We talk a lot about the recession. We talk a lot about social media and it’s disruptive nature. I’ve noted before that the industry of social media has only benefited from the recession. And I’ve always believed that entrepreneurs had the most to gain and that they are our best way out of this.
It dawned on me today that when we talk about the recession or the disruptive effects of social media we are often saying the exact same things.
The last big market disruption came with the mass adoption of the Internet. Everyone blamed the crash on the “tech bubble” but maybe the bubble was just masking the inevitable crash. Maybe this time the “housing bubble” was just the prelude to the current situation. Maybe the market crashes in both cases were brought on by the disruptive nature of the Internet and social media.
It’s not like all that money people lost just went away. It didn’t disappear. It was just radically redistributed. I don’t know where it went, probably a handful of millionaires but not all of it. I’m sure a significant number went to the thousands of small startups that were disrupting the status quo.
The more social media disrupts the more the big giants suffer. The small disruptors aren’t publically traded so the better they do, the worse the Market does - at least to some degree right?
I don’t know that there’s a direct cause and effect but I’m thinking they’re more correlated than we may talk about.
I’m no economist but if you have any thoughts on this I’d love to hear them. I’m sure I’m not the only one that’s thought this. I also decided to ask this question on Quora.
Similar Posts:
- The Economy is Still Broken Because No One Has Actually Fixed Anything
- The Big Difference Between Startups Now vs During the Last Bubble
- How Will 5 More Years of Recession Affect Social Media?
# of Comments 2
# of Comments 1
# of Comments 10
