But following updates from coffee shops, for example, was something entirely possible with e-mail mailing lists, subscribing to blog RSS feeds, etc. So social networks really add no new tricks to that old dog.

Of course, understood that any business needs to be where its customers are spending their time. So if their customers are on Twitter, on Facebook, on FriendFeed, etc., they cannot simply pump out an e-mail or RSS feed and ignore the rest.

But I think we’re well past the point of channel over-extension. Anybody who wants to follow a business should not have to sit through the itemization of seven different social networks, an array of tools, Web sites, mailing lists, phone numbers, fax numbers, smoke signals, Bat signals, CB radio handles, and amateur radio call-signs. It’s not just complete overload, it’s absurdist and surreal. And it’s also highly taxing for the small business that somehow tries to publish to all these channels at once.

On a recent trip to Seattle, I tweeted that a lot of the highly reviewed coffee shops and I had been excited to try in the area really served crappy coffee.

I mentioned the shops by name.

I received a lot of “feedback”. Most of it meaningless defensive dribble, some of it creative “come try again”, and a few invitations from other shops in the area.

I “follow” several local shops–Kean, Intelli.LA, etc.–and I enjoy their updates on new coffees, what is being roasted etc.

I think it may a little early to throw in the towel on corporate social networks–they are still growing + learning, and will likely get better…

Keep up the good work! Thanks, David S