I'm about 50 pages in and this is really bad. The author is a WaPo reporter and it completely shines through. Every section ends with a cliffhanger ("But MySpace wouldn't stay on top for long" or "But nobody believed blogging could turn a profit"). And the author does no commentary in her own voice. She lays out the history of some platform or fad using a couple of people as examples and then quotes journalists and celebrities commenting on that. It promises a "social history of social media" which I took to mean an exploration of society and culture either online or shaped through the online. Instead, it's individuals standing in as examples for eras of online life. Also, the view is extremely US centric, but that could just be because social media has its roots there.

It's very quick to read though, so I'll probably still finish it.