{"id":1043,"date":"2007-05-04T08:20:22","date_gmt":"2007-05-04T15:20:22","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/artfulmanager\/wp\/2007\/05\/choosing_not_to_be_active\/"},"modified":"2007-05-04T08:20:22","modified_gmt":"2007-05-04T15:20:22","slug":"choosing_not_to_be_active","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/artfulmanager\/main\/choosing_not_to_be_active.php","title":{"rendered":"Choosing not to be active"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>A circuitous route (<a href=\"http:\/\/www.neillarcherroan.com\/blog\/social_technographics.php\">Neill Roan&#8217;s blog<\/a> to <a href=\"http:\/\/kevindaoust.com\/?p=51\">Kevin Daoust<\/a> to <a href=\"http:\/\/www.micropersuasion.com\/2007\/04\/forresters_part.html\">Steve Rubel<\/a> to <a href=\"http:\/\/blogs.forrester.com\/charleneli\/2007\/04\/forresters_new_.html\">Forrester Research&#8217;s weblog<\/a>) led me to Forrester&#8217;s recent report on &#8221;Social Technographics.&#8221; The report explores and categorizes the behavior of individuals on-line, focusing on how they use social technologies (such as weblogs, feeds, tags, social network sites, etc.). The <a href=\"http:\/\/www.forrester.com\/Research\/Document\/Excerpt\/0,7211,42057,00.html\">report<\/a>, itself, comes at a cost ($275). But the public elements of the findings are useful on their own (for more details, see <a href=\"http:\/\/www.micropersuasion.com\/2007\/04\/forresters_part.html\">Steve Rubel&#8217;s entry<\/a>).<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/blogs.forrester.com\/photos\/uncategorized\/2007\/04\/24\/ladder_3.gif\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"http:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/artfulmanager\/images\/ladder.gif\" alt=\"Forrester participation ladder\" width=\"216\" height=\"131\" align=\"right\" border=\"0\" hspace=\"4\"><\/a>The research authors offer a segmentation model, based on on-line consumer behavior, that cuts to the question I was asking <a href=\"http:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/artfulmanager\/main\/067465.php\">earlier this week<\/a>: How participatory is the web, really? And how true is the assumption that web technologies create a world of content-creators rather than a world of content-watchers.<\/p>\n<p>According to Forrester&#8217;s research, a full 52 percent of on-line consumers are &#8221;inactives,&#8221; engaging in none of the identified social networking activities. Some 33 percent prefer to watch, read, or listen, without contributing to content. While those higher up the &#8221;participation ladder&#8221; are more active collectors of content, critics or commenters, or creators of their own pages, blogs or videos.<\/p>\n<p>You can <a href=\"http:\/\/blogs.forrester.com\/photos\/uncategorized\/2007\/04\/24\/ladder_3.gif\">see the participation ladder<\/a> in their graphic on-line.<\/p>\n<p>It&#8217;s a handy reminder that in our enthusiasm and panic to embrace the participatory audience &#8212; the hands-on arts consumer &#8212; we shouldn&#8217;t forget the large percentage that really just want to watch. Further, the same individual consumer may change their preference for direct engagement as often as they change their mood. The trick remains in offering <i>a range<\/i> of options for connecting to creative work, some sleeves-up and hands-on, others reactive or responsive, and still others left to quietly observe.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>A circuitous route (Neill Roan&#8217;s blog to Kevin Daoust to Steve Rubel to Forrester Research&#8217;s weblog) led me to Forrester&#8217;s recent report on &#8221;Social Technographics.&#8221; The report explores and categorizes the behavior of individuals on-line, focusing on how they use social technologies (such as weblogs, feeds, tags, social network sites, etc.). The report, itself, comes [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_genesis_hide_title":false,"_genesis_hide_breadcrumbs":false,"_genesis_hide_singular_image":false,"_genesis_hide_footer_widgets":false,"_genesis_custom_body_class":"","_genesis_custom_post_class":"","_genesis_layout":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-1043","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-main","7":"entry"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/artfulmanager\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1043","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/artfulmanager\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/artfulmanager\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/artfulmanager\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/artfulmanager\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1043"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/artfulmanager\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1043\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/artfulmanager\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1043"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/artfulmanager\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1043"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.artsjournal.com\/artfulmanager\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1043"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}