Comments on: Time Magazine Gets Owned by Social Media

By: ICanHasAssembly

ICanHasAssembly — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 22:04:34 +0000

"Isn't social media two-way communication using a technology?"
So is the telephone.
Are you calling 4chan a telephone ?!

You're wrong. Letting you know.

By: jacob

jacob — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 21:24:41 +0000

don't recall the 4chan guy, time to do a bit of research, thanks for sharing this.

By: Time Magazine Gets Owned by Social Media | Kyle Lacy, Social Media … « Social Media

Mon, 27 Apr 2009 20:22:11 +0000

[...] Continued here: Time Magazine Gets Owned by Soci&#… [...]

By: Adam Helweh

Adam Helweh — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 19:51:17 +0000

I would consider these guys straight "hackers".

By: anonymous

anonymous — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 15:03:25 +0000

MARBLECAKE FOREVER!

By: Stuart Foster

Stuart Foster — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 13:55:38 +0000

Haha, I just found out about this. Go 4chan. (Although to be fair…that sentence should never ever be used again.) This definitely is a victory for those of us who do want the rest of the world to stand up and take notice. I mean if Moot can make the list as Time's Most Influential person…I'm at least 99th on that list.

By: kylelacy

kylelacy — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 13:47:37 +0000

Isn't social media two-way communication using a technology? Sounds like 4chan to me. Maybe I am wrong. Please let me know.

By: ICanHasAssembly

ICanHasAssembly — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 13:44:23 +0000

4Chan is not bloody social media, social media is the kind of idiots that have twitter accounts,
while /btards are the kind of people that write their own chat macros.