360DigitalInfluence

Adults make rules for kids all the time. It’s their job, after all, to protect children and to help them to grow and to succeed.

But sometimes those rules can get in the way. And, according to the National School Boards Association (NSBA), the 92 percent of school districts across the country that have policies creating barriers against Internet use during the school day may be doing just that — getting in the way.

(Disclosure: I don’t have children and I love social media. But I do have a background in media literacy education. I hope that counts toward something.)

The NSBA recently completed a study of nine- to seventeen-year olds and their use of social media as well as the role of social media in education. What did they discover?

No shock here, but kids are heavy users of social media.

• 96 percent of students with online access use social media, with 81 percent doing so within the past three months.

The thing is, many of them are using social media for educational reasons.

• 50 percent of students use social media to talk about schoolwork; and
• 59 percent use social media to talk about education-related topics like college or college planning, politics, news, careers or jobs, ideas and religion or morals.

And most schools are requiring the use of the Internet to complete assignments.

• 96 percent of school districts have teachers who assign projects that require the Internet;
• 95 percent have teachers who use web sites to communicate assignments and other course-related information;
• Nearly 50 percent have international pen pal programs and online partnerships with other schools;
• 35 percent have student blog programs; and
• 22 percent use wikis for school projects.

But they are also making rules that restrict Internet use during the school day.

• 92 percent of school districts require parents and students to sign an Internet use policy;
• 98 percent of school districts use software to block access to inappropriate sites;
• 84 percent prohibit online chat and 81 percent prohibit instant messaging;
• 62 percent prohibit commenting on message board and blogs and 60 percent prohibit email; and
• 52 percent prohibit the use of social networking sites like MySpace or Facebook.

While these rules are only applicable during the school day, their mere existence is sending a (wrong) message to parents — and to students. Participating in social media has limited educational value.
Meanwhile — and despite the hype perpetuated by the media —
students and parents report few problems with students’ social media use.

• 20 percent of students have seen inappropriate pictures on social networking sites (likely to have been posted by their own peers);
• 18 percent have seen inappropriate language (again, likely coming from their own peers and nothing more than they hear on the playground or the bus – or at home);
• 7 percent of students have had someone ask them about their personal identity or have experienced cyber bullying;
• 4 percent have had conversations that have made them feel uncomfortable;
• 3 percent have had strangers approach them repeatedly; and
• 2 percent said that they a stranger tried to meet them in person, with .08 percent actually agreeing to do so.

What was most interesting about the study was its discussion of students the NSBA labels the “noncomformists.” These students are heavy users of social media and they break the rules that school districts have for Internet use. They use inappropriate language, post inappropriate pictures, share personal information with strangers and, while online, often pretend to be someone they are not.
But these same students know about new sites and technology before their peers do, communicate more frequently with their parents and demonstrate greater proficiency with “21st century skills”: communication, technological, creativity, collaboration and leadership.

Meanwhile, their graders hover in the B’s and C’s, which the NSBA suggests has less to do with their capabilities and intelligence and more to do with the schools’ lack of effort to engage them in innovative and creative ways.

What does the NSBA recommend?

• Educators and administrators should take the time to educate themselves by spending time using social media. Don’t believe the hype. Experience it.
• Put social media to use for staff communication and professional development – give your staff the chance to use social media in a productive way.
• Begin to experiment more with using social media for educational purposes.
• Develop policies that will help to ensure more equitable access to social media among your students.
• Pay attention to the “nonconformists” and develop more innovative ways to engage them.
• Reexamine restrictive Internet use policies.
• Work with social media companies to identify opportunities to increase the educational value of their technology.

What would I add to that list? Why not actively engage those nonconforming students in developing ways to engage their nonconformist peers — as well as other students? Take advantage of their leadership capabilities and their knowledge of social media and give them a good reason to get excited to come to school and a chance to do well.

Do you have anything to add to the list?

(By the way, the study was funded by three organizations with an economic interest in encouraging students’ — and schools’ — use of the Internet: Microsoft, News Corporation and Verizon.)

Speaking of economic interest . . . while I was writing this post, there was an ad for the cable industry’s online safety campaign, Point Smart Click Safe. While most messages about online safety lean toward overemphasizing the boogie man in the closet, the message from the ad was that parents should simply spend more time learning about what their kids are doing online. In the ad, the dad had been reading his daughter’s blog and was able to speak more fluently about her interests.

“You might even like it,” the ad says.

I met Chris Jordan from Notes from the Trenches about a year and a half ago when I reached out to her on behalf of a client. She is the mother of seven beautiful children who provide her with seemingly endless story fodder for her blog, which currently brings in about 10,000 loyal readers a day.I recently asked Chris if I could interview her for this blog after reading about the State of the Momosphere session at this year’s BlogHer conference (Chris was on the panel.) We finally got around to finding the time to talk last week.

Chris recognizes that her blog is valuable and that her readers have grown invested in her life and doesn’t feel like compromising her blog by responding to the 2-3 requests from marketers she gets daily. Instead, she encourages these same marketers to buy blog ads to reach her audience and to compensate her for her hard work and writing.

Alison: Did you imagine when you started your blog that it would turn out the way it has?

Chris: When I started three and a half years ago, nobody had ads. There wasn’t a market for it. I started my blog as a personal journal and I never thought I would keep doing it past a week or so because I don’t have that long of an attention span (laughs). But as I kept going, it evolved. I found my voice and it went from there. I’ve only had ads on my site for a little over a year now. And within that year I’ve been making money off my site and have been offered other blogging jobs.

Alison: Do you make much money off the ads?

Chris: It’s not enough to live on but its nothing to sneeze at either. It’s money for extras.

Alison: I would guess that the money is not your primary motivation.

Chris: No, it’s not at all.

Alison: Can you describe what happened at BlogHer during the State of the Momosphere session?

Chris: As much as I hate to rehash it again, sure.

Alison: Why do you hate to rehash it?

Chris: I got a lot of hate mail from people who love pay for post. I am so over pay for post.

Alison: Tell me about pay for post and why you hate it. Rant. Go for it.

Chris: The premise of pay for post is that you write posts for five dollars each — which is the going rate — where you hawk a product that you’ve never used and you’ve never seen and you write about how much you love it. For five dollars.

Alison: Are you explicitly asked to say you love it?

Chris: Yes, you cannot write a negative post. And it’s not something you’re even familiar with unless all these people have actually gone to Hawaii to stay in a time-share and have hair implants.

Alison: So, they’re not sending you to Hawaii or giving you the product.

Chris: No, they’re not sending you anything. You’re not getting anything out of it except for five dollars.

Alison: And how obvious is it when you see the post?

Chris: It’s pretty obvious. It will be like, “Hey, I found this great product. Link here. You should really use this great product.” And then another link.

So, during the State of the Momosphere session, Jory Des Jardins, who was moderating, asks, “Is there any kind of advertising that you wouldn’t put on your blog? And do you feel like, with the advertising, you have to change your tone?”

So, I responded, “No, I don’t change the tone of anything I write. I would never say anything about something that I dont use.”

I said that people need to value the work they’re doing and pay per post is not something that values their work. It just sort of snowballed from there and people were saying that I said awful things about pay per post and really all that I said was that I thought you were getting taken advantage of. And most of the people who are writing those posts are stay at home mothers who feel like they need that five dollars.

And people are spending a lot of time writing these things. If you took all those hours and you spent it on your writing, you could have a portfolio that could potentially get you a real writing job. Turning over your blog to badly written advertising — you’ll have nothing to show for it. The people who want to read you for the content have long left because they’re bored with the product reviews.

Alison: When I talk about your blog I talk about the video of Miles cracking eggs into a bowl and how in 24 hours there were thousands of views and how that is a perfect illustration of how you have built this audience who will absorb anything you have to say. And that’s significant. Marketers try to figure out how to produce videos for huge brands to get people to watch them and they can’t find an audience. Why do you think people watch a video of Miles cracking eggs into a bowl?

Chris: I think people have become emotionally invested. My readers are invested in my life. They take things personally on my behalf. If somebody says something offensive, they feel personally offended for me. Or when they see me at BlogHer they feel like they know me. And that’s why they watch the video.

Alison: How often do you get requests from marketers?

Chris: Several times a time. Constantly. Every time I check my email.

Alison: What’s the most ridiculous request you have received?

Chris: Theyre all ridiculous! Really. Okay, maybe I shouldn’t say all. 99 percent are ridiculous. “Come and look at my web site! This product will be the great new thing.” Lots of times, it’s not even geared to me. It will say, “For Notes from the Trenches,” and it will be in a different font or it will read , “For Notes from the Trenches readers to enjoy.” People offer stuff, but its usually really dumb stuff that I have no interest in.

I think a lot of PR people haven’t realized that — and I think a lot of bloggers haven’t realized it. It is valuable real estate that you’re asking me to give up for free. I mean if it was something that affected me and it was something that I really wanted or always used or something like that — well, no, I still wouldn’t consider it. I’ll go and buy the product if I want one.

Alison: Why do you think compels other bloggers to accept products?

Chris: I think they like getting free things and it doesn’t matter what it is.

I now say to people who approach me with products, “Well maybe you should buy an ad through the BlogHer ad network. Buy ads on blogs that reach the demographic that you want to reach and maybe in the ad have an offer that if you buy through this ad you get a certain percentage off or have a drawing for it.” There are a lot of things you can do if you really think this is a good product. But people aren’t going to just say nice things because you want them to.

Alison: Do you think your readers look at your ads?

Chris: I think they definitely notice. I think people thought it was funny when I had that birth control ad sitting up there for a while.

Am I coming off as a total b*tch?

Alison: No, I think you come off as someone who realizes that you have influence and you shouldn’t be giving it away.

Chris: If you don’t value what you are putting out there, you lose your voice. Your readers are not going to come back.

We’re buzzing about mobile solutions around here a great deal lately. (Read what Rohit and John have to say.) It’s hard not to with all the hullabaloo about the iPhone. And a recent Harris Interactive poll indicates mobile is an imperative element of any effort to reach young people, with 44 percent of cell phone users between the ages of 10 and 17 saying that text messaging is their “primary form of communication.”

My personal interest in mobile is my belief in its ability to serve to bridge the digital divide as well as its role in political and social change — both in this country and around the world, including developing countries. With cell phones already in the hands of the those who are least likely to have broadband access, why not, as I said in response to Brian’s recent post about the increase in broadband use in the U.S., stop worrying so much about broadband and invest correlative energy in developing mobile solutions.

In other words, who cares if there isn’t any WiFi in your village when, through your mobile phone, you are able to coordinate microfinance loans that enable others to develop businesses and feed their families?

One of my favorite reads these days is MobileActive.org, a network of folks who are learning and sharing best practices for using mobile technology for civic engagement. My former colleague, Katrin Verclas, coordinates Mobile Active and is an endless source of good ideas and great resources and, most importantly, INSPIRATION.

Shareideas.org is another collaborative space for sharing best practices for using mobile technology for “social benefit.” (It was Katrin that pointed her readers — including me — in its direction.) ShareIdeas already has a great set of case studies about folks from Nigeria to the Philippines to Indonesia using mobile technology for civic engagement, economic empowerment, education, environment, health and safety, and humanitarian relief.

And it’s obviously not just developing countries. In the UK, Friends of the Earth’s “Join the March” campaign asks folks to upload films from their phones with a message to their MP about the need for stronger climate laws. In the U.S., former Senator John Edwards — and many of the other presidential candidates — are using mobile technology to keep their supporters engaged in campaign activities. And Al Gore’s Live Earth campaign, which continues on beyond last weekend’s concerts, has a global SMS campaign to encourage people to signal their commitment to take easy — but necessary — steps to fight climate change.

Have you signed up to participate in an advocacy campaign via your mobile phone or device? If so, I’d love to know about the campaign and your experience. Did you feel like it was an empty exercise or did you feel like what you were doing was having an impact? Did they continue to send you messages and, if so, was it effective or did you just wish they would go away? Was it something that you told your friends about to get them involved, or was it just something you did on your own?   What else worked — or didn’t?

photo by Scott Beale / Laughing Squid

Because I am oh so punk rock, the inclination when John asked the team to offer up a social media tool that we love (transparency, transparency) was to come up with something completely obscure — like a bootleg vinyl 7″ from a Nation of Ulysses show in some Seattle community center basement.

But, no. Nothing obscure here. I love me some del.icio.us. Yum yum. Can’t get enough.

Oh, del.icio.us, how do I love thee? Let me count the ways . . .

1) Because browser bookmarks are inadequate and limiting. I only save things on my Firefox bookmarks that I visit regularly — like my online bank account or Google Reader (I love you too, Google Reader). I’ve lost bookmarks when I’ve switched computers or even browsers and, if you don’t have your personal computer with you (which, of course, if you know me, is close to never) you don’t have your bookmarks.

2) Because you can remind yourself — and tell others — why you saved the link in the first place. Browse my del.icio.us links, I’ll show you.

3) Because, if you are in my network, I don’t need to fill your already too full email inbox with links that I want to share with you.

4) Because other people send me links that they think I’ll like via del.icio.us — and, sometimes, they’re right.

5) Because if I could communicate my interests as well as my del.icio.us tag cloud does, I would be much better at small talk.

6) Because the folks at del.icio.us make it easy for me to embed my latest links in my blog sidebar. (Now, if only Blogger — my blogging platform — would allow me to auto post those links like the other cool kid platforms . . . )

7) Because, like Netflix’s Friends feature, I get to see what my friends and family members who use the service are looking at these days.

Just del.icio.us.

On Friday, Mark Goren at Transmission Content + Creative wrote a post about The Early-In Loop, the folks who find out about cool content on the web and then “generously” pass it along to others. In response, Douglas Walker at Webtalker wrote a post about WHY it is that we share things with others, generating the following list:

• Geek Cred - When I share something with another and it is found to be valuable then my “geek cred” goes up and thus I become a bigger influencer to that person, increase trust and, feel better about myself in the process.
• Rewarding the Good - When I see something I like, agree with, or find some type of value in, I like to share it with others as a way to reward the creator. Conversely, I will ignore bad content so as not to continue its spread.
• Verifying Judgment - I may not be sure how I feel about something, so I send it to friends or blog it to find out what others think and confirm whether my initial opinion was correct.
• To say Hi - Sometimes I might use stuff as a way to reconnect with someone if I don’t have anything else worth saying and just use the content as a relevant bridge.
• Pay Back - Some people are good at sending me stuff, so when I come across something relevant to their interests, I might send it along to return the favour.
• Badge - I might send something out in the same way that I wear a funky t-shirt, because it says something about me or what I am into.

The answer to that question — why do people forward/share content — is ongoing in our work. A video, web site, blog post, photo, podcast, del.icio.us tag, whatever isn’t a success story — isn’t SOCIAL media — unless it’s remarkable enough that people (and, specifically, the people you are trying to reach) share it with others. When clients or colleagues ask us to produce “viral” content, the content part is easy, it’s the viral that can occasionally be a bit of a mystery.

I agree with all of Walker’s reasons for why he sends things along; all of them are familiar and applicable to me. But, are there other reasons that aren’t listed? Here are my six additions to Walker’s list of six, most of which are less about being “in the know” and more about my personal relationships — which might, therefore, apply to consumers that we are trying to reach through our Digital Influence strategies:

• Common Ground - I send things along to people because I want to affirm our commonalities: things that make us laugh, things that infuriate us, things that make us think.
• Reveal - I’ve sent blog posts from my own blog to people who didn’t previously know I had a blog in order to tell them about it. It’s generally very matter of fact: I’m sending them a post that is relevant to them (or, like Walker, gives me a chance to “say hi”), but the underlying message is “I haven’t told you about this before.” Not everyone has a blog, but there are other things that someone could reveal about themselves by sharing something they found online.
• Thinking of You - I send things to people — a week, a month, a day, an hour - after having a conversation with them to show them that I am thinking of them or that our conversation inspired me to learn more about something.
• Follow Up - Similar to Walker’s “To Say Hi,” I send relevant links to clients or colleagues as way to follow up from conversations to keep the ball rolling and to demonstrate my value as a resource.
• Showing Off - I share things from my ego feed or about things that I worked on with colleagues or friends. But, when a site offers me the opportunity to create a widget or participate in a co-creation exercise, I also share the products that are generated because I think they are cool because my hands are all over it.
• Welcome - Similar to “Common Ground,” I send things to new friends or colleagues as a way to show them that I see them as being part of my circle, to affirm our connection.

Okay, now it’s your turn. Think about the last thing you passed along — an email you forwarded, a news story you shared, a del.icio.us tag you linked to for someone else, a blog post you emailed to a colleague. Why did YOU send it along? You don’t need to come up with six (although you are welcome to do so), but how about just one?

On Friday, I attended the Personal Democracy Forum conference at Pace University in New York. With my background in political mobilization, it was like going home: the conversations, the old friends and colleagues. And as a true political/social media junkie, I was in heaven, surrounded by the likes of Larry Lessig, Joe Trippi, danah boyd, Robert Scoble, Eric Schmidt, Thomas Friedman, Jeff Jarvis and Josh Marshall.

Oh yes, lots of (white) men. But it was boyd who — in the 10 minutes the conference organizers gave her and her Madonna circa Borderline get up — is most worth remarking upon.

boyd spoke about the fact that, although they have seemingly embraced social media, the presidential candidates insist on treating “the digital world as another broadcast medium similar to TV.” She thinks it’s time for candidates to begin to think about the digital world “as a networked public where people live their lives.”

This is particularly relevant for young people, boyd’s area of expertise. I remember reading a post on her blog in which boyd made the insightful point that young people — in contrast to older generations — did not talk about “going online,” as that would suggest a distinction between their lives online and off. They are not “going online,” because they are always there.

As far as boyd is concerned, candidates are losing out on an opportunity to “shake hands” with young voters, something they can do without a day of flying and an advance team.

And, says boyd, this means going further than simply collecting friends as an endorsement of your candidacy because IT’S NOT.

“Much of (young people’s friend) collecting is identity-driven. Politicians are used as a marker of identity to be shown off like a badge. Connecting to Barack or McCain or Hillary is all about staking one’s identity in relation to political life. Many users are friends with multiple candidates because they want to show their active engagement in politics.”

“Real friends leave comments or wall messages,” said boyd, and, as far as she’s concerned, politicians should do the same. If it works for celebrities, why not Romney, Giuliani, Richardson or Edwards?

Or, for that matter, why not the consumer brands that are creating MySpace profiles and, as boyd would say, treating the social network like just another broadcast medium?   While this wasn’t boyd’s point at the PDF conference, her message still applies.
For the past few months, our client, Select Comfort, has been commenting on their customers’ blogs or on message boards to thank customers for their enthusiasm for the product or to let them know whom to get in touch with at Customer Service if they have a question or concern. The company is demonstrating that they are actively listening and they are taking the time to show their customers that they are doing just that. They are “shaking hands.”

So, I’m with danah. Say hi. Show you’re listening. Shake some hands. Your voters/your customers will make it worth your time.

I have an aversion to using this blog to gush or promote ourselves.   In the end, it’s my belief that the best way for you to know how fabulous we are (and, yes, we are fabulous) is to read our posts and to see how we think.

But, today?   I’m gushing.   (Just a little.)   Our beloved and intrepid leader, John Bell — Ogilvy’s Executive Creative Director and the Managing Director of 360 Degree Digital Influence — has been elected to the Word of Mouth Marketing Association’s (WOMMA) Board of Directors.

We are proud members of WOMMA and we are committed to their ideals and ethics and to word of mouth as an effective strategy for our clients.   We joined the association, in part, because we wanted to stay on top of best practices.   But we also wanted to contribute to elevating word of mouth — both as an industry and as a strategy within public relations.  

We  aim to help  our clients to recognize that “opinion leaders” aren’t just those guys that appear on the Sunday morning news shows.   They’re the woman who tells her co-workers about the new coffee shop that opened up down the street or who tries to organize a Meet Up for fellow supporters of Barack Obama (or Hillary Clinton or John McCain or John Edwards or Rudy Giuliani or  Fred Thompson or  . . .).   They’re they guy who orders a glass of Laphroig every time he’s at the bar (straight, with a water back) and encourages his companion to have a taste or who organizes a book club for fellow science fiction geeks.    We are in  a time, as we say around here, when anyone  can  be an influencer and social media amplifies  the power of word of mouth.

John — and the rest of us — look forward to working with WOMMA and its members to spread the word about word of mouth, to strengthen best practices and to develop effective metrics for assessing ROI.   We’re proud of John and we think, in his new role,  he’ll make an important contribution to the association and to the industry overall.

The “official” press release is attached: Ogilvy Public Relations Worldwide’s John Bell Elected to WOMMA Board of Directors.   Or you can link to it here.

I consider Wikipedia to be a great social media experiment.   The whole notion of a wiki is about community collaboration.   “Truth” is defined by the collective.   Narrow, self-serving content doesn’t stand a chance.

Believe in your own experiment, Jimmy.   Let us in.   Expect the best of us and most of us will meet your standard.   The rest will fall by the wayside as your army of editors uphold the truth.

Unlike Fight Club, the first rule of Social Media Club is that you should always talk about Social Media Club.

What’s Social Media Club? It’s a group of people — around the country — who are passionate about the power and potential of social media, which the Club’s organizers define as

conversational media in all its interactive forms including text, video and spoken words — whether face to face, over the Internet, over the airwaves or via mobile technologies such as iPods and cell phones.Social Media Club is a chance to share best practices, generate new ideas and make connections between people and ideas.

This Thursday night, Social Media Club will be meeting in our offices in Washington DC from 6:00 to 8:30 pm. Registration (free) information is right here.

Join us.

The second rule of Social Media Club? You should always talk about Social Media Club. Bring someone else along.

John Bell is on a panel right now with Paul Rand from Ketchum.   Just the two of ‘em.   The topic at hand is “Beyond Buzz: Keeping It Going after Your 15 Minutes.”   (There’s a joke in there somewhere, but I’m going to refrain.)

John’s talking about the contrast between Buzz versus Active Discussion versus Co-Creation.   Buzz can’t sustain itself, active discussion can, co-creation can be sustained and can, “quite frankly”, grow.

John’s a proponent of co-creation because of his own experience — and his own excitement — as a consumer and his desire to be a part of the process.   He wants to participate in and be proud of the outcome.   (Actually, I think that’s what he heads up our global Digital Influence practice — he loves this stuff, personally and professionally, and recognizes its potential.)

Check out John’s recent post on a new scotch distillery’s foray into co-creation or others on the topic.   Good stuff.