What Is Conversational Media?

Media doesn't have to be a spectator sport.

Conversational media is both monumental and mundane. Right now I like to think of it as "hiding in plain sight" on the media landscape. People see it and accept it, but they don't necessary grasp its significance and vast potential.

This new weblog will focus on the emerging field of conversational media: where it comes from, how people are using it, and what it can do.

To get things started, here are some thoughts on what I understand so far about conversational media...

ON THE MUNDANE SIDE...

Conversational media are tools and channels which allow people to participate in a public or group conversation. That is, it's a kind of "mass media" (even if only on a small scale) where members of the "audience" can speak up and be heard/seen directly. They help create the content -- and indeed, their participation is usually what makes the content worthwhile.

Conversational media includes everything from call-in talk shows and teleconferences to e-mail lists, weblogs, online forums, and more.

This is different from private conversation because the tools and channels of conversational media inherently allow more than two people to participate in the conversation. Also, it's different from a simple group conversation or meeting because the participants need not be in the same physical space.

Call-in radio shows are conversational media (at least in a limited way) because anyone who's listening live has at least a chance of participating regardless of location. In contrast, "The Oprah Winfrey show" is not conversational media because only the people in the TV studio get to participate directly in the conversational portion of the show. Viewers at home can only watch, and at best attempt private responses later by phone or e-mail.

ON THE MONUMENTAL SIDE...

Conversational media can change the balance of power in just about any situation where power applies -- politics, business, health, education, community, culture, spirituality, sports, human rights, civil rights...  you name it.

When the balance of power changes, all kinds of decisions and actions change. This affects everything from the brand of oatmeal you buy, to the government you elect, to the calamities you work to prevent. These changes can happen locally, globally, or among individuals with any shared interests.

Think about it: Power is often expressed as: "Who gets to have a say."

...That's literally quite a telling phrase. If your voice cannot be heard, then you have zero chance of expressing your will or influencing matters which concern or affect you. Your personal power, or the power of any community you represent or care about, is thus severely limited.

In contrast, even if you or your community is vastly outgunned (either metaphorically or literally), simply speaking up and engaging others in conversation can consolidate resources and create surprising leverage.

Even more importantly, when the predominant media tools and channels allow only (or mostly) one-way communication, two kinds of weird and often destructive problems happen routinely:

• Tunnel vision: Entire issues, dynamics, and even nations can become virtually invisible to the "public eye." We surrender or discount our ability to gauge what really matters.
• Distorted mirror: Where one-way media predominates, it gets easier to believe that we are what the media say we are. That is, we surrender or discount our ability to observe, define, and discuss ourselves -- and each other.

WHY CONVERSATIONAL AND ONE-WAY MEDIA NEED EACH OTHER

Obviously, I like conversational media. I think it has a lot of potential, which is why I started a weblog specifically to explore this field. However, I don't think it's inherently superior to one-way media.

In fact, I think that a healthy society needs both kinds of media. Each person should be able to choose the balance of media types to meet her own needs and tastes. This is, of course, only possible if both kinds of media are easily available.

In the past, our access to viable conversational media was limited because it's more of a technical and logistical challenge. Perhaps more importantly, it's simply a more complex concept, at least in the context of mass communication.

The generations who have grown up inundated with one-way mass media find it difficult to think in terms of conversational media. This is, I believe, the core reason why established news and media organizations are generally are having a hard time figuring out how to include the internet in their business models.

Indeed, people who are entrenched in one-way media often view conversational media as a threatening source of chaos or competition.

What I hope to demonstrate, through the conversation in this weblog and elsewhere, is how conversational media can expand and enrich connections that often begin in one-way media. It also can provide a vital "feedback loop" that keeps one-way media from becoming an echo chamber. Most importantly, it can aid society, business, civic life, and any collective human endeavor by giving people a daily opportunity to be involved, rather than aloof.

WHAT DO YOU THINK?

...Those are my initial thoughts on this subject. I'm sure my thinking will evolve over time, especially as I talk things over with you.

What do you think? Where would you like to take this discussion? Comment below!

• Distorted mirror: When we listen to one-way media more than we tother, we begin to believe that we are, collectively or individually, what the media says we are through the one-way media. We surrender or discount our ability to observe, define, and discuss ourselves (and each other) first-hand.

Comments

[Christian Spannagel]

Hi Amy!

I totally agree with you that we need both types of media, one that is mainly used to present information, and one that allows for discussion. It's similar to school lessons where students should read a text first (inform) and talk about the text afterwards (discuss).

Discussing without being informed does not work. So, let's use the one-way media to get information, and let's discuss it afterwards to validate the information.

[Amy Gahran]

Thanks, Christian.

You make a good point. Yes, there are many reasons why one-way and conversational media are complementary.

Personally, though, I think that both types of media can contribute differently to both information-dissemination and discussion.

For instance, one mainstay of one-way media is the commentary piece, which is often about discussion. Likewise with interview and analysis pieces. Even documentary films and videos often showcase discussion. However, the audience cannot readily participate in that discussion.

Similarly, I've personally found conversational media (especially online forums and e-mail lists) to be great first sources of information. If an issue is going to get big, often I'll hear rumblings about it in online discussions long before traditional one-way media pick up on it. This is mainly because conversational media is increasingly a place where experts and primary sources first raise issues.

So I'd say the distinction you offered is often, but not always, true. But that's just my opinion.

Thanks for being the first to join this conversation! And Happy New Year!

- Amy Gahran

[Christian Spannagel]

Ok, you're right. It's not 100% information on one side and 100% discussion on the other side. But I would say, the main aspect of one-way media is information, and the main aspect of conversational media is discussion.

[Amy Gahran]

Yep, I agree with you: one-way media is *mainly* used to publish or disseminate information, while true discussion is more common in conversational media.

- Amy Gahran

[David Burn]

Interesting. Where'd you pick up the term Conversational Media? I've been using it for a couple years now, but I didn't know it had caught on. I'm glad it has.

[Zachary Richards]

When I was growing up only neurosurgeons and drug dealers needed cell phones. Now everyone is important. Everyone has something to say.

Conversational media is a useful description of this modern communications landscape. It's the day of a thousand songs in your Nikes that your son mixed especially for you, tweenagers ability to manipulate stock prices through blogging, colleagues chiming in from the bedside on mobile devices, pictures of birth messaged to everyone on your cell phone contact list the second the baby breathes.

The challenge now is deciphering meaning from the increased amount of messages. Just because I can engage in conversational media, doesn't mean I should. Sometimes I regret what I say and I see the depravity in others. Sometimes the discussion isn't furthered.

Short of being a complete ludite, I advocate serious reflection on what it means to communicate this way. Our ability to learn from each other is awesome. But we are still figuring out the best way to harness this power. Let’s not talk for the sake of hearing ourselves but toward a productive end.