Josh Bernoff has some interesting thoughts on the user of terms like user, luser and people to describe 'who' umm...uses technology. In a post entitled: I'm sick of users, Josh asserts:
We know users are important now. Disappoint them and you lose. So why do we still have to call them "users," which puts the emphasis on the technology they are using?
Yes, I know "users are people, too." But you know what? All people are users now! (With nearly 80% Net penetration in the US this is pretty close to true.) Users put up with computers. People just do stuff.
Nobody talks about users of dishwashers, or users of retail stores, or users of telephones. So why are we talking about "users" of computers, browsers, and software?
Is Josh right? According to his next post: Users fight back, plenty of people agree. Well, not plenty but a few influentials. Like Nick Bradbury, who agrees the term 'user' seems wrong but has settled for 'customer' on the grounds they have clout. Sorry Josh but I can't find the BBC link reference. Commenters seemed divided but one named Alfred made what I think is an interesting point:
The Internet is a complex medium hence "users" seems to be the best way to describe the people who are "using' the Internet. Some of us might not like the term but can somebody suggests a better term that can capture all aspects of the Internet? I don't think terms like owners, consumers, people, human beings, carbon based life form are any better.
This is about the use of language. It's an important topic at a time when many people are splashing around the terms 'social media' and 'social computing' without really thinking what they might imply to the uninitiated. I've written about this at ZDNet in the context of enterprise computing, largely because I believe the language being sprayed around right now is not contextually helpful to decision takers.
Even less helpful is the arbitrary attachment of terms upon which few seem to agree. If we think of 'computing' in its generic sense then 'user' is a wholly appropriate term upon which there need not be dissent. We can easily embrace the many devices which are part of the overall computing network that are non-human without fear of contradiction. In a world where business drives process automation, it is hard to imagine any other term making sense. Do we really need to make that distinction or are we implying that be reducing the human element we are baking in failure?
Josh argues that 'user' is something that has design connotations stemming from its use (sic) by developers and that in turn places 'us' as being at the mercy of machines. I can't see how he makes the jump except to locate social media as a human endeavour. Even then I'm not convinced the average person gives a damn. I certainly don't see Josh's assertion in the fresh, vibrant and user/people friendly designs I observe in much of the new software that is available today. And just to be clear: I don't see any apps that ask me for a 'people' name. They all want a 'username.'
In a recent engagement, we were faced with pricing for different types of user/people. We came up with different classes we're calling Contributors and Consumers. In doing so we're describing the function each fulfills. We're hoping that the connotations implied by each (givers and takers) will encourage at least some consumers to become contributors. It's a ploy to assist in deeper adoption but not one we believe is overtly offensive. I anticipate some debate on this important point.
I would prefer the term Co-Creator to Contributor because it infers a stronger sense of status and community belonging that can be usefully contrasted and which more closely fits how I see these users/people using the technology. Sure, I'm manipulating the use of language to finesse a situation. But I am doing so in a way that I hope reflects a genuine reality.
I'm sure there will be plenty who disagree but if you can come up with something better then I'd be delighted to hear. There's a lot we're only just starting to learn. Now is the time to be making mistakes. And yes - language in incredibly important.
Technorati Tags: language
Sponsored By: FreeAgent Central - complete money management for UK freelancers
Innovationlink to original post