Why RIAs are not social media

I've been thinking this weekend about rich Internet applications in comparison to social media. Their differences would seem to be apparent, but numerous times over the last year, I have been involved in projects where RIA's are confused with social media apps. So I have to ask, why is this?

I think the main point of confusion is that RIA's are often provoking to the senses, meaning that they do a good job of stimulating visual and aural senses, and sometimes even emotional responses. This response however is only between the user and the computer. In other words, I suggest that RIA's feel social because the computer is responsible for a human response that goes beyond what, in the CHI world, is often referred to as "surgical" (meaning I'm buying a product or clicking on a button). So the thinking goes, the response feels social so it must be social media.

But what makes social media, well, social, is the feedback loop. It simply is not social media without a feedback loop. What I mean by that is that the user must be able to respond beyond a click or a laugh or a purchase. They must be able to offer input and that input must be shared with the greater community. This is not rocket science but rather a very basic tenant communications and systems theories.

The feedback loop is the key because it allows for noise in the system, and it is that noise which enables change. It is dynamic, whereas RIA's, while fun to watch, are static. The creator creates and the audience gets to watch. Where is the "social" in that? It is really no different than watching TV.

For those with a deeper interest, or perhaps those who may just be bored, here's a paper I wrote a few years ago, which offers a more academic look at feedback loops by comparing blogs to Gregory Bateson's criteria of a mental process as a circuit. Please feel free to comment, feedback is always welcome ;)