Is “Social Media” the right category in which to place Plurk? How about “Social Networking?” Or maybe “Social Bookmarking.” Any of those could fit the bill, but there is more than a little misunderstanding surrounding the actual meaning of those terms. Before a service such as Plurk can be shoehorned into a category, we need to be sure that we understand the definitions of the categories themselves.

When in need of definitions for Web terms, I generally go to the most recognized Web source for such things. Here are the applicable Wikipedia definitions;

Social media is an umbrella term that defines the various activities that integrate technology, social interaction, and the construction of words, pictures, videos and audio.

A social network service uses software to build online social networks for communities of people who share interests and activities or who are interested in exploring the interests and activities of others.

Social bookmarking is a method for Internet users to store, organize, search, and manage bookmarks of web pages on the Internet with the help of metadata.

Micro-blogging is a form of blogging that allows users to write brief text updates (usually less than 200 characters) and publish them, either to be viewed by anyone or by a restricted group which can be chosen by the user.

(This last was added at the suggestion of @dotlizard. See here for more)

So, which of these definitions does Plurk adhere to? In my opinion, all of them, though more so the first two than the last. Of greater importance, Plurk seems to combine aspects of all three “social” types and then to add a number of features and subtext layers. Over the next few days, I am going to be taking a closer look at Plurk, these definitions, and what new things Plurk has brought to the table. Along the way, I hope to answer the question asked in the title of this column.

I am KDFrawg on Plurk. If you see me, stop by and tell me what you think Plurk is!