In a sign of the growing convergence between traditional media, new media (i.e., web-based blog technologies), and social networking, Tony Perkins announced this week that Always On now supports social networking: the so-called Zaibatsu.

There is no doubt that even fanatics like me will now start to limit participation in these services. I guess if someone has made an investment of time and energy into the Always On network to date, this turn of events will be seen as positive and beneficial. However, if Always On has been a sideline for you (as it has been for me), just another source of info, then having the SNA snap-on is unlikely to tip you in.

Pretty soon, the Wall Street Journal and Comcast will be offering SNA services threaded into their offerings. And why not? Its just a matter of what you affiliate with. WSJ has a good claim to corporate America's networks, and at the other extreme, Comcast serves nearly all the high tech households in my neighborhood. People's networks are not homogeneous, they are really discontinuous and heterogeneous. My neighbors are 'close' in proximity, and I would like to share certain forms of information with them ("Come to my barbeque this weekend") while other subnetworks should be getting different sorts of announcements from me ("See you at Instant Messaging Planet in Boston next month!).

I guess I am willing to join various disjoint services to manage different sorts of networks, especially if the services catered to me by providing differentiated offerings. Like if Comcast supported neighborhood related networking somehow, or Monster supporting job-search related activities.

But Zaibatsu looks like another Orkut -- there's no there there. If all we have is a way to make relationships explicit -- the most minimalistic social linkage -- I despair. It's too thin a broth.