Teach Me How to Tweet
There are approximately 16,926,015 Internet users as of Feb. '09, which is roughly 79.6% of the Australian population, according to ITU. As marketers, it's our job to reach them with messages; however, Twitter is not the place to broadcast sales of products and talk about how great a company is - Twitter is a place to exchange contextual information; meaning, information that is specific to what people are asking questions about or talking about already. My involvement with Twitter is not to talk up the company I work for or the clients I represent - it's to engage with people who share the same interests as me. It's personal and entirely about my indidivual opinion. The best use of Twitter is Zappos, a company that empowers their entire workforce to engage in real time.
I spend a lot of time thinking about social media, reading about social media, talking about social media and writing about social media. It’s very hard to not get lost in the semantics, misinformation and negative assumptions surrounding the topic of web 2.0. It isn't hard to get started - there are people out there who want to scare you for their own benefit. Fear is one of the most powerful selling pitches around - look at George Bush's presidency if you need an example of how it's possible to manipulate popular opinion through fear tactics.
One of my biggest pet peeves is the negative taste some have developed for the use of the term. I can remember several instances where a person scoffed or raised an eye brow or simply discarded the concept as ludicrous. I believe people have this reaction because they are confused. 'Experts' tell them that they need to be careful, that involvement is dangerous, that once you say something you'll be held to it forever and no matter how hard you try, you'll never be able to live down your mistakes.
There are lots of reasons why people have adverse reactions to the concept of social media. I’ve blogged about it before, and will continue to blog about it again and again because it is the pervasive darkness that lingers in my daily existence. I cannot escape the constancy of negative barrage against change- regardless of the person’s age, gender, life position; everyone seems to carry large amounts of doubt with them. There is something incredibly threatening about social media for most people and it is because of these individual fears that my job can be incredibly challenging.
I don’t know what it is that makes some people open to the idea of sharing their knowledge, opinions, creative talents- or lack thereof; I’m not a Sociologist. I assume there is something within our survival instincts that tells us to communicate with our fellow human beings. It’s our learned behaviour that teaches us to fear each other and fear strangers. Insecurity keeps us safe in a mute state. We fear judgment. I’m sure there are tons of theories and philosophies about open communication, but it is a very new thing to be able to cross over so many physical barriers and reach out to people on the other side of the world.
To me, the role of Marketing within the context of social media is to listen and communicate. Build relationships and treat people as individuals. Perhaps what is most scary about social media is how incredibly simple it is and does not require degrees to master. Social media breaks down convention – and that is a huge reason as to why it appeals to me. I don’t take it anymore seriously then I take myself. If I make a mistake or I’m misunderstood then I learn from it and move on. And most importantly, maintaining the ability to laugh at oneself is important. Social media can become a reflection of the persona we project out into the world – and sometimes it’s very humbling to see yourself as others see you. It’s not about tricking people with smoke and mirrors- you don’t need to learn a heap of “Twitter rules” to engage. Do what feels natural and I guarantee that you will enviably connect with like-minded people.
In conclusion, next time you see a post, article, comment about the 'rules' of online engagement - don't waste your time with it. Would you buy a book to learn to swim? Not likely, you'd find someone who knows how to swim and practice with them. Don't buy into the wrongful thinking that you need to learn a ton of new terms or abbreviations - just jump in and splash around. It's fun and everyone is allowed to play in any pool they like. Whatever technology or platform works for you is perfectly ok - old fashioned email works just fine.
Source of cartoon: Outraged Comics
Clay Shirky Big Idea Social media enhances the emotional dimension of news
Clay's involvement in SXSW was much more true to character this year. Check out Teressa Iezzi's post about Monkeys with Internet Access: Sharing, Human Nature, and Digital Data.
Clay has the extraordinary ability to explain the complexity of social media and new web technologies in simple terms. He speaks in realistic terms that rationalize what's happening without making it all seem like you need a manual or adopt new lingo to understand.
For those who aren't familar with SXSW, it is a massive conference in Texas that is broken up into three main categories: film, music and interactive. The panels, discussions, talks and seminars are some of the best around. I highly recommend it to anyone who is passionate about digital media (and the parties and live music is the best you'll find in the world).
Consider the Source
I think it's important to consider the source- traditional media, newspapers don't want social media to be successful because they're scared of going out of business.
The reality is that Facebook- and any reputable social media network DOES NOT ask or require a social security number. You don't fill out your physical address nor do you need to fill out anything but your name and email address. Also, there are people canvassing for donations on nearly every corner of every downtown city centre right now - asking people for their names, address, and credit card numbers. That is more of a privacy concern to me then giving an online company superficial information about myself.
Today we are fractured from our network and we use social media to stay connected. It’s really that simple. The information that comes from participation within social networks provides valuable data that gives researches insights they'd otherwise have to spend years and stupid amounts of money to collect.
Privacy does not "vanish" - people are ignorant and give away info that is NOT required or asked of them. Participation is optional and what you disclose is in the hands of the participant.
And to quote from the article:
So far, this type of powerful data mining, which relies on sophisticated statistical correlations, is mostly in the realm of university researchers, not identity thieves and marketers.
I read about the Netflix lawsuit- I've been following it for years. At the end of the day - the movies people choose to watch is not a danger to their physical person. The information that was shared was done so to improve the internal algorithm of the recommendation engine. It breached privacy, but didn't open customers up to identity fraud.
in reference to: How Privacy Vanishes Online, a Bit at a Time - NYTimes.com (view on Google Sidewiki)
..the customer data released for that first contest, despite being stripped of names and other direct identifying information, could often be “de-anonymized” by statistically analyzing an individual’s distinctive pattern of movie ratings and recommendations.
Learn more about how to protect yourself online: http://www.privacy.gov.au/topics/technologies/security
Is Social Media Just for Kids?
I've heard the same statements over and over. "This new social media thing is just for kids". "Social media is a time waster." "Social media doesn't make anyone any money."
The sentiment is hard to handle because there are stacks of evidence to contradict just about every negative remark. The truth is that it comes down to a personal preference about how you spend your time and what matters to you. It is also about the size of your existing network and location limitations.
Personally, I think if you’re doing something just because everyone else is doing it – then you’re living a very desperate existence. If you believe something just because a credentialed “expert” says its true – then you are doing your own intelligence a tremendous disservice.
I’m not a social media advocate. I really don’t mind if people don’t want to use it or know anything about it. But I wonder about a reaction that is defensive or causes someone to lash out with a negative judgment – doesn’t that sound like fear to you?
Realizing that consumers have the power should not be a new idea to anyone. No one is going to buy your product just because it exists. The world of advertising is changing dramatically because Ad Agency’s are finally realizing that people need to understand the value of things. Consumers ask themselves questions like: How does this product relate to my code of ethics? Is it organic? Is it made of renewable materials? Is it going to last me long enough that the cost is reasonable for my budget?
Maybe the problem for me is that I've never cared about the "experts" - that was something my Mom used to try and drill into me all the time, and still tries to convince me that the only opinion that matters is from a renowned specialist. What I enjoy the most about Social Media is that I can learn from people I can relate to and understand. I don't know about you, but most professional journalists seem to say the same things and report on the same things. I don’t want to know what someone is paid to say – I want to know what is real. Knowing what real people are saying is what matters – not what a spokesperson is paid to say or a politician wants you to believe for their own benefit.
Interestingly my mother also told me not to follow the crowd and do things based on my own code of ethics- the pearl of wisdom, "if you're friends thought it was cool to jump off a cliff, does that mean you have to?”
If you don’t think social media makes sense for you personally, then that’s ok. It's not about following what everyone else is doing - it's about finding the right resources so that you can steer your own ship. The idea that we all are expected to follow the same code and traditions is over. People move around these days - living in different countries and travelling more often. Not everyone goes to school, finds a job, gets married, has a couple of kids, lives in a house with a white picket fence out front, etc. What was once 'traditional' is now unpractical for most people or generally unrealistic. Today we are fractured from our network and we use social media to stay connected. It’s really that simple.
Here's a few statistics that might help shed light on the subject:
- In June 2009, the Australian Bureau of Statistics reported 8.4million active internet subscribers in Australia
- 79.1% of internet users in Australia view online video.
- YouTube receives 6.17 million Australian visitors monthly.
- A study on social networking usage in Australia, found more than 70 percent of Internet users in Australia visited a social networking site in June 2009, up from 29% the previous year.
- Facebook could generate between $1 billion and $1.1 billion in revenue this year, a big increase over the $710 million estimate from The Wall Street Journal a few months ago. In fact, the world’s largest social network could have made between $600-$700 million in 2009.
- Huffington Post Revenue and Valuation Estimated Value: $150 million
- TechCrunch is now building a conference business and expanding its network of blogs. It probably fair to guess that it has grown to a revenue run rate of $5 million. To believe that the figure could double to $10 million in 2008 is not unreasonable.
Collaborate or Perish: An Introduction to Social Media
Yesterday was an incredibly long day for me. On top of my regular non-stop schedule I presented an introduction to social media seminar to a few of our existing clients. You can check out the presentation on Slideshare.
For those who have read some of my earlier posts, you’ll know that I moved from Toronto to Melbourne last year, and I had a really hard time figuring out how to market myself to potential employers. The job titles I had at home aren’t traditional and aren’t seen as roles within a corporate organization. Titles such as: Online Community Specialist and Online Community Moderator, are roles that fit into online gaming or user management on platforms, but not traditional company’s, right?
Wrong.
After 9 months I realize that the roles I had do fit into Australian businesses, but it’s a lack of connection between the marketing strategies and the business objectives. I believe there is a disconnect and the people who are meant to be initiating these activities are not receiving the right kind of guidance.
To me, the main reason company’s should engage in social media is to create a dialogue. And not a always a literal dialogue where you create a group and lamely ask random questions to a disinterested audience. A dialogue can be a lot of things. The narrative is in assembling all of the communication to create a message.
If you look at a platform, such as Twitter, you can assess the functionality and use it to create your communication strategy. Twitter is a great way to extend your customer service and find ideas for customer-centric solutions. Facebook is a great place to conduct surveys and solicit feedback based on opt-in offers. It also allows you to conduct research to a broader audience. LinkedIn helps you generate leads and find potential partners.
The point of these examples is that you can extract metrics of measurement to build business strategies that are future-proof. Your services can identify solve problems in a more timely manner then traditional reviews. All of this data and information needs to be disseminated by someone within your organization. It doesn’t need to be only one person’s job to manage and communicate, but there should be someone collecting and reporting on the information. Teams should have access to this information to form the basis for the day to day practices of your business.
Interestingly, at the end of the presentation a woman asked me about privacy. She said, “how are company’s supposed to control what their employees say to people online?” This is a classic response and something I expected to hear. My response to this is that employees should sign confidentiality agreements that clearly stipulate what they are permitted to share with others outside of the company. If you are a car manufacturer, you might not want your employees leaking information about a product soon to come to market, but it would be ok for your employees to solicit information about people’s favorite car or the story of how they bought their first car. Or even what types of software they’d love to have in a car if they were able to design their own. Alternatively, if a car designer wants to find out whether people like 2 door or 4 on a particular model – why not ask people? Isn’t it better to find out what people want before launching a product that may or may not satisfy the demand? No one is suggesting that employees give away the secret sauce, but the world is full of great ideas and specialists. If you turn your back on the crowd you will surely find yourself out of business sooner than you think.You need to relinquish control.
ConnectNow
I'm very stoked about this upcoming conference. First of all, it's in Sydney - so a short flight from Melbourne and excuse to hang with my Sydney mates. And also, it's pretty exciting to see so many names on the speaking roster who I've chatted with online.
The Australian Dame of Social Media, Laurel Papworth (aka Silk Charm on Twitter) will be there. Dareen Rowse of famed ProBlogger will also be there.
Also Tara Hunt (aka MissRogue on Twitter)- a fellow Canadian, entrepreneur, and one of the most influential women in technology (according to Fast Company Magazine in 2009).
Social Media Expert?
Do you think there's such a thing as an expert of social media? If so, who is holding up their hand?
I've been involved in social media in a professional capacity since 2003. I'd never claim to be an expert, and not because I don't think I know a lot about social media. To appoint myself an expert isn't accurate and I don't think it's accurate for most people. Anyone claiming to be an 'expert' is a touch conceded and I tend to think "suspect" immediately.
I see myself as a specialist or consultant because I've worked on several platforms for various companies and I know about the challenges a lot of company's face when they first start out in social media. You don't need an 'expert' you need someone who can help you understand that the world of business is changing. Read Wikinomics, Groundswell, and Here Comes Everybody and save yourself a lot of stress and money. It's going to be OK.
For most, claiming to be an "expert" is like saying my GP is an expert doctor. It doesn't make any sense. My GP is super clever and she's great at helping me understand the basics concerning my health. And a GP could be a lounge chair expert knowing lots about a particular biological or physical element of the human body due to a personal interest of theirs, but a general practitioner is usually known for having general knowledge. Usually you'd be sent to a specialist by your GP when they can't figure out what's wrong with you. I mean, wouldn't it piss you off if your GP kept trying out random treatments for a cancer diagnosis instead of sending you to an oncologist?
For me, a specialist is someone who has been apart of a team building a platform and has had success at leading a community or users on a platform. Creating a profile on Twitter isn't really that special or requiring expert skills.
Watch how your pet is a social media expert: http://vimeo.com/9044339
There are defiantly lots of people who know a lot about social media, but its really the same as being a TV expert. Do you really need someone to teach you how to flip channels?
I think most people offering social media services are like the TV guide - they give you all the options about what's on, with descriptions and even reviews sometimes, and then they allow you to make up your mind about what you want to watch. So there's a big difference between the TV Guide and TiVo.
An expert has the ability to manipulate the TV into your own platform. An expert builds you TiVo. Someone who is a social media expert is a person who can build you a branded application, game, or digital product to license and share. An example would be: Creating custom designs for iGoogle that have the potential to provide millions of users more tools to personalize their homepage. A social media expert creates stuff and helps customize platforms through APIs. The expert makes you appart of a community. They create tools that adds value or is engaging.
It's no biggie to be a consultant. It's not a dirty title, but there's a big difference between me and Mark Elliot Zuckerberg (one the founders of Facebook). I'm ok with not being an expert, and I think most of my clients are happy to have me describe the landscape for them. Most company's use social media inappropriately and they give themselves a bad name because of it. Doing it right isn't actually that difficult, but it usually requires you to define your goals and then decide how to engage. There are so many people claiming to have all of the answers- but it's not too dissimilar from weight loss gurus. The truth is, the answers are inside of you.
5 Tips to Help You Optimize Your Ads on Facebook!
Facebook's 5 tips to help you optimize your ads on Facebook!
We encourage you to use them for continued success in 2010:
1. Pull reports about your ads. Reports show you detailed demographic information and provide insights about what kinds of users are interacting with your ads. They may also show likes and interests of users, and you may find new keywords you should be using to target users.
2. Remember to frequently visit your Ads Manager to make sure your bid is within the suggested bid range. The suggested bid range you see when creating your ads is based o n the bids that are currently winning the ad auction for the users you've chosen to target. This bid range will fluctuate over time as the pool of competing ads changes. You want to make sure that your bid is within the suggested bid range so it’s reaching the most relevant users.
3. Monitor your campaigns and budgets. It’s easy to forget how many campaigns you currently have running, and what budget you have selected for each of them. Visit your Ads Manager to check up on this so you maximize your spend! You have the ability to change your daily budget for any of your campaigns at any time.
4. Increase your conversion rate by choosing a clear and simple destination page. Make sure that the site you are advertising is easy to navigate and that it presents information clearly. If you are promoting a product or event, feature it prominently on your site so users are able to click on it right away.
5. Take notice of the ads that seem to be receiving more clicks or impressions than others. Simply changing your image or ad title will make the ad appear new to users. If you see impressions or clicks declining, refresh your ad more often to ensure that your ads don’t become stale.
Learn more about how to get started advertising on Facebook.
Learn about other company's success stories:
Flying Solo Forum Discussion
Facebook Advertising: It’s All Local
Meet Meebo
Meebo is a cool service that lets you connect all your profiles through a single login experience.
There's a tidy toolbar you can add to your blog or website (I've recently done this), and there are a few apps worth checking out.
I love anything that attempts to simplify my online life.
(psst - Advertisers, you can place banner ads on the Meebo site within the user profile.)
http://business.meebo.com/
Reading in the Brave New World
After years working for a major book retailer I can assess that people want options, and the way we read has been changed forever by new media. As an example, it’s surprising to discover magazines and newspapers without any online presence except to list statistical information concerning their distribution and ways to advertise. Forget about seeing an App or podcast available. Instead of embracing new directions there seems to be a sadness over the dwindling sales of printed material and traditional media. There are also concerns that modern communication and information searching tools will injure our intelligence.
Luckily there are experts on the subject and we don’t need to continue scratching our heads over how to understand the reading brain. Maryanne Wolf, is a cognitive neuroscientist and child development expert from Tufts University and author of the exceptional book, Proust and the Squid: The Story and Science of the Reading Brain
“Human beings were never born to read,” she writes, “Reading is a human invention that reflects how the brain rearranges itself to learn something new.”
Contrary to what your 3rd grade english teacher led you to believe reading is an evolutionary exercise and doesn’t follow an intrinsically strict rule book. If language and reading were to remain the same we’d still be saying ‘thou’ and ‘shalt’ instead of ‘you’ and ‘should’. The main difference in these contemporary times is that technology is at the helm of consumption. New forms of communication are altering spelling and causing the older generations to squirm at the sight of lol, brb, and whatever other forms of new speak the kids are talking these days.
While I can’t say that I’d jump at the thought of reading a book or even short story written entirely through IM abbreviations it would be an interesting visual representation of the times. After all, isn’t that what most art tries to achieve? The classics that define our culture will never die because adaption ensures their survival.
Finally, tools such as Literature Map will take care of those pesky publicists who believe their opinion should dictate which books are worth reading. Peer to peer sharing and personalized recommendations are how I want to find new authors and books worth my time and money.
What is this thing we call privacy?: Part 1
In fact, if you search information overload the results will illustrate nearly everyone is aware of a potential problem, but no one can be certain what to make of it. On the one hand, we adore the playfulness of social media and the ease of open communication within a network, but at the same time we are fearful that the price of these tools is too much personal information. No longer are we remote islands onto ourselves, but digital villages of white noise, colourful images, encapsulated in a blur of promotion. The ability to exist within this new world is to trade information about your true identity.
According to Roger Clarke, “cyberculture' is the concept of a group or groups of people achieving cohesion by means of the information infrastructure”. As a consultant specialising in strategic and policy aspects of eBusiness, information infrastructure, data surveillance, and privacy he is a good source on the subject. In a paper entitled Dissidentity, Clarke raises an important point regarding the psychological need for private space.
“There are many different contexts in which human behaviour depends on the freedom and constraints associated with the identities that they use.”
Wikipedia defines privacy as; ‘the ability of an individual or group to seclude themselves or information about themselves and thereby reveal themselves selectively.’ To me, the reality is that no one should expect to be entirely private when online. Privacy is a relative term in the offline world and it’s no different online. There are a few colourful words to describe a person who would walk around wearing a mask and cloak. Usually, when someone has something to hide it’s because they participate in some sort of action that they believe would change other people’s perception of them. Fear of embarrassment, judgment, hate, as well as a multitude of other emotions can lead people into strange behaviours that they’d rather keep to themselves.
I can entirely appreciate the notion of privacy and why most people do not wish to have personal information disclosed without their explicit consent. When I provide my email address to a site in exchange for a newsletter, registration, or information there should be an understanding that my email addresses is not to be used for any other purposes then the agreement of which I consented. In other words, my email address should not be sold on a list for other product promotions and third parties should not contact me as a consequence of my participation in divulging my personal information. Spam is a cute name for a very big problem. Another issue is identity theft; which I'll try to tackle in another post soon.
Some believe that the World Wide Web is a virtual space, cyberculture, or cyberspace. The reality is that who we are online is not a different person from our offline selves, and the laws in which we conduct ourselves online should be in keeping with the laws that stop us from stealing and hurting people in the physical world. The ability to be intrinsically more of our darker selves or indulge our fantasies is a freedom and not a right. An abuse of freedom has the power to alter the structure of a society, or at the very least break down trust. Anarchy is a beautiful yet unrealistic dream that would sooner turn into a nightmare then a Utopic wonderland.
Ignore the man behind the curtain: The Rise of the Algorithm
So what is at the heart of the MySpace vs. Facebook controversy? I believe that it is primarily due to the oversight of installing a robust algorithm to ensure users remained engaged in their online community. Knowing that users are there to listen, create, and share should have been enough to inspire a cool tool to keep users engaged. Instead the focus remains on selling ad space and monetizing promotions. By the time Facebook became a household name the opportunity for MySpace to engage their users through internal services and apps had passed. I would have expected MySpace to work on interactive shopping and peer-peer recommendations. Instead they remain banner crazed and the level of noise on the site is what I imagine crazy to feel like, or at least a brutal migraine headache.
Facebook recently enhanced their internal algorithm to mixed reviews. Nothing is perfect, ever; however, community upset is perhaps the most problematic issue to manage. Civil upset can evoke a mass exodus. A reality that Friendster and other online communities know all too well. I’m not overly concerned whether Facebook retains its hold on the online community monopoly because I have no doubt that something bigger and better is inevitable (Twitter?). What is interesting to me is the gentle tweaking of internal algorithms that make the experience seem magical. OK, ‘magical’ is pushing it in terms of the Facebook experience, but my point is most users have no idea how or why the news feed produces its results, etc.
Lastfm.com is a great example of what I would have expected to see from MySpace. The sites algorithm is among the best I’ve seen and the experience is simply sweet. Recently the site changed from free streaming for all to a subscription model. Except for the US, UK, and Germany all users of the site must pay $3/month (USD) to enjoy the delightful radio station algorithm that seems to be able to read your mind and present music you currently know and love, music loved but forgotten, and music you never heard before and love immediately. Despite being able to provide a great service the change in payment model didn't go unnoticed, to say the least.
The mark of a good algorithm is that the more you engage with the site the smarter it becomes. Amazon.com has put this technology to good use for years, and it’s among a handful of reasons that it remains my favourite online shopping destination. If eBay and etsy could do the same thing for me I’d likely spend more time and consequently more money too. Providing a service that does the work of searching around for me is a place I want to spend my time. The only way a good algorithm can be bad is when users aren’t savvy enough to know the difference between intelligent technology and a breach of privacy - but that is a whole other topic that I’m not in the mood to address at the moment.
For now I’ll leave you with a final thought: What would happen if an online community with a sophisticated algorithm for predicting recommendations was mashed-up with products and services? The answer is the end of crappy online banners and wasted efforts on online promotions.
The cult of the amateur: How one man's views taint only his own reality
The internet fascinated me from our very first introduction back in the early ‘90s because it provided new opportunities for self expression. Suddenly there was this tool that allowed me to connect, build a peer group, express my thoughts, and read from a fresh perspective. Blogs are powerful and have led me to support the online community in any way I can. I’ve worked in various roles, in an array of capacities, all in hopes to learn everything I can about the platforms that cultivate freedom of expression. I believe that every single person deserves an opportunity to express themselves and experience the powerful self-esteem boost by attracting a following.
On the flip side, it’s quite flattering to be considered such a threat by someone like Keen. I don’t think he’s an elitist as he claimed on the Colbert Report, instead I’d say that he’s scared of being seen as something of a charlatan. In my experience, there is no such thing as a professional artist. There are commercial artists, but that isn’t the same thing. To say that one person has value because they generate revenue and another does not because they share their work for free is ignorant to say the very least. I don't believe earning money equates to having talent.
There are lots of wonderful books out there regarding modern technologies and their effect on our culture. Understanding web 2.0 and the tapestry created by its many collaborators will perhaps reveal a more realistic view on where we're headed, check out: Rise of the Creative Class by Richard Florida, The Wisdom of Crowds by James Surowiecki, Groundswell by Charlene Li, Here Comes Everybody by Clay Skirky, Small is the New Big by Seth Godin.
A final thought to consider is the historical legacy of self publishing. For example, Walt Whitman's Leaves of Grass was published in 1855 and continues to have a profound effect on the American psyche. I would assert that self publishing is as vital to Democracy as voting. It would be interesting to know what Whitman would do if he were alive today. I think he'd be extremely active on Twitter. Being able to communicate and provide unique personal insight is not new and could not possibly destroy a culture that is founded on individual freedoms and self expression. More recently Iran and South Korea are able to communicate with people outside of the country because of social media. More and more technology can go where 'professionals' can not lending to a truly independent voice corresponding what is really happening on the ground.
Am I a feminist?
Anyway, the interactive portion was truly brilliant. I’ve attended several conferences in Toronto, and found little nuggets of interesting insights, but the speakers at SXSW were exceptional. My only disappointment was with the majority of the panel discussions. At times the conversations came off as ego stroking and less about useful insights. That said, there was one panel that did affect me because of the context of the discussion. The panel was titled, Everything I Needed to Know about the Web I Learned from Feminism, and consisted of 4 females discussing their views on how feminists are persecuted for their beliefs online.
First off, as with most panels, I felt the title was extremely misleading. The discussion did not address what principles from feminism related to the web, but instead what I observed was a reinterpreting of their experiences with aggressive comments as attacks to their feminist ideology. Fair enough, but this is, in part, why I have a hard time with contemporary feminist views. I dig the philosophy of feminism. I really enjoy reading books by Gloria Steinem and Naomi Wolf, but I’m not sure that I fit in with the feminist crowd of today. I don’t entirely care if someone has misogynistic views; in fact, there are plenty of times when I use this character flaw to my own benefit. The blonde stereotype is alive and well and doesn’t apply only in the context of sexist men.
To me, hurtful or sexist comments are a situation when we need to step back and ask ourselves what is a reasonable expectation. If I allowed myself to feel angry and persecuted every time I felt I was treated in a sexist manner I'd spend most of my energy on situations that are outside of my control. Also, I don't think we need a society of politically correct robots. While no one deserves to be singled out or mistreated for any reason there needs to be open dialogue. Tolerance is not a one-sided action. At this stage of the game the issues remain big picture issues like seeing more females in politics vs. expending ourselves and our resources on discussions about nasty comments or off-hand remarks.
At the end of the panel I went up to a woman who had raised her hand and asked for help with her sexist co-workers. None of the panel had much to say. They basically were like, “don’t let those bastards beat you down sister!” I told her that she should address the issue with HR as sexism has been illegal for 20 years or more. She wasn’t very friendly this woman, and felt compelled to list all the places she’d worked and how much professional experience she had, and went on and on about how unique and complex her working environment is. She wasn't listening to me and didn’t want my help. Without a thought she was essentially attempting to put me back in my place as a dim blonde with no authority on the matter.
And as to men bashing women online, I don’t agree with the panels’ assumption that it is an attack on their principals. I think it’s more like anonymous online users who are bored and know an easy target when they see it. Once a bully knows what buttons to press he/she will go to the limit with it. Or maybe it's just like being in the backseat with your little brother as kids. Remember when he purposefully tried to annoy you by reaching into your personal space; hovering his finger inches from your face. Why react the same way now that you did back then? Just ignore him and soon enough he'll find some new way to get on your nerves.
Welcome to my blog.
Instead the modern landscape is filled with brands and advertisements and pressure to conform to a socioeconomic sect in order for businesses to analyze specific consumer demographics. This can't be the free society envisioned by the founding fathers. Thoreau's Civil Disobedience is collecting dust on the shelf of history. The new generation aspires to conform and fears rejection. Very few proudly carry their freak flags in the offline world anymore. It's like there's a spinster librarian hushing everyone to be quiet. "Shhh - share your opinion elsewhere. Aren't there online places for your kind?" it seems to me that the worst thing is being thought of as strange or weird. Why is that? Or more importantly, why do we care? Who said everyone has to like and accept us? Maybe this is the dark side of too much political correctness.
Before my rant gets misinterpreted as propaganda or conspiracy theory I'll stop and go back to the premise of this blog. The role of social media in my life and why I think it has importance. I recently read Clay Shirky's book Here Comes Everybody, in it Clay gives a profound overview of the current online landscape and presents examples of how people are organizing and effecting change by their participation on social media platforms; such as: blogs, Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, etc.
Brands and consumer focused businesses need to remember that a consumer is not a faceless mindless entity in which to understand through statistics and dogmatic primitive analysis. The beauty and purpose of social media is to release all of us from the chains of categorization and the simplistic roles they evoke. Advertising and marketing no longer needs to be the likened to the pastor delivering a sermon, but rather a country fair where wares are on display peddled by trustworthy friends of the community.
Several years ago I read, 'The Wisdom of Crowds: Why the Many Are Smarter Than the Few and How Collective Wisdom Shapes Business, Economies, Societies and Nations', It's a book written by James Surowiecki about the aggregation of information in groups, resulting in decisions that, he argues, are often better than could have been made by any single member of the group. The book presents numerous case studies and anecdotes to illustrate its argument, and touches on several fields, primarily economics and psychology.
In a recent report entitled Social Influence Marketing published by Razorfish, Bob Lord states:
You can read the entire report here: http://fluent.razorfish.com/publication/?m=6540&l=1
I think this example from Cadbury is the future of advertising. It's not about what the company thinks is best for it's brand - it's about what your customers want to buy.