Everyone seems to have their own definitions for the terms social networking, social media, and community . Rather than debate topicality, we’ve generally operated with the general definitions from Wikipedia (linked above). That said, there are important nuances to call out. My thanks to Adam Daum of Gartner for a conversation several weeks ago that crystallized these nuances. I’ll paraphrase the definitions our conversation led to:

Social networking -- the tools or technology used to facilitate interactions between individuals or groups. Social media -- the output (you hope) of those interactions taking place via social networking.Community -- the outcome of those interactions and media: a collection of individuals brought together by similar interest.

This may seem like a no-brainer for those working in the industry, but they’re important nuances… and can say a lot about how you view the world depending on the terms you use. We’ve been approached by many a media company saying they “need a community.” Since they’re in the business of attracting audiences, I hope that there is already a “community” around their content. What they’re more likely looking for are the right tools to enhance the audience interactions already taking place AND make those interactions more accessible and transparent to the media company so they can better understand the community that already exists around their content.To that end, it’s important to think about the TYPE of interactions you’re trying to foster in your community as you evaluate the social networking tools out there. Different tools facilitate different interactions, resulting in different social (media), which ultimately results in different types of communities. If you’re a media company, what do you want in your community?