Freedom of speech: defining ‘social’

Earlier this week, I recorded a video commentary for the word of the day at, the visual dictionary, in which I defined what the word ‘social’ means to me.

Here’s a clue on how I defined it with this definition of ‘social’ as an adjective from the Collins online dictionary: “of, relating to, or characteristic of the experience, behaviour, and interaction of persons forming groups.”

How would you define social?

If you have a view, you can either create and upload your own video or leave a comment on the one I did, either at Wordia or at YouTube where the video is also posted. You’ll need to create an account at Wordia before you can contribute there.

committeetoprotectbloggers My video contribution is part of Blogging Nation Week with the Committee to Protect Bloggers and The Independent, a campaign of awareness-raising on freedom of speech that’s been running since earlier this month and ends today.

I’m honoured to be in a group that includes some rather well-know people who have contributed their thoughts to this campaign as well, including Nick Clegg, leader of the LibDems (who defines ‘democracy’), John Redwood, the member of Parliament for Wokingham, the town in which I live (who defines ‘politics’), and Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury (who defines ‘refuge’).

But this is really about anyone who has an opinion on something being able to express that opinion, such as I have done and everyone else who’s been part of Blogging Nation Week has done.

Why not add your opinion too?

Neville Hobson

Social Strategist, Communicator, Writer, and Podcaster with a curiosity for tech and how people use it. Believer in an Internet for everyone. Early adopter (and leaver) and experimenter with social media. Occasional test pilot of shiny new objects. Avid tea drinker.

  1. Norbert Mayer-Wittmann

    Hi Neville,

    I enjoyed your contribution! :D

    In my opinion, what you contribute primarily adds meaning to “” (much in the same way that my writing here adds meaning to “”) — it may a small amount of data, but that doesn’t mean it’s insignificant in meaning. Taking all such contributions together may result in becoming know to be similar to what people commonly refer to as a dictionary.

    When people type something (such as “amazon”) into a search engine, that also has a meaning. Normally, they will want to find a certain kind of information. I myself have contributed to, because I feel that the wisdom of the language will lead people to definitions of terms they wish to find clarification of, when the word “dictionary” is included in their search phrase (in many cases, people search for “dictionary” as a single word — much in the same way they might search for “amazon”).

    This approach to language (i.e., language being defined by how it is used) has a very long tradition, and one of the most well-know philosohers of language championing this approach was Ludwig Wittgenstein.

    And it is also at the heart of the wisdom of the language.

    :) nmw

    • neville

      “Language being defined by how it is used”: well pointed out, Norbert, thanks. I see it like that, too. Good company with Wittgenstein, then!

  2. drew3000

    Thanks for making the video submission, Neville! If you ever want to post something on the Committee website, let me know!

    — Andrew Ford Lyons
    Coordinator for Committee to Protect Bloggers

Comments are closed.