You must have seen at least one episode of NBC’s The Biggest Loser by now…well even if you haven’t seen it but probably heard about the fact that these people who go on the show lose 100+ pounds in 16 weeks. Awesome, right. What does this have to do with Twitter you may ask? I will tell you my theory…

It’s pretty admirable that extremely overweight individuals are first of all taking the initiative to get themselves healthy, which for some to now finally lose the weight that they’ve lived with for so long, is something they thought they would never overcome. That’s pretty admirable, but that’s a lot of weight to lose in such a short time. The contestants on the show literally work out up to 8 hours or more a day, plus they have supervised workouts with trainers, health and nutrition experts, sports medicine therapists etc.

My thought has always been that there is no way that someone can lose that amount of weight, in that short a period of time when they are by themselves at home and probably have to work for an income too. People can lose the weight and they should definitely get started, but the show surely gives some viewers the impression that they too can lose that much weight by themselves in that time frame.

My worry is that someone who is extremely over weight will get inspired, start working out and not lose 10 or 20+ lbs in one week or even one month and then give up.

Now here’s where my theory connects to Twitter…Does Twitter have the “The Biggest Loser” effect?

A recent article posted through Mashable talked about the phenomenon of “Twitter Quitters”, which highlighted the fact that a large number of users new to Twitter are quitting a short time after they join (though it did stipulate that retention rates were higher since Oprah joined). Have Twitter and it’s mass of celebrity users given the impression that you too can have 1000s of followers/fans (or millions if you are Ashton Kutcher)?…Are these new Twitterers perhaps quitting because they join and feel like no one is listening, no one cares, and they may have the expectation that they too can become an online sensation?…If you subscribe to my theory, then you too may agree.

It’s no secret that we live in a very vain society where immediate gratification and fame is what most lust after. Shows like The Biggest Loser, and celebrities like Ashton Kutcher, while they mean well and do inspire some to a point, they also create social losers and false hope.

That said, I am not advocating that you should not work out, nor that you should not join Twitter or follow celebrities. I think you should work out, and do it for “you”. Do it to get healthy. Do it to because you want to. Do it as a lifestyle change, for the long term with a realistic outlook that change doesn’t happen over night. And for those of you joining Twitter…join because you want to. Because you care to listen to what others are saying, or whatever reason you may join, but don’t expect to have an league of followers by tomorrow…everything in its due time.

So what do you think? Does Twitter have “The Biggest Loser” effect?

Social Media to some extent is still the new kid on the block. In the truest sense of the word social media is information that is created and shared by network users. Information is created in networks like Facebook, Twitter and Myspace, or shared via bookmarking sites like Digg, Reddit or Del.icio.us (of course there are a lot more, but that’s another post). But is that all that social media is to us? Just sharing and creating like some online robots?

Social Media is in fact part of what the techies of today call Web 2.0. Sounds fancy right? It generally just refers to the next generation of internet development and design. Web 2.0 has helped foster the development of a variety of online communities and sharing networks, including blogs and of course our topic du jour – social media.

The networks which we establish, and ultimately in which participate, also foster a community. Perhaps this Web 2.0 business is all that. Of course thinking of “Social Media” as an online community is a bit cliché but that’s just the name of the game. People participate, they share, create, observe, learn, goof off (but not during the 9-5 grind of course), get to know others, find their niche etc. As you become involved in the community, you will also be able to communicate your own visions, thoughts, plans, goals, or whatever you want.

I think one of the goals of anyone’s online communication strategy, whether it be through networks, your blog or your website, should be to build and continue to foster an online community for your users. Use whatever analogy you please, social media is an online community.

It’s fascinating to think of a new age of communicating. Sci-fi movies for years have shown what seemed like the impossible. Ok so we aren’t quite there yet – communicating through thoughts alone – may still be a few years away. I have to admit even I am not telepathic although some people may sometimes think I am (*smile*). But is online communication really all that different from how we otherwise communicate?

Let’s explore…

Offline people generally use one of three ways of evaluating someone or a situation: passive, active or interactive responses. As a passive person you generally observe conversations (you know the ones who call themselves shy). Active interaction involves someone “actively” engaging others in conversation often by asking questions or proposing a thought. While interactive involves direct interaction between two communicators (an exchange of communication).

If you think about it, these communication behaviors are actually absolutely present in online communication as well. An interesting observation is that in mediums such as email and Instant Messenger where visual cues are scarce, textual cues are more frequently used to decode the meaning behind the words. Most develop a great skills whereby they are able to follow those textual cues to reduce uncertainty in some circumstances and overall form impressions about those whose text/content they are reading.

Those mediums, social networking connections, where visual cues are more existent like Facebook or even Twitter at this point, make it easy for someone to be more passive. Why? Because you unobtrusively observe. All you need to do is set up an account and watch the conversations flow.

Though arguably (and this is my opinion) that seems like a waste of time. I believe that social media provides an excellent opportunity for interaction on a more active level. I do admit that I too passively read, follow and learn more about others in those networks. I am curious, what is it that they do? I am fascinated by what makes people tick, how and why they do and say what they do and say. And so I chose to engage and follow up on information that has been presented to me. I am very active in social media networks beyond just Facebook and Twitter, among all of which I actively share, promote and propose ideas and thoughts, as well as  solicit feedback.

Give it a try. I wonder if you find it as fascinating as I do.