In a way, this is kind of a follow up to my last post. 

Alexander Van Elsas makes a what is sadly a very ironic post in regards to the noise being generated by the Web 2.0 world and how he can't keep up with it.  What makes it ironic is that the post itself is a rambling 1,550 words (a little over 2.5 pages). 

Now, before I get to my point I've paraphrased his post below.  I encourage you to read the paraphrased version, and then go and read the original.  What you'll find is that the insight shared is exactly the same.  Here's the (paraphrased) quote...

Social media allow us to interact over content, anywhere, anytime. And we love it. Interaction is what makes web 2.0 valuable. While typical users are just catching on to this trend early adopters often use 5-25 of these web 2.0 services.

One such service, FriendFeed, is becoming a favorite among early adopters. It allows users to share content via RSS feeds and then allows those users to comment on each item. Friendfeed then attempts to (re-)orgainze that content to allow you to find interesting items from those you follow.

While I can see why people enjoy FriendFeed for it’s engagement, better discussions and better content I find the discussion tends to stray (especially when people who haven’t read the original item get involved). There are other services that allow you to share all kinds of things, from Travel Plans to Multimedia, but while that’s addictive it can also be overwhelming. I’m not alone in this, search for “noise” or “echo” on Friendfeed and you’ll find many people dealing with the same problem.

As a side step this overwhelming amount of content makes it really hard for good content to stand out which leads blogs to post sensationalist stories (with accompanying headlines) in an attempt to get attention. This is where Social Media is quickly hitting our human limitations in that there is only so much content we can swallow.

One of the main weaknesses of most aggregators in my opinion is that there is too much unintentional sharing. We don’t just share things we find really important, we share anything. And worse, we don’t share by sending each other something specific (intentionally), but we share RSS feeds making the act of sharing unintentional (or maybe unconscious). As a result the stuff I might be really interested in gets buried under a whole lot of unintentional, unfocused and mostly uninteresting content. This exact same pattern developed in e-mail which started with a few intentional mails directed specifically at individuals and ended up with people CC-ing everyone (which made mail box rules a reality).

We need trust filters, noise detectors, blockers, friend feeds and rankings, all kinds of technical solutions to stop all that useless content obscuring the good stuff from us. But we are ignoring the fact that the underlying principle of sharing is the cause of all this. By using RSS which as a technology is truly great as a sharing mechanism, we also accept that we get endless streams of unintentionally shared content.

1. I see everything as a river of content. It passes by all day long, and whenever i feel like it I dive in. I spent limited time in this social media river and am not concerned what I miss when I get out again. the river doesn’t dry up, there is always something else to be found
2. I try not to share too much, only the things I myself really find valuable (this is always hard to do)
3. I actually read long blog posts and try to provide my thoughts if I feel I can contribute. I haven’t visited sites like TechCrunch in ages. I’m not interested in any post that has a title of “breaking news” as much as the impact it has on me and others. That’s why I follow people like Rolf Skyberg, Steven Hodson, Chris Anderson, Kevin Kelley, Chris Messina, Zephoria, Jonathan Harris and many more like those (sorry guys, can’t fit you all in here).
4. I don’t comment or like endless streams of content (sorry guys). It’s not that I don’t like many things, but I do feel that I need to be reluctant to join in every discussion. I have an opinion about many things, but I’m by no means an expert on them. Instead of adding more noise to the river, I try to interact in those places where I feel I can contribute.
5. I write long blog posts myself. Maybe it ads noise too, but my intention is to contribute where I feel I can. I read great stuff from others, so I feel I need to pay back by presenting my thoughts.
6. I try not to share too much, only the things I myself really find valuable (this is always hard to do)

This is how I deal with my human limitations in social media. How do you deal with it?

I honestly think the above is still overly long but to make the point I had to include every one of his points (even if they seemed unrelated to other points in the piece).  To hammer the point home, here's a graphic to show just how much I managed to cut off his original post. 

My point here is a pretty simple one, the problem with content overload is in large part due to the content creators having no respect for the reader's time.  Be that in the form of making a repetitive comment, tweeting every little whim that enters your head or rambling on for 3 pages when you only have about a page worth of actual thoughts the end result is the same.  People are overwhelmed by the number of words while getting very little actual content. 

Let me be clear, I'm not saying anyone should stop themselves from saying something they need to say.  Just that they should say it in the most concise way possible so that it has a better chance of being read.

Usually I wouldn't bore you with the Ins-and-Outs of my personal blog reading but this is such a good example of how to lose a reader that I just couldn't resist.  For those who don't know, Dan Lyons used to imitate Steve Jobs on the (aptly titled) "Fake Steve Jobs Blog".  He's now struck out on his own with a personal blog under his real name.

A few days ago he commented on the topic of Steve Jobs' health saying...

Best part of Joe Nocera’s article from yesterday’s New York Times (“Apple’s Culture of Secrecy”) was, of course, the quote from Steve Jobs, the one where Nocera picks up the phone and Jobs hits him with this opening line: “This is Steve Jobs. You think I’m an arrogant [expletive] who thinks he’s above the law, and I think you’re a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong.” 

In other words: Classy.

And just the kind of thing you’d expect from the CEO of a large, publicly traded company, right?

The above quoted article got him an ear full from both the Mac faithful and those who thought Jobs' health should remain a private matter.  He obviously took umbrage to that criticism saying...

Also striking in this whole fiasco around Steve’s health is the response from the Apple faithful. Check out the comments on this blog for a representative sample. Criticize the PR operation at Apple, or Dear Leader himself, and the Apple faithful swarm out in droves to call you a traitor or worse. My email inbox has even worse stuff. Or check out blogs like this one which is called “i drank the kool-aid” (ahem) and which now has become devoted to bashing me.

Friends, I’m sorry, but you’re enablers. Steve Jobs behaves like a spoiled child and you not only tolerate it, you defend it. Apple PR is arrogant, rude, and then stumbles trying to handle a textbook PR situation — the kind of situation that occurs pretty regularly in the business world, and the reason that companies have PR departments in the first place — and you defend that too. You refuse to hold Apple to the same standards as every other company.

Since then he's just gone completely off the rails on the topic.  To date, Lyons/FSJ has made 17 posts on the topic and that's over a mere 3 1/2 days.  Worse yet, he insists on posting the same darn joke over, and over, and over, and over and over again.  A joke that was only mildly amusing the first time. 

Basically it goes like this.  Lyons/FSJ says "Guess what, x person just called me.  He said "You think I'm an <insult here> and I think you're a <2nd insult here>, got a minute to chat".  Then he goes on to say 'x' person wanted him to know something but would only tell him off the record.

This is a list of the posts he's made that have essentially been the above joke with different names pasted in...

• Michael Dell calls to non-comment on his own weight loss
• That Chocolate Rain guy just called me
• Kevin Rose calls to non-rebut rumors about Digg and Google acquisition talks
• Sergey Brin calls to non-comment on Cuil
• Woz calls to non-discuss rumors about his personal life
• Now everyone is pulling this crap. Groan.

6 posts that are essentially identical and not that funny to begin with.

This, to me, is the most striking example of "I've had a little success and now I don't believe I can do any wrong"-ism that I've seen in a while.  The truth is 17 posts in the grand scheme of things isn't really THAT big a deal.  Information pollution for sure but not the end of the world. 

The main reason I'm unsubscribing is simply to do my small part not to feed what has obviously become an enormous ego.  Honestly, if getting angry e-mails from Apple fanatics is all it takes to get you riled up than you have way too high an opinion of yourself.