Everyday, users dictate the validity and/or the popularity of news online. They don’t get paid to do so. Possibly, the piece was written on a single user blog, just like this one. The story goes from 1 set of eyes to thousands overnight. The Social Web is a beautiful thing.

And as I speak right now, some of the world’s most powerful media moguls are probably looking for ways to exploit the hottest current social portals for more self-serving exposure or maybe just for market research to see if that little website is a worthy target of acquisition. That’s why Rupert Murdoch bought MySpace; it wasn’t because he liked Hawthorne Heights, it was because he wanted to secure the newest generation of minds and eyes to influence in whatever direction was the most profitable to him, stockholders and the advertisers.

Sure, you could accuse me of donning a tinfoil hat as I write this, but seriously people… we know that this is happening. Look at Google and their track record of buyouts and acquisitions. YouTube was snatched up right when it’s name was as household friendly as… well.. Google is. And that’s the point; smart marketing people strike when the iron’s hot. A buyout like that was a win/win for both parties involved simply because it generated all that press for both sides therefore generating no loss in visitor patronage and ultimately no risk for Google.

Speaking of viral video, local and national TV news channels are finding themselves in competition with anyone sporting a cell phone equipped with a camera. All news channels want to be on the scene first, but that technically never happens. Since Joe Schmoe was at the scene and got the pictures to prove it, news channels are clamoring for those shots.

A new service called YouNews is about to go public, and news channels are already out there pushing it. The public gets to upload and share the news as it happens, and best of all, the news channels get the bragging rights of bringing the story to your attention. We do the footwork, they save money by not having the overhead of having cameras and people on the scene. All the while, cashing in on The Social Web.

I know I know… I’m coming across as cynical on this. And you’re right to think that. Escape from crass capitalism was one of the biggest motivating factors fueling internet surfers and webmasters to carve out some small private niche on the net. We get sick of advertisements and corporate interests tainting the experience of something we can call our own secret place.  We build a like minded community, we share and contribute and we only invite people we think are cool enough to know about our secret club. Before we know it, our secret is growing and the wrong people are bound to sit up and take notice.

Not all social portals out there that have been bought up have lost their appeal, but it’s gotta be hard to stay true to the community with all that money coming into play. If you have a hideaway on the web that you feel could be a target of being bought out, it’s up to you whether or not you want to fight it or just let it happen. Maybe getting gobs of cash behind it will be good for technology upgrades and getting some people on payroll.. maybe it will be bad because it just becomes a channel for making more cash at the expense of the people (looking at you MySpace).

Whatever side you’re on, this is our internet and we make it what it is. So are you revolting or conforming?