It is so easy to recognize a newspaper, a television or a radio. You have grown up with them. So, you can recognise them as Traditional Media.
But what about Social Media? How many of us can define Social Media or recognise its different forms?
The name that comes to our mind when we talk of Social Media is Facebook. Some will add Twitter, and some YouTube. These are the most recognisable “faces” of Social Media.
But what is Social media and how is it different to Traditional Media?
You get a better idea of Social Media if you break the term into its two components: social and media. The ‘social’ part comes from people interacting with each other. And the ‘media’ part comes from the platforms that make these interactions possible.
These platforms share some common characteristics, based on which they can be grouped in six clear categories.
(Read Social Media can be organized in 6 clear categories)
Traditional Media vs Social Media
# Difference 1
Creation and dissemination of content: Traditional Media is based on the principle of one-to-many. An Editor decides what is news; which news reports should be published in the day’s newspaper or which reports should be telecast in the next bulletin. The news consumers, that is the readers and viewers, have no role to play in the creation or dissemination of content.
Social Media, in contrast, is a media that works on the principle of many-to-many. Any individual can create and share content. This makes the content creation process more democratic.
# Difference 2
Focus or purpose: Social Media, as the name suggests, is a media where people come to interact with friends, relatives, acquaintances etc. It need not be news-based. In fact, a very small part of the Social Media universe is devoted to creation or dissemination of news.
The Traditional Media is primarily a news media. It has traditionally performed the function of gathering and disseminating news, and continues to do so.
That is why the two media are like chalk and cheese.
(Read: 9 social media networks that everyone must know)
# Difference 3
Interactivity: Social Media allows users to comment on content created by their friends, relatives or peer group. There is no Big Brother blue pencilling comments. All comments are in real time. They enrich published content, and empower people to share views.
The Traditional Media is tightly patrolled. All communication is one-way: from the editor to the readers. The most that a reader can hope is to get a letter published in the Letters column of the newspaper. There is, of course, no guarantee as to how much of the letter will be edited before it is published. This interactivity is even more limited in the case of television.
# Difference 4
Convergence: Social Media is a truly convergent media. You can publish content as text, audio, video, graphics or photographs on Social Media sites.
The Traditional Media can work in only one format – either as print or as radio or as television. There is no convergence in the Traditional Media space.
# Difference 5
Speed: Social Media is instant. Reports published on Social Media sites can be accessed instantly.
Traditional Media takes time to disseminate information. In the case of newspapers, this is limited to once a day; television or radio can update reports more frequently. But they cannot match the speed of Social Media unless they go live.
# Difference 6
Cost of creation: It costs a small fortune to set up a newspaper, radio or television station. Few individuals can therefore hope to become publishers.
Social Media platforms allow free posting of content. Anyone can therefore become a publisher or broadcaster.
# Difference 7
Reach and numbers: The reach of Social Media is staggering. It connects billions of individuals across the globe.
In contrast, the reach of traditional media is limited to the number of readers or viewers that individual newspapers or channels may have.
Differences between Traditional Media and Social Media
(Note: If you know more differences, please add them in the Comments section.)
Just some points of disagreement on this as follows:
On difference 3 (Interactivity), most social media does employ a form a big brother in some form of AI reviewing and restricting comments. They now also employ human “Fact-Checkers” that can remove a comment after it has been posted (https://www.wsj.com/articles/in-facebooks-effort-to-fight-fake-news-human-fact-checkers-play-a-supporting-role-1539856800).
And similar to an editor or a newspaper not publishing your letter because he/she doesn’t like the content, social media now bans some users strictly because they don’t like the content the user is sharing (https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/06/twitter-permanently-bans-alex-jones-and-infowars-accounts.html).
Unfortunately, big brother is alive and well. They call it “fake news” instead of thoughtcrime but they are still deciding what we can read & see.
On difference 7 (Reach and numbers), it also isn’t really true. There may be billions of users on the internet but posting a message on social media only has the potential to reach them. Similarly, putting a tv show out on the airwaves has the potential to reach billions as well (there are well over a billion tv’s in the world).
In reality, a social media post or a tweet is probably actually being viewed by fewer people than many tv shows. The most popular users of twitter have just over 100 million and most of those are not actively viewing every tweet the user sends so each tweet is probably viewed by significantly fewer viewers than that (https://friendorfollow.com/twitter/most-followers/). The most watched tv shows are also viewed by over 100 million (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_watched_television_broadcasts_in_the_United_States) but most of those viewers actually are watching the content so tv still has a real advantage over social media for reach.
Similar on difference 5 (Speed), you may be able to post something on social media immediately but very few people are seeing it as soon as you post it whereas live tv is going to have a much bigger audience who is actually viewing the content at the time it is being aired so in some instances tv is more instantaneous and in most cases, it is about the same. For both, the content is made earlier and viewed whenever it is convenient for the viewer. When some big news event is happening (think 9/11), the tv & radio were generally better at being more instantaneous (certainly than social media but even than the internet in general).
One of the biggest differences that you didn’t mention (perhaps because it might put a negative spin on social media?) is the trustworthiness of the information on traditional media vs social media. Since anybody can post on social media (well almost anybody since they do ban people), you can’t trust the information unless you have experience with the poster. In the traditional media, the news is very well vetted & while it may be given with some sort of bias (think MSNBC vs Fox News) the basic facts are usually true (e.g. almost no traditional media reported incorrectly on the Obama birther conspiracy).
Anyway, just thought I’d give some feedback on your article.