« What Can Social Networks Learn From World of Warcraft?
Twittermeter Graphs Twitter Chatter »

Defining Social Platforms

Posted by Nick O'Neill on January 25th, 2008 3:50 PM

Over the past few months I have been thinking about the distinction between social networks, the social graph and social platforms. While preparing for a presentation the other day I decided that it was time to actually define what social platforms are. In the process of defining “social platforms” I had to first define what social networks are and what the social graph is. There has already been much discussion as to whether or not there should be any distinction between the social graph and social networks.

My assumption is that there is one social graph for each individual and they can be part of multiple social networks. The social graph is the sum total of all our real-world connections and the sociological bonds (or ties). While social networks have a very similar definition the primary distinction is that we can be part of multiple social networks but we each only have one social graph. There are three primary types of social networks:

  1. Those that represent our real-world connections,
  2. Those that represent virtual/fantasized connections, and
  3. Those that represent a mix of virtual/fantasized and real-world connections.

This brings us to social platforms. Social platforms are one step above social networks. Social networks can be both real-world and virtual; our social graph combines all of them. So what is a social platform?

A social platform is an operating system that leverages the power of social connectivity to virally distribute applications.

It’s as simple as that. We can leverage our various social networks or anybody in our social graph to help distribute the applications that we find useful or entertaining. All social platforms must include the following features:

  1. A markup language enables developers to display both personal and social information without accessing the information
  2. An API (application program interface) that provides access to the core elements of the platform (e.g. a cell phone’s phonebook or Facebook profile wall)
  3. A system for defining a user’s connections (bonds or ties)
  4. Privacy settings that enable users to control what information applications have access to

Are there any other components that social platforms must have? Do you think any of the ones I included are not a necessity?

 

Viewing 5 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    i believe there is already an inherent social graph we use everyday: the contact list in our email account.

    Sometimes it updates itself (like in Gmail), it has all our real life contacts, some virtual contacts too, and keeps and archive of all our activities online with, in must cases, direct conections to real life activities; and serves for viral uses too.
    • ^
    • v
    I agree with Sebastian. The distribution of an app is really a side-effect of the most important part of a social platform - that is the ability to interact with my ready-made connections within the app. For example, a stand-alone game is not making use of the social platform until it lets me compare my score with others', or challenge them in some other form. Of couse, using such features implicity distributes the app by making friends aware of it, but that was not the primary aim.

    Furthermore, I think we should really be talking about 'social distribution'. To me (and I accept others have different definitions), viral distribution is when the main function of the app inherently spreads itself - such as a vampire bite on a friend, or Nicknaming someone, each in the form of an invite. An app that just has a separate invite function is leveraging the social graph to spread itself, but I would not call that viral. Just my thoughts!
    • ^
    • v
    Interesting post Nick, but I'd like to suggest that the idea of Social Platforms extends well beyond facilitating the viral distribution of applications. That the current crop of platforms revolves around this does not limit the definition of Social Platforms.

    In my opinion, Social Platforms leverage the power of social connectivity to facilitate social connections (aka the Social Graph), which often entails the point-to-point and viral distribution of things (for the sake of argument, let's call them "Social Things"), such as applications, photos, notes, thoughts, ideas, information, etc. To me, status updates are a great example of a Social Thing that needs a Social Platform to survive and be really valuable.
    • ^
    • v
    Gotta disagree with you Geoff,

    I agree that "Social Graphs" may be a product of Web 2.0 (another crappy buzzword), but it does have a theoretical value. I won't repeat what has already been posted but as social platforms expand beyond social networks and eventually reach the mobile world and potentially the gaming platforms, I would suggest that our "social graphs" will become increasingly relevant.
    • ^
    • v
    I hate social graphs. They make no sense to me. It's more gobbledy gook buzz from 2.0. That being said, a very nice post defining social platforms.

Trackbacks

blog comments powered by Disqus
Interested in advertising on SocialTimes?
Become a sponsor