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 chat groups, so it is closer to a social network than social media.
You are funny. That article links directly to what media typically refers to, i.e. “mass media”.
Ask any typical person around you what they understand if you talk about “the media”, and they will confirm that this indeed refers to what I am talking about.
The “social” qualifier is a direct reference to how normal media is a one way street and how publishing is only open to a selected few and that is what sets “social media” apart from it.
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 chat groups, so it is closer to a social network than social media.
No, once again you’re inventing definitions, please have a read
You are funny. That article links directly to what media typically refers to, i.e. “mass media”.
Ask any typical person around you what they understand if you talk about “the media”, and they will confirm that this indeed refers to what I am talking about.
The “social” qualifier is a direct reference to how normal media is a one way street and how publishing is only open to a selected few and that is what sets “social media” apart from it.