Are they influencers? yes.

For whom? for each other and internet stakeholders (marketing and advertising guys basically)

Should they be taken as the only indicator? no.

The problem starts when they forget that 4/5 of the world isn’t even online yet, when they forget that only 11% of the blogs of Technorati (so, not of all blogs) are active. The problem is them perceiving this circle as the majority instead of a minority. So, thanks for the reminder.

Expanding on your thinking… I’m not sure it’s about people not using the Web that much, but more about what they do use it for. It’s not surprising to me that very few people are publishers or are otherwise creating content; it seems logical that there will always be more searchers than creators or social connectors.

Can this be defined as a good or bad thing? If the searcher’s subjective position leads them to believe the results they’re getting are totally democratic, then I suppose it could be argued as bad. But really, we’re just going to have to go through a longish education process as people start to get this stuff – it took a while before consumers stopped taking everything published or said in mass media at face value too.

Regarding the advertisers: they are slowly starting to understand that the value is in the deeply engaged few (addicts) rather than the hordes.

In the mean time, the few with the loudest voices have a soapbox. It’s up to everyone else to sort through the clutter and try to make sense of it all.

http://www.useit.com/alertbox/participation_inequality.html