The blogosphere is currently up in arms over a recent Time article where they state that the virtual world of Second Life is one of the world's worst websites. Linden Lab's Torley Linden responded in the company's official blog stating: "saying “Second Life is a website” is as accurate as saying “This bowl of fruit is a banana” or “The color red is the rainbow”."
The article's dozens of other inaccuracies aside, this is a good example of something that is becoming more and more apparent: old media outlets are becoming more anachronistic by the day. A measurement of worth according to the unpublished criteria of an anonymous writer for a corporate held publication isn't worth the pixels it darkens on your screen.
Nick and I are coming to the realization that new media demands more of its sources simply because the public demands more of the new media. Articles like this one from Time about something the writer clearly knows nothing about can only be one of two things: a clever ruse to get people to go to the site, or an act of confusion and anger at a world that has passed them by.
Great category, by the way. Here's our take on it:
http://www.centric.com/thought/2007/07/12/flamethrower-of-truth-ii-secon...
Oh, and for the Time newbies who think virtual worlds will never amount to much, here's a take on the whole Intartube thing, circa 1994. Certainly looks hilarious today, doesn't it?
http://www.centric.com/thought/2007/07/12/glimpse-of-the-future-1994/
By the way, that's what this video will look like in, oh, say, 6 years or so:
http://www.ugs.com/secondLife/
The change that is coming will NOT be small. Nor will it be "pathetic," "childish," or any other disparaging adjectives the old media can throw at it.
http://www.centric.com/thought/2007/07/11/crumbs-on-the-hors-douevre-tra...
Now, I'm sorry, I have to go back to the excellent Rideau viognier I was enjoying.
Time also named Odeo, forgotten older sibling of Twitter, as one of the 50 Best Sites. While Odeo was a slick website that made podcasts more accessible, even its founders knew it had a limited future. That Time would cheer a site most people have forgotten definitely reinforces how out of touch the mainstream media is.
SL is a platform,
I think the problem is that people expect it to be one thing. So far every news article has it mostly wrong. Most negative comments and articles I read about SL are because the writer hasn't understood one thing. Second Life is a platform. It's not just a game, but it can be. It's not an alternate life, unless you want it to be. You could make money there, but you don't have to work there. You can meet new people, meet people you know, or wander by yourself. YOU CAN DO WHAT YOU WANT!
That's the great thing about SL and a few of the other virtual worlds, and I think that's why some people in the media and some discussions I've seen in comments to articles. The ones that don't get it are waiting for someone to tell them what to do in the metaverse instead of deciding what they want to do.