant, we don’t need to categorize.

potsie: It all depends on the audience. Some clients are still comfortable/think about traditional and social media separately.

PurpleCar: @potsie I say “paper copy” or “print book” – I make distinctions about the tech, not the product.

romez: How do you feel about emerging communication technologies being referred to as “New Media” ?

PurpleCar: “New Media” is a stupid term, too. New tech is fine. What it does isn’t relevant. It’s new tech or it’s old tech (like the wheel). @romez

MattTGrant: I absolutely agree re: “Social Media” – name me a medium that isn’t social? it’s like saying “social language.”  sometimes I will say “emerging media” instead of “social” – at least it gets at the temporary novelty of the new.

PurpleCar: A Medium is something through or by which something is accomplished, conveyed, or carried on (m-w.com) (inherent social quality). but that’s my point. It’s emerging tech, delivering human communication. I say we just call it media and point out the tech diff

MattTGrant: The question is are “social media” essentially different from traditional media? A wiki is really different from a newspaper. The difference is the “two-way-ness” – I can edit a wiki – I can’t edit the newspaper – I can tag on Flickr, I can’t on TV (yet)

PurpleCar: @MattTGrant That is amateur vs. professional media. Sponsored vs. volunteer. That is where the difference lives.

BigBossBgilbert: “New media” (to me) describes new forms of media delivery (podcasts, for instance). Not sure what you mean.

PurpleCar: Media hasn’t changed. Delivery systems and participants have changed. Media hasn’t changed. “New media” makes no sense. @BigBossBgilbert

BigBossBgilbert: I think it’s also a question of the way news is being handled. There’s big difference between online reporting and print.

PurpleCar: @BigBossBgilbert How is there any difference between online reporting and print? There’s just a diff b/w amateur and professional reporting. Even with the iPad that will be able to have inline video with print, that is still just regular old media on a new device. I say “tweet” when I use Twitter, “update” for other services, “video” for YouTube. I don’t say “I put some social media up on YouTube.”

hchybinski: LOL thank heavens you don’t say that – because it sounds dumb! LOL

PurpleCar: @hchybinski Yes it’s all media. To call it “social media” is redundant AND too general of a term. Trying to think of other redundant terms…

BigBossBgilbert: That sounds like the opinion of someone who’s never written for both. There’s an enormous difference.

PurpleCar: @BigBossBgilbert If you run a search on my name, you’ll see I’ve written for both. Journalism is good or bad. Has nothing to do with tech.

BigBossBgilbert: I’m not talking about the thoroughness of reporting, I’m talking about the difference between online and print delivery mediums. The most cursory, basic example would be the concept of a “deadline”

PurpleCar: @BigBossBgilbert What makes you think online reporting doesn’t have deadlines? I’m really confused at what you are saying. I write for some online pubs and I can tell you, there are deadlines. I’m saying “social media” as a term is obsolete. Online or off. Good or bad. New tech or old tech. It’s all “social media.”

BigBossBgilbert: Agreed, but you’re painting with really broad strokes here. Let’s take that all the way out and say that any form of media that exists where you can interact with others is “social media.” And no, “deadlines” as a concept online are obsolete. The internet simply exists, there is no printing cutoff. Which is to say that stories are ongoing. Updates are constant. That changes reporting in a fundamental way.

PurpleCar: @BigBossBgilbert stories were always constant. Their ongoing quality was just ignored by the writers after the initial soundbite/story.

BigBossBgilbert: But the medium itself changes how easy it is to update that. The difference between updating an existing story online and doing so the next day in print is ENORMOUS. Also, the direct interaction between writer and reader is far more apparent online.

PurpleCar: @BigBossBgilbert but listen to what you are saying. Communication has increased. Info flows more. It’s all just media. More of it, but same.

BigBossBgilbert: Sure, but there’s no harm in specializing your reporting based on the medium. In fact, it’s greatly beneficial to your reporting.

PurpleCar: @BigBossBgilbert That means our habits are changing. It doesn’t mean someone has invented a new medium, say, like info exchange via DNA. You would be forming your reporting around the tech and the environment, much like writing for NYT vs. small town rag. I hear what you’re saying but you sound like the rest of the old newspaper guys who really want to believe its “new” media.

PurpleCar: Anyway, I’m just saying “new media” should be “new tech” and “social media” should just be “media” or specific terms like “tweet” or “video”

BigBossBgilbert: You’re really nitpicking here. And yes, “new media” does mean “new medium.” It’s fair to call online-based news a “new medium”

PurpleCar: @BigBossBgilbert In a few years, the terms will fade and blend in, when people assume it’s online & paper is more rare. I’m an early adopter

BigBossBgilbert: Agreed! But it’s ridiculous to not parse the two now as they’re still pretty separate.

JustinKownacki: “New” always disproves itself over time. We need to subdivide the media, the tech & the distribution. No “new” required.

PurpleCar: @JustinKownacki exactly. “new” will fade, as will “social.” We need to use more specific terms for which media. NYT article. Blog post. Wiki

ericsmithrocks: but… @bigbossbgilbert is a full-time blogger for @joystiq, not an old-timey newspaper guy. Though his cap is very Newsies-ish.

PurpleCar: @ericsmithrocks yes, I know. I said he sounded like one. I’m just annoyed with the term. It hinders communication and is useless.

JustinKownacki: This is the danger of hastily-applied signifiers creating information muddles down the line. “Podcast,” anyone?

PurpleCar: @JustinKownacki agreed.

PurpleCar: Most people should be using the term “networking” or “networks” when they say “social media.” Making a Facebook fan page is networking.

JustinKownacki: The lack of demarcation between “social media” and “social marketing” also makes me apoplectic. But that’s a different rant.

PurpleCar: @JustinKownacki YES! Or MARKETING. Thank you! Calling media “social” when you really mean “marketing” is misleading and slimy.

PurpleCar: Maybe I can get @chrisbrogan to stop using the term “social media” and just use the specific terms like marketing, networking, online, etc.

PurpleCar: This article uses the term “engagement ads” — see, that is way more accurate and truthful than “social media” http://is.gd/7e2vh

Gruven_Reuven: Might be old school now, But I still prefer Howard Rheingold’s (@hrheingold) term “Virtual Community.” You should read his book “Virtual Communities”. I highly recommend it. The virtual circles we create are mini communities.

PurpleCar: @Gruven_Reuven Yeah, I don’t know how much “community” is a falsehood when one talks about online or virtual networks. Not sure on that one.

Gruven_Reuven:  depends on the community. I’m still a part of a close knit mailing list community that’s been around since 1991

PurpleCar: @Gruven_Reuven The jury is still out on that for me. The whole perceived intimacy trap with online relationships can’t be ignored

georgedearing: liking @PurpleCar’s stream today

danieljohnsonjr: Catching up with @PurpleCar’s updates today. Wise she is, yes.

PurpleCar: @danieljohnsonjr @GeorgeDearing thanks, guys. I rant, therefore I am. It’s anti-social media.

richpalmer: @PurpleCar That’s why we follow you! It is nicely antithetical.

georgedearing: @PurpleCar you could be the voice behind my new venture @shitsocialmarketerssay / that says a lot..in a good way..really

+++++++++++++++++++++

Today I will change the name of 2 of the subcategories on this blog: Social Media and Social Media Gems to Media and Gems. I’ll think of more descriptive titles later.

This was a lot of fun. Thanks to everyone for weighing in. What do you think about the term “social media?” Are there comments in the Twitter stream above that I haven’t addressed or missed? Let’s continue this conversation in the comments.

-Christine Cavalier, PurpleCar

Tags: emerging, generic, meaningless, Media, Rhythm Ticks, social web, terminology, terms, Twitter conversation, useless

Increasingly, my group of early adopters and the public at large are finding the need to further define and categorize the general term ‘media’ in order to communicate effectively.  For example, many of us are familiar with the term “traditional media” and know what that means.  We’ve heard the term “citizen journalism” and somehow know that this is traditional media made by a non-professional person.  But these two terms aren’t enough to describe the different types of media that are emerging.  We need more detailed terminology.

Here are some of my ‘in-progress’ definitions of different types of media to help define our growing world.

Basic Terms:

Media: any form of communication: speech, video, audio, pictures, art, written words, animation, webcast, etc.

Content: any piece of consumable media posted on the internet.  Used in reference to one instance or the whole of a person’s or group’s work.  E.g. “I read her blog.  I really like her content.”

Content generation: the act of making consumable communication for the web.  Eventually this term will be generalized to mean the act of making any media.

Content generator: Any person who makes media, but currently it refers almost exclusively to blogging and videoblogging people.

Consumer: Any person who reads or watches media on the internet or off-line.

Media snacker: colloquial term (sometimes derrogative) for people who visit many media sites to read or watch small amounts of media quickly.  E.g., clicking on a website and reading only headlines or post titles, then moving on to another site to do the same.

Various Types of Media:
Traditional media: (also known as Mainstream Media, initialed as MSM): the content that comes from recognized news sources like newspapers, TV news channels, etc.  Traditional media is generated by large or small organizations that hire professional journalists and video crew staff to generate content.  That content is then mass-distributed on a regularly timed schedule.

Citizen media: media that serves a political or journalistic purpose.  Citizen media may be the product of citizen journalism.  Usually produced and distributed on the internet on no particular timed schedule. [Citizen journalism: when “regular” people (i.e. unpaid or untrained journalists) report on current events.  The citizen journalism is the investigative action, the citizen media is the content generated when the investigative action is finished.]

Public media: this is media that the general population generates.  Public media doesn’t serve a specific purpose like citizen media.  Public media can be consumed and/or interacted with by masses of people.  This can also be called “Common Media.”  E.g., YouTube.

Private Media: public media that has been hidden from public view.  E.g., private sets on Flickr.

Corporate media: any media that is made for or used solely by a business.  E.g., training videos.

Ad media: any advertising media, including viral media.

Viral media: media that appears public (that may be public or corporate media) that gathers the attention of many consumers.  Media usually isn’t considered ‘viral’ unless it has garnered attention internationally and has been seen by hundreds of thousands of consumers.

Technology

Social media: This is a confusing term.  Social media isn’t media as defined above and should not be listed under the category of “Various Types of Media.”   Social media isn’t media, it is technology.  Social media refers to an ever-growing set of communication tools and website and mobile applications on that focus on sharing public media and connecting people who share a common interest in that public media.

Social site: a website that concentrates on forging connections between people.  A place where people can share media.  E.g. Myspace, Facebook.

Live stream: a technology that allows a person to generate content and post it practically simultaneously on the internet.

As I said, this is a list in progress.  Let me know what you think.  If you know of a phenomenon that has yet to be defined, please comment and we will think up something together.  If you take issue with my definitions or want to tweak them, please comment.  This is a collaborative effort from this point forward.  Thanks!

Tags: definition, Media, social, technology, terms

11 QUESTIONS FOR MEDIA MAVENS ABOUT READING

Due to the little tiny bit of controversy in my “riding fences” post, I asked a few media mavens to answer a few quick questions about their reading habits and how they see themselves as readers.

A big thank you from me goes out to the participants from our small social media circle. Still waiting to hear back from iJustine, but here are the participants in this impromptu study: DYKC, CC Chapman, Annie Boccio, Julia Roy, Eric Rice, Amanda Gravel, Chris Brogan, and Jeff Pulver.
I am breaking the results up across several posts, in the interest of spacing.

Please leave a comment with your answers/thoughts; I’ve posted the questions below to copy and paste. Thanks, and enjoy!

1. In one (can be hyphenated!) word, how would you describe your career, culture or identity. E.g., “I am a(n) ________.”
2. Do you think this identity has been represented well in art (including fiction, film, poetry)?
3. What do you typically do on long trips (plane, train, auto) for entertainment?
4. What traditional paper & print media, if any, do you read on a regular basis?
5. What is the last fiction novel or short story you remember reading? When was this?
6. What is your preferred genre for fiction and/or non-fiction?
7. Would you rather read a novel or listen to it?
8. Approximately how many page books do you buy in a year for yourself or other adults?
9. Please pick up the book nearest to you now. What are the first and last words? What is the title?
10. You’ve just been given $300 gift card to Borders right before a 3-week trip to an ‘off the grid’ island. What do you buy?
11. What connections, if any, do you see between social media and traditional fiction?

1. In one (can be hyphenated!) word, how would you describe your career, culture or identity. E.g., “I am [a(n)] ________.”
DYKC: Black.
CC_CHAPMAN: Helper
2. Do you think this identity has been represented well in art (including fiction, film, poetry)?
DYKC: Not comprehensively enough.
CC_CHAPMAN: Sure, we see it over and over again in the person that is friendly and helpful to those around them. Sometimes to the point of their own self sacrifice.
3. What do you typically do on long trips (plane, train, auto) for entertainment?
DYKC: Watch the scenery while listening to music.
CC_CHAPMAN: My iPod is always synched up with the latest music and podcasts. I also always pick up a couple of magazines and bring a book with me. Almost always fiction if it is a long ride or else I’ll never get lost in it.
4. What traditional paper & print media, if any, do you read on a regular basis?
DYKC: Good Magazine, Harpers, Black Enterprise, XXL, GQ
CC_CHAPMAN: Sunday Boston Globe, Rolling Stone, Wired, Fast Company, Mens Health
5. What is the last fiction novel or short story you remember reading? When was this?
DYKC: Halting State, by Charlie Stross — last week.
CC_CHAPMAN: I read the last Harry Potter book as soon as it came out.
6. What is your preferred genre for fiction and/or non-fiction?
DYKC: Cyberpunk, or hacker related.
CC_CHAPMAN: If I’m reading non-fiction is is most likely a business book of some sort. On the fiction side I really read anything. Grew up reading tons of fantasy novels and they are still my favorite. I like to try out new genres based on great writers telling interesting and new stories. I’m a big fan of deep character development rather then rapid plot.
7. Would you rather read a novel or listen to it?
DYKC: I’d prefer to read it.
CC_CHAPMAN: ALWAYS read it over listen. I’ve never been audio book guy. I also can’t see me ever getting a Kindle or anything similar. I like the tactile feel of holding a book, flipping the pages. I may be totally digital in a lot of areas of my life but reading it not one of them.
8. Approximately how many page books do you buy in a year for yourself or other adults?
DYKC: Between 15 and 30, not including hardbound/softbounds graphic novels (i.e. Comic compilations).
CC_CHAPMAN: Wow, I have no idea. I buy lots of books. A good 10-20 a year easily and I love to give books as gifts to people because to do it right really shows you know that person.
9. Please pick up the book nearest to you now. What are the first and last words? What is the title?
DYKC: Laugh, Washington. Title, Laugh if You Like, Ain’t a Damn Thing Funny: The Life and Story of Ralph Waldo “Petey” Geene
CC_CHAPMAN: The, Chase. Title = Rules of the Red Rubber Ball
10. You’ve just been given $300 gift card to Borders right before a 3-week trip to an ‘off the grid’ island. What do you buy?
DYKC: Every book by William Gibson, Neil Stepenson, Bruce Sterling, and Toure’.
CC_CHAPMAN: I’d certainly get something philisophical and mind provoking to get my brain going. I always love doing that if I’m going on a back country trip of any sort because it gives your mind something to chew on during all the quality idle time. I’d also pick up some other travel adventure books since I find there is nothing better then reading about someone elses trip while I’m on one myself. I’d also probably grab a couple of the latest hot books since I hardly ever read these and it would be the perfect time to catch up on what everyone else is raving about. I also LOVE the bargin tables at any bookstore so I’m sure I’d spend every last time grabbing a couple of these gems.
11. What connections, if any, do you see between social media and traditional fiction?
DYKC: Social media is a lot like fiction, in that you are able to “read” everyones story (as presented) online. The trick, is to discern the real narrative (is it true, is it embellished, pure fiction? etc).
CC_CHAPMAN: Aren’t we all sort of making it up as we go along in both? *laugh* The key to good fiction is characters you can connect with and the telling of a good story. It could be argued that this is the same for social media. A lot of the people we connect with we have never met in the flesh so we only have their words (and photos, voice and video in some cases) to connect with them.

Tags: Books, CC Chapman, Clarence, DYKC, Interview, Media, Readin'