<div class="text-justify">

My car is going in for service this morning - which up until now, hasn't been a great experience as there has generally been something that goes wrong or, some way that the servicer tries to squeeze a little more out. This morning's however is a little different, as the person came through a recommendation of a friend from work, who was recommended by a colleague of ours and so far, all the experiences have been good. 

>The service guy messaged me just before to say there is a problem. The car doesn't need an oil change for 12,000 kilometers, so he will check the levels but there is no need to do it.

That's a first. *Turning down money.* I wouldn't have known any different if he didn't mention it.  


![image.png](https://files.peakd.com/file/peakd-hive/tarazkp/23wMf2q4gRPqb8cfGymWXX4jrTEo8ivLxHzxdcZLbj2i6Pi7L1WzfYB8n6TXLwitsC125.png)

Word of mouth is the best way to generate business relationships and I think this expands out to even the largest of business models. The reason is that it isn't just the product or reputation of the company on the line, the recommendation puts the reputation of those who recommend it on the line too. It is like telling a friend how good a movie is in the hope they will see it, assuming they are going to like it too.

But, I think that because of this "accountability" of recommendation, the direct word of mouth network is not as strong as it used to be and it has been watered down even further through anonymous and fake recommendations through online rating systems. A five star product review has become meaningless, as has a lot of the IMDB rating systems, as there is no filter on preferences of who is recommending.

For the example of this small service business, the original contact is someone who *loves* their cars a lot (Porsches) and the person who recommended to me, is someone who respects their car a lot, but also is an English speaker. I don't love my car, but I appreciate having one and as someone who struggles in Finnish, having a service person who I can speak with freely makes a difference. 

But, this word of mouth recommendation network which is great for drumming up business, is a double-edged sword for the supplier, because if they fail to deliver, they risk affecting a chain of customers who obviously trust each other enough to listen to the recommendation. This works in the negative also, which means failure can result in a compounded loss of clientele. 

Small businesses can't usually afford to lose income, but through building trusted relationships with their clientele, they are able to have a steady flow of customers coming in, without having to chase for work. This is especially true for something like car service, which is generally scheduled on time or kilometers and this means that as the business builds, taking on new work becomes the issue, as there is no man-hour availability, so hiring needs to happen to increase capacity. 

As someone who has been running a small business for almost a decade now, I appreciate those who go out on a limb to build their business and, I try to use them when I can, rather than supporting the chains that are answerable to their shareholders, not their customers. Much like the trade of content and crypto on Hive, there is a far more direct and close relationship between supplier and buyer and as such, personality and preference matter.

While generic content might get the SEOs metrics ticking over, in general it doesn't build the trusted relationships required for a compelling long-term trade. It becomes individual pieces of content that don't connect people emotionally, don't get them to commit, recommend and come back again and again daily *for people.* It is like a news site - geared for ad revenue, no matter if what is delivered is useful or liked. 

The ad revenue model of the internet has generated a massive amount of wealth for a narrow amount of pockets,  but it is what has also killed the freedom of the internet, as platforms are incentivized to maximize their ad income to satisfy the shareholders, not provide for their customer stakeholders. As we have seen on the social platforms, anyone who threatens the ad revenue model, is expunged.

The "community" aspect is no longer to cater for people, it is built for individuals to feel like they are part of something with others, even though they have no idea who those others truly are. The content and topic of the day collects them together, but there is no continuous relationship built, no actual community that can develop and build something together. 

But, these same groups can definitely *tear down* what is built, because they can be triggered and activated to pile-on in a swarm on a topic or person very, very quickly to destroy reputation and network, leaving them alone and ostracized. And, what is worthy of destroying a life over is often completely meaningless, but because individuals want to feel powerful, they throw their anonymous weight behind the mass, because they are protected - because they are not only not known, but also have very little of their own creation out there themselves. 

It is a funny world, isn't it? We have moved from celebrating and empowering the creators, to becoming a world of powerful and invisible critics that tear the creators down. The problem is though, that the more this happens, the worse the creators get, because they have to cater for the lowest common denominator and they can't go too far out on any limb, because to do so is to invite the wrath of the masses. 

This is part of the homogenization of creativity, so that creators have to both appease everyone and fit their content to monetize an ad revenue model in order to survive - because for most platforms, the only way to make money is through pay-per-click ads, which require a large number of "followers" to make it worthwhile. Under these conditions, creativity is difficult and once locked into a monetized position, it is very hard to take risks, because it raises a high chance of being demonetized for the slightest indiscretion that triggers the crowds. 

Word of mouth is powerful, but the "wisdom of crowds" these days is a lot less valuable than the power it is afforded. Generic might trigger the masses and generate wealth for the centralized platforms, but the value it brings to the individual is minimal.

Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]


</div>

Posted Using [LeoFinance <sup>Beta</sup>](https://leofinance.io/@tarazkp/generic-for-the-masses)