Here Comes Everybody by Clay Shirky

It’s interesting that a book about, among other things, the radically changing nature and “amateurization” of consumer media was published by Penguin and has three pages of blurbs at the beginning of the book from major, established media organizations.  In addition, the cover has a quote from the Boston Globe (which I think is now bankrupt) and the back cover quotes from the Minneapolis Star Tribune and the New York Observer. 

This suggests one of two things. 

One: Skirky’s book really is on the front edge of a wave that the most of society hasn’t fully caught yet; Penguin realizes that but still has to appeal to older patterns.

OR

Two: the role of the managed, professional class isn’t really going anywhere, despite Shirky’s observations.  

Of course, it’s probably a combination of both these options. 

And that’s one of the more refreshing parts of Shirky’s book: he looks at both sides.  He appreciates that new media trends are just now unfolding and beginning to be understood. He also recognizes that people now have an outlet for the human desire to create groups and organize in ways that allow for the greatest depth and breadth of expression. 

By that, I mean I can now find people to share with and learn from about ideas and experiences that are critical to me.  This, in turn, allows the body of knowledge for everyone to expand exponentially.  If I get Lyme disease, I will be able to find groups of people that have had it, recovered from it, and have loads of information that I would find useful.  In the old method of management and communications, if I got Lyme disease, I would have to seek out support groups or other “communities of practice” that had been created top-down by various professional organization or medical institutions.  No longer.  Now, I can find these communities of practice organically emerging based on the needs of the group.  If I have been experiencing arthritis as a result of Lyme disease, then surely I will be able to find groups discussing and sharing on just that subject.

However, I use a medical example here to demonstrate some of the limitations of these new methods of decentralized communication.  As Shirky says, “It used to be hard to get people to assemble and easy for existing group to fall apart.  Now assembling latent groups is simple, and the groups, once assemble, can be quite robust in the face of indifference or even direct opposition from larger society” (p.210).   This can obviously be a problem if the information the group is providing is either plain wrong or is leading to destructive behavior.  I have seen this with forums discussing the benefits of using massive doses of antibiotics to combat Lyme-like symptoms, despite evidence to the contrary.  Shirky gives the example of pro-anorexia groups on discussion forums of YM.

As a result, I thought Shirky could have put more energy in his book to the idea that indiscriminate blogging, posting, and web publishing does have a dark side.  In a medical situation it could have unpleasant consequences—masses of people determining the best course of action, as opposed to doctors or researchers with evidence based research. 

We see this pronounced in political blogs, the vast majority of which are people who watch/read the news and provide ad-hoc analysis, simply based on their perspective—as opposed to an investigator who diligently researches what is actually in a bill or the voting pattern of a particular elected official.  Hopefully, we will find an economic model in the near future that allows for hard-core investigative research AND for the collaborative power of the blog.  (State of Play touched on this).

One of the weaknesses of Here Comes Everybody was a general lack of real data.  Most of the book read sort of like a thoughtful blog.  Skirky made keen observations about the changing nature of communications, but he didn’t provide real data to back it up; rather, he provided interesting antidotal examples of new media in action.

Despite this, his book is timely and useful, largely because the pros of new media far outweigh the cons.  The outlets for human expression have exploded, and that is a good thing.  The difficult part will be figuring out how to balance this communications “revolution” with institutional knowledge and practices that have proven quite robust so far.  Perhaps his next book. 

Twitter and the NFL

Despite the fact that the organization is now in shambles and the Supreme Court is about to force it to change its name (rightly, I must say), the Washington Redskins have been dear to me since the good old days of John Riggins and Darrel Green.

This week two unpleasant things happened to the team (actually it was more than two—but for the sake of simplicity, let’s keep it there for now).  One, they lost to the previously winless-since-2007 Detroit Lions.  Two, they felt they sting of the Twitter fan attack.

A rookie on the team was upset last week when fans at FedEx Field booed the team despite beating the Rams.  This rookie proceeded to damn the fans for their behavior with this Twitter post: "All you fake half hearted Skins fan can...I won't go there but I dislike you very strongly, don't come to Fed Ex to boo dim wits!!"

The fans went crazy and soon enough the story was picked up by major networks. 

Twitter and football is so interesting because for the first time fans have the opportunity to publically express their celebrations or frustrations with a team or a player.  This is particularly good for Redskins fans who have been deeply frustrated, and rightly so, ever since the team cursed themselves by moving from DC to Landover, Maryland a little over a decade ago.

 Although Twitter doesn’t allow depth or breadth of thought, it does allow for fans to get things off their chests.  This is also true during the political election season, which is very much like the NFL season (I’ll post on that later).

It’s tough to tell whether or not this is really a good thing however.  I, for one, find it fun but a wasteful enterprise, reading all these ranting and ravings.  Surely, there is some value, although I can’t quite point it out yet.  Thoughts?

Nuts and Bolts of Digital Political Strategy

After reading Colin Delany’s Online Politics 101 and Ben Rigby’s Mobilizing Generation 2.0, one thing became crystal clear about online campaign strategy: this is very new stuff. Both writers freely acknowledge this and give practical examples of organizational strategies that worked and those that didn’t. At the same time, they remind us that there isn’t a sure fire method to use online tools to deliver results.

Because best practices on online strategies seem to be changing daily, ROI is often fleeting. An organization might spend loads of money and time building a wiki, virtual world, blog, etc, but be left with few measureable outcomes. HOWEVER, as Rigby and Delany stress, just because we can’t solidly measure all the results of a digital campaign doesn’t mean that it’s done in vain.

The world has alreay begun a new way of communicating and every digital step organizations take keeps them more in synch with these emerging strategies.

One thing that is not new is having good content. Rigby and Delany both emphasize that “content is king.” No matter how proficient your organization is with online technologies, if you don’t have the content no one will care. From my own experience, it seems that this is a real stumbling block for organizations looking to establish an online presence. They either have not thought about how to repurpose their content or they simply don’t have the content to begin with.

Three key takeaways from these readings:

Mobile phone campaigns are here to stay and have amazing potential.

Rigby has an entire chapter dedicated to mobile strategies—and the subject matter certainly deserves it. Mobile strategies are delicate, because the last thing you want to do is spam your members on their mobile devices. But as networks improve and mobile internet browsing advances, it certainly seems plausible that the phone will be as important as the PC for connecting to the internet (it is already is for some people!). By creating strategies using mobile devices that can gather data or send out key information, organizations can capture people right at the moment they are thinking about the topic. If done right, mobile technologies should make it super easy for people to interact with your organization.

Online “gardeners” keep your online presence fresh, healthy and growing.

Rigby talks about “wiki gardeners,” (the people who maintain an organizational wiki). I like the idea of this role a lot, and it will only become more and more important as these strategies mature. I might even take the idea of the wiki gardener and broaden its scope and suggest that all organizations need digital gardeners to monitor and tend to their online presence. The online gardener can monitor comments on organizational blogs, work on social networks to build friend bases and keep good communications flowing, tend to the wiki, make sure that online communities don’t languish, keep content updated, and basically do the lion’s share of the digital upkeep. Unfortunately, until 2.0 technologies reliably generate quantifiable ROI, organizations probably will not justify a full time position for this (but they should--some already do). I think we’ll see this quickly change in the coming years—it’s already started.

If content is king, INTEGRATION is prince.

As Delany writes: “If you pick up one idea from this website, let this be it—integrate or die.” The power of these tools lies in the fact can all work off each other. The more they are integrated the more powerful they become. An add can encourage you to text in some information, which can lead you to a blog, which you can put into your feed, which eventually leads you to join an online community, which makes you like the organization more and more until you bequeath your life savings to them. Well, it’s not that simple, but that’s the idea. If your organization is good, and fights for a good cause, or provides some key service, and you can properly place the content in the right tools the right way, you might be on your way to riches—or at least a more sophisticated communications plan.

Initial Investigation of How Campaigns Are Using Facebook

What Strategy? will be looking at some of the tools used on the Internet today to get the message out. Let's see Facebook in action

Looked at two political campaigns and one cause:

-DC's Mayor Adrian Fenty (sadly, starting his campaign already)
-Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) (campaigning it up this year)
-DC Vote (campaigning, and until a Constitutional admendment, will always be campaigning)

All three Facebook pages followed a pretty standard Facebook tab layout with content on the Wall, Info, and Photos. Some common threads:

-Each page prominently led users to a webpage.
-The photos sections did not inundate you with photos but selected only the all-star pictures.
-Able to see other supporters (standard, of course, on Facebook).
-Each page used the “updates” feature to tell supporters about recent activity. Often these updates included links to other webpages or stories.

Nice touches:

-Fenty had a YouTube tab which allowed you to easily watch key interviews and videos of him (like his appearance on Meet the Press).
-Fenty used a Notes tab to post his extensive bio. But he also had a nice little RSS feature configured for the notes section so that supporters can learn of new info that he puts there—which will most likely be infrequent.
-The profile picture on the DC Vote page is the same as the advertisements that are running around DC right now on the subways and busses. Good integration!
-Fenty had a nice link to the “schedule” section of his DC Govt page so that you can always learn what he is doing, in theory. (He’s been taking a lot of unscheduled trips lately however).

Strategy

The term "strategy" is perilously close to falling in the dark void of jargon. It's used so often that it's meaning is fading quickly.

Unfortunately, I don't have a solution to this problem, as the word does sum up a lot of things in 8 letters.

I will try (although I'm not sure how sucessful I will be) to define what I mean when I deploy "strategy."

What Strategy?

What Strategy? will look at the different methods folks use to get their message out and get people engaged. What Strategy? doesnt make the distinction between messaging for corporations, non-profits, mom and pops, political campaigns or people just trying to get a voice out there. Different tactics are needed for different campaigns, but the fundamentals are more similar than different, particuarly these days.

Although jargon, catchphrases and the dreaded 'conference speak' will pop-up here and there, What Strategy? will make every effort possible to limit their appearance, as they nausiate us, and we don't like them.