Mediamum » social media

So I’m about to become known as that woman who researches death in social media.

mediamum — Sun, 20 Feb 2011 19:22:03 +0000

My dissertation topic is coming together. What a fun little journey (also known as screwing with my mind) this is.

I research social media. I’ve written a paper on the best way to construct a tweet. I watch how people use their streams. I’m interested in how they construct their online lives, communities and identities. The stories (lies) people tell; the release people feel in ‘oversharing’; the flirting; the stupidity; the bravery. How people create, condition, and curate their intertwingled on- and offline lives. I’m the Penn and Teller of social media. (Probably the Penn. Because the other one doesn’t speak. That’s totally not me.

I’m not sure how I fell into the death realm. I’ve decided, though, that this will be my area of adventure for the dissertation. It’s fascinating. While we all know the ‘proper’ behaviours and practices when you physically die (the ulitmate form of identity management), today we need to get our heads around what will happen to your social media representations when you pass away. We haven’t prepared ourselves for this – people have online lives, and these don’t stop when you do.

Facebook initiated a Facebook Memorial Page where loved ones of the deceased can opt to have the page effectively closed, but still visible. It’s getting a heap of flack on that – mainly because it’s difficult to ensure the person moderating the page is who they say they are. Some people think they want their page closed down, others want them to remain. It’s not easy.

I’m considering three areas of death in social media:

1. The appropriation of your social media profile to become akin to a memorial upon your passing. How the community, friends, etc engage with each other, and with the ongoing digital representation of the deceased.

2. People who commit what has become known as ‘virtual suicide’. The closing down of all social media profiles (and commonly, reopening them). This is a great way of controlling identity both on and offline. Check out the suicide machine for a little more of this.

3. Finally, the people who use social media as a part of their offline suicide toolkit. Posting status updates as they say goodbye and end their lives, or live broadcasting it in social media.

Right now I’m engaging with the 1st one. I’ve developed a research proposal to examine Facebook’s Memorial Pages. I’ve got a list of reading as long as my arm – including areas as diverse as post mortem photography and roadside memorials as well as the scant work done in HCI so far in this area - thanatosensitive design, which is what I’m seeking to write in.

Interestingly, one paper says that it’s not trying to say we should design for the dead. I laughed out loud at that. But two weeks later, while walking the dog this morning, I realised that is exactly what we do need to do. We need to design for the dead as well as for the living. (Have I weirded you out yet?) My thinking is that if identity continues in social media after death (even if it’s managed by a loved one, which is common) then there is also agency that continues. We need to create design, spaces and opportunities for the dead to engage. And suddenly dead gets inverted commas around it. ‘Dead’. Because when you die, you don’t really. Jed says this makes me a “freaky weird kind of person.” I’m cool with that.

Yeah, I think you want to invite me to dinner parties. Meanwhile, ponder this – there are over 3 million dead people with Facebook pages. What do you want to have happen to yours when you pass away, and how will you prepare for it?

Mummy’s back in graduate school

mediamum — Wed, 25 Aug 2010 15:27:11 +0000

During my Masters degree, I began looking into a PhD. I needed a wider range of opportunity and consideration. I wanted to look at media that is more than broadcast, and that doesn’t pretend to be objective.

So I ventured forth to the ATLAS building on campus and annoyed/asked people there for guidance and advice.

First I joined the Doctoral Seminar group at ATLAS. A 1-hour, 1-credit required class for ATLAS PhD students that is as much about giving them a sense of community as it is about content delivery. My idea behind it was to ‘suck it and see’ – I wanted to see what the students were like, what ATLAS was like, what their idea of ‘multidisciplinary’ really was, and how they all worked together to find out if it was a fit for me. In that class I met the amazing students who became good friends, and were interested in the same broad things as I was.

Me in pre-school. Amazing. So much, yet so little has changed.

Big kudos to Jill Van Matre, Associate Director at ATLAS who put up with me not knowing who I was; and the instructor for seminar that semester, Mark Winokur – both of whom cleared my acceptance even though I was not part of the PhD program and I was the first to ask them to take me. They took a risk. The type of risk that sees the future rather than the present. A good risk.

Through the rest of the Masters, I unliaterally took classes that would assist in my application for the ATLAS PhD program. I stressed over my GPA when many were past that phase. I was told repeatedly variations of ‘nobody’s ever gotten in from the SJMC before’, ‘funding is a real issue’, and even ‘ATLAS might not be taking any new PhD students at all, you know’.

I opened metaphorical doors and windows for funding opportunities and alternatives in case it didn’t work out. I stopped talking about my plans with people without vision, and I wrote a thesis on online communities. I ignored the fact we have no money.

I applied

ATLAS accepted four new PhD students this year. All four are women. I’m one.

I’m working in the ConnectivIT lab with my advisor, Leysia Palen. The lab looks at human centred computing (HCC). In particular, Project EPIC (Empowering People in Crisis) seeks to understand how people use technology when there are heightened areas of fear and personal loss at stake – in disasters such as Haiti, bushfires and floods. Far from just using social media to organise a Happy Hour meetup, I’ll be helping produce work that aids emergency personnel and individuals save lives.

However, there is math. But I have lots of friends who will help me understand it, or at least pour the wine when it all gets a little much. Statistics for Dummies is online. I found it

Lessons learned

This is just the beginning of this part of the journey, but I learned a lot in getting to this point. I thought you’d like to hear some things:

* Don’t look for reasons ‘why you should not do it’ – there is no need to look for those – everyone will throw them at you. There are plenty. Look inside for your own reasons ‘why you should do it’. There are fewer of them, and they might not make sense to some people, but they’re way more important.

* Listen to the warnings/negatives of everyone, and use them to prepare and plan for ways around issues. Be conscious of things like you have no money. Work out ways around the money thing. Clip coupons. Get used to free things. Don’t be too proud.

* Make strong connections. From the admin person through to the Dean. Everyone is important. It’s not strategic. It’s just being a nice human being. It will pay you back. Just don’t expect it to, and it will. (Does that make sense?)

* Don’t get angry. Many times people say you can’t. That’s because they’re not willing to. That’s okay. It doesn’t mean it’s the same for you.

* Finally, don’t worry about how you’ll manage next year (time, kids, money etc). Just eat that elephant a bite at a time, and worry about it as it happens. Every journey is different, and for women who wear so many hats, we are the essence of innovation. Keep stumbling forward.

* Smile, laugh and love every step. Lots. See the funny side. Sure, it shows you are a little bit crazy. Crazy’s good.

My thesis, mom bloggers and understanding brand relationships

mediamum — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 15:16:21 +0000

News flash: I’m not your average mom blogger.

I do research in social media and post that along with my posts about my family, my work, my life and beliefs. Like most women I wear many hats, and I blog a little about them all. Sometimes it’s academic (like this one could be if I hadn’t just had 3 hours sleep), other times it’s more focused on how many things people throw away that are perfectly good. My blog is three dimensional – it’s a pretty transparent view of me in all my roles.

Many people and companies know I do humanities focused research in social media. Some are really interested – it sounds so fun to work on that stuff! But I’m kind of sucking the fun out of social media. I am very interested in how little details like word choice and sentence structure contribute to identity work (how we see people, and how we construct what we want others to see us as being). I find I need to speak about stuff in very much a short elevator pitch style rather than give full answers to those who ask about my research – because you know what? They really don’t care about the structure of a tweet the way I do. They want to connect and get stuff. I want to know why. While these overlap, they’re not exactly the same. To use an academic term, we have different lenses.

Luckily, my friends/colleagues are typically one of the following:

a. Too polite to say how truly boring they find it, or how I’m destroying the ‘fun aspects’ of social media for them by analyzing everything they do/post.

b. Care more about me as a person than my work.

c. Actually like talking about the research and how it fits with what they’re interested in (these people tend to be other academics, people in industry concerned with social media, or startup people.)

d. Someone I used in my research data collection.

e. On drugs/alcohol.

Or a little of some of all of the above.

In any case, whatever area you fit in – I’m posting my full Masters Thesis here. Because it’s my blog and I can. And also because I spent a heck of a lot of time researching and writing it. The realm of the mom blogger is a crazy and at times convoluted one. Not all of us get along – in fact I’m waiting for a “Real Housewives” version of mom bloggers. (If you giggled/smiled at that, you know what I mean.) And that friction is because we are all passionate, opinionated and sassy. Even though I disagree with some of the things people do, I respect them for making their own way.

So enjoy my thesis for what it is. For those who are not seasoned academics and want to actually find out what it was all about, probably the best thing for you to do is just read the intro and then skip to the conclusion – and trust that I did all the data work in between – that will stop boredom setting in.

I am moving on with my work, and have entered the realm of crisis informatics – looking at how people use new tools of technology to communicate during emergencies and disasters. I am very lucky to be working in the EPIC lab at the University of Colorado. I continue to be interested in digital marketing, social media and as a mom blogger (self identified as well as identified by others), I look forward to seeing how and if brands and women finally work out how to work together.

FINAL MASTERS THESIS

Should some brands stay out of social media?

mediamum — Wed, 28 Apr 2010 00:04:55 +0000

The ongoing antics of Nestle as it continually trips itself up in all forms of social media (Facebook, viral Greenpeace videos) have led me to ask if some companies should just stay out altogether.

Even Satan or Lex Luthor would have a better time on social media than Nestle. There are legions of people wanting to embrace evil.

Nestle Killer-Asesino Facebook page, one of many opened in response to Nestle's social media attempts

But Nestle doesn’t even have them on side. People are not saying that they’re willing to accept a company that has substantial long-term crappy business practises – because Nestle doesn’t admit to them. And that’s saying something.

For a company that is top ten worldwide in almost everything – size, employees, number of countries it operates in, number of brands it holds… no other consumer goods company has as much worldwide impact as Nestle…. and no company can boast as much obvious distrust from vocal consumers who have long-held issues with the company, and now have a means to share them with a new generation, and in new regions.

What doesn’t Nestle get?

The problem for Nestle is not just at the ‘I don’t like the company/product’ level. The issues are not just opinion. If it were, then they could be dismissed by many as trivial, personal or simply without foundation.

Instead, social media offers more than just opinion sharing. It gives every person with a web connection access to hard factual information, statistics and documented history including legal processes. The information is as deep as the user wants to go, and it’s all just a click away. Companies can’t hide it. That’s the nature of the web.

Getting it right

Chiat/Day’s Pepsi Refresh Project understood that there is something that resonates between a brand and the consumer, and that connection reaches far beyond the product.

Instead of using social media to focus on products, use it to focus on global issues – issues you and other multi-nationals contribute to, profit from, and can make a difference in. Involve the social web in gaining insights into how to fix these problems. Work with people, not against them. People want you to succeed when you demonstrate a commitment to things that affect their lives, their world.

If you spend part of your exhorbitant ad spend on social media that demonstrates real involvement with the community rather than talking about your products, you’ll begin to build some social capital where you have none.

Frame the conversations – it gives you some control. But ensure you’re framing them in spaces you’re willing to go, and that people will support you in.

Birthdays, connectedness and social media

mediamum — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 03:19:01 +0000

Jed: How old are you this year?

Me: I’m 27.

Jed: Oh thank goodness. You’ve been 24 for 15 years now. Glad to see you’ve decided to move on.

Me: I have not. I’ve been 27 for a while. I embrace my age.

Jed: Yes. Yes you do. Especially when your daughter is catching up with you.

Me: I could totally have given birth at 9. That happened in China or something. It’s because I went to an all-girls high school. I married very young. Anyway, don’t give me grief, it’s my birthday. I’m 27. Where’s my cake?

It’s easy to think that after a certain age, your life should be something to look back on each birthday and reflect with a self-satisfied grin. It should be about chocolate, wine, good friends and a drunken refrain of “My Way.”

I love Halloween!

I’m not doing that.

This is the second birthday I’ve had in the US. Each birthday I’m reminded of the people, animals and things I miss. While their love surrounds me still, I wish I had Max and Bec here with me. My mum and dad. My dogs. And yes, even my stuff that’s in storage in Sydney. (Because I’m that shallow. Back off.)

But this year is better than last. I am being literally flooded with birthday wishes through social media of all forms, including people who are very special to me, and whom I’ve met while living here. While I’m on the US leg of my life. My mum sent me a spectacular handmade card and my brother and his family will skype with me from Sydney. My daughter chats with me from Armidale, country NSW. My cousins and friends wish me cheeky happy birthdays from London. And I am thrilled that I have friends doing the same, from all across the USA.

Social media means I don’t feel as displaced as I could be.

I’m still rather teary, but I’m still doing it my way. I’m not ready to reflect yet. The journey is still happening. I’m looking forward.

The fact I have no idea where I’ll be living this time next year, but that I have so many things bouncing around, shows that I’m at a high point. And I’m very lucky to have good friends and family all around the world who care.

I can’t wait to see my family and friends in Sydney in 78 days – I miss holding them and seeing them face to face. I’m looking forward to the opportunities that are coming up everywhere. I’m busier than ever.

Some things are different. I have found I love winter most of all in Colorado, and I love summer most of all in Sydney. (Extreme much?) However, some things haven’t changed. I still want to lose 10 kg (20 pds). But I still want cake.

And so it goes. Wherever you are in the world, whatever your time zone, we are connected. A click away.

The three categories of mom blogs

mediamum — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 23:25:01 +0000

Mass media (and some mom bloggers) would like to lump all mom bloggers into the same shoebox. As a result, it’s hard for marketers to navigate these waters without recognizing the differences between bloggers in the space.

Just as there are different types of magazines and newspapers, so there are different types of mom blogs. I’ve been researching the sphere of mom blogs for more than six months, and can generally classify them by three distinct types. I’ll describe them, along with providing some foothold references to traditional media, in the hopes of dispelling some questions. Comments from you are (of course) more than welcome!

1. Pitch Me – The marketing-focused mom blog

This is the blogger who says, “think of me as an extension of your marketing department.” The blog front page usually includes a “PR Friendly” button. This blog typically features lots of competitions, and wants to promote as much stuff as possible. Much like an advertorial-focused trade publication, there can be much value in the blog content, it can be very professionally done, and have a wide distribution.

Pitch Me blogs are keen to work with companies. (Pic credit: Flickr army.arch)

The blog owner may have ideas which extend to a complete campaign – they are like independent specialist creative agencies, but with a blog. Sometimes they will even want to negotiate a fee for their work with a brand and product (reflecting their role as being focused on marketing with your brand rather than an independent publisher). This is not new – there are older traditional publications that have done this type of thing – charging a company to have an article included.

The negative side of this is that while popular, the audience of these blogs recognizes that most of the content on the blogs comes from a marketing alignment (just as happens with traditional advertorial-focused magazines) and their purpose in visiting the site is to win stuff. Any kind of stuff. It is this type of blog that MSM (mistakenly) classify all mom blogs as.

For brands, it may appear easier to work with these bloggers – they are eager to develop a relationship with most PR representatives that have taken time to craft their pitch and do a little research on the blog and their style. This is not unlike pitching any kind of magazine, including the marketing-oriented advertorial ones. However, you should be ready to be asked for compensation for the inclusion of your material, whether you write and develop it or they do. These relationships are probably best suited to FMCG (fast moving consumer goods) products. The relationship is fast, and shallow – any belief that long-term resonance with the community will be achieved in this high noise space is fools gold, unless you run continuing promotions across a wide number of them (keeping it at high level is important here because your brand will be tarnished by a relationship with a Pitch Me blog that is low quality).

Prediction: These are the sites that are fast growing in number. There will remain a few high level blogs in the category, and these will develop to possibly being the best looking sites on the web – a necessity from sheer competition within the category. Sheer traffic numbers, however, do not demonstrate the readership’s commitment to the blog but rather to the range of competitions and giveaways. Because they tend to use passive voice, unless the blogger is in the top tier of these blogs, they are only of passing interest to the large readership and are not in themselves memorable brands to associate yours with. For deeper resonance on higher priced items, best find another outlet.

2. My Magazine – Multi-niche magazine-style blogs

These blogs reflect far less of a marketing approach and more of an individual, active voice. The blog will cover a variety of areas, generally reflecting special personal interests of the blogger (who may actually be a specialist or expert in one of these areas). These bloggers are open to receiving information about products/services/companies/brands across the realm of interests they cover, but nothing beyond that. In fact you’ll annoy them if you try – sort of like pitching a wedding venue to divorce magazine. Not only is it a waste of everyone’s time, it’s actually unprofessional and demonstrates a lack of understanding and/or basic research. And these bloggers are likely to call you out on exactly that.

The premise of providing compensation of some form to these bloggers depends upon the type of product, campaign and information you have. If you are looking for particular amount or style of coverage to be guaranteed, then it’s advertising and you need to pay whether you provide all the content, or if the blogger develops it themselves. Depending upon the blog (and its hosting location in the world), disclosures of these arrangements will be necessary. If you are willing to offer a product/information and hope that you’ve got enough nouse (and the blogger is interested enough) to hope to get something written, then you don’t pay. Of course, you’re familiar with this – it’s the same as a traditional general interest magazine and the writing ethics are reflective of a traditional journalist (even if the writing style itself is different). They have a more active voice and agency on their blogs, and do not focus primarily on competitions or marketing. They reflect more of the traditional journalistic standards in their writing, and will develop distinct areas of advertising and editorial to ensure adequate compensation and understanding is achieved for all parties, including their readers. They will sometimes actually feature boycotts and dissention rather than promotion (something you will not find in a Pitch Me blog). You will have a better idea of the readership of this type of blog, allowing better segmentation for more specialized products, or more specialized market segments – great for brand extensions or highly targeted mass consumer campaigns in the blogger’s interest category.

Prediction: These bloggers will align themselves with a few brands and have some short-term campaigns that will be highly effective for all concerned. Some of these bloggers will become more and more celebrated within their segments, through MSM outlets. While there are fewer of them, their range is wide and a somewhat varied audience of people find them to be ‘sticky’ sites that they will regularly return to.

3. Niche specialized blogs

These bloggers are becoming the new version of traditional specialized (or event trade) magazines. Focusing on a single general area such as health or politics, these bloggers have detailed knowledge and understanding in their field, and have enough passion and/or specialised expertise to blog authoratively about it. While they are moms/mums, they do not focus on product reviews, competitions and giveaways – however they might run them occasionally if it complements their niche. These blogs have far lower readership numbers overall, but the readers are influencers in the category, and are very loyal to the blogs in the space. These blogs are very sticky to those who are influential in the subject matter. The readership also has deep respect for the blogger’s expertise and looks to them for specific recommendations.

Niche mom blogs have one particular area of expertise. Pic credit: Flickr Mike Licht, NotionsCapital.com

These bloggers are also the ones least likely to enter into a variety of advertorial-style campaign deals. They will want to work with specific brands only, and develop a ‘brand ambassador’ relationship that is more akin to a spokesperson role. Through that relationship, some form of compensation would be negotiated, that would not necessarily guarantee coverage on the blog. These blogs are better suited to high-end, or specialized products with a defined niche target audience.

Prediction: This area will be growing in breadth and depth over the next year as more women with specialised interests and expertise decide to blog, and as some early entries to the competition-focused FMCG field move on and develop a loyal base focused on competitions in one category.

Summing up

Over time, the tiers of influence to be found in each of these areas will prove themselves. In much the same way as you already use your media monitoring forces to discover influencers in traditional media, you should utilize the same strategies for blogs and bloggers. Just like journalists, they have their brand passions – and their brand dislikes. More and more often, they have their story needs and deadlines that will see you gain the most favourable treatment when you can help them at the most appropriate time (just as you do with journalists). Some already have editorial calendars – you should ask for them, and use them. The only difference is that the internet works on dog years – the field changes seven times a year, not once. It’s a challenge to keep up, but everyone should at least try.

Finally, it would be a mistake to trash any of these three types of mom blogs. Each of them have a place – and there are great and not-so-great iterations of all three types. Depending on the brand, the best relationships will be had by aligning with the best blog (and blogger) for the objective – and these decisions need to be made with consideration of more than traffic numbers, google rankings or other shallow metrics in mind.

How to avoid people using location-based social media

mediamum — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 03:37:18 +0000

The hot thing at SXSW is location-based anything. (I’m so cool, I don’t even need to be there to know this.) But I’ll bet every single geek pushing a location-based app at SXSW is missing the point. You should sign up for location-based social media. So cool people can avoid you.

Here’s the deal – there are some people I’d rather not see. (Oh come on, don’t get all judgy. Like you’re happy to see every single person, every time you see them? Yeah, right). Some people always ask you for money. Maybe they repeat the word “dude” too often (that’s really annoying). Or they’re smelly. Or don’t wear shoes (I have this thing with shoes. Blame flylady.). Perhaps there was a drunken evening in a toilet stall you’d rather not be reminded of (don’t look at me, but if you’re blushing right now, well there you go).

These are people who you cross the street to avoid.

If an axe murderer checks in at Starbucks, best you go elsewhere for your mocha. (Pic credit: Flickr Creative Commons Jin.Thai).

Social media today gives everyone the ability to only ever run into people you like, and avoid all the weirdos. Yes, even if you’re at (Woodstock for geeks*) SXSW.

Location-based social media is the gift that rewards everyone. You can see where the people who will negatively effect your groove are at all times, and avoid them. And people who actually like those dodgy losers can find them.

It’s a win-win.

Real-world example right here

Over a year ago, I requested all mountain lions around the Boulder area get on Brightkite. It was a reasonable request. I just wanted to know where they were so they wouldn’t eat my kids, Brightkite is a local startup (ie, the mountain lions need to support local industry), and it would allow us all to avoid an awkward confrontation.

The old-school way of keeping track of mountain lions. Social media would be far more effective. (Pic credit: Flickr Creative Commons pst)

Well, none of the mountain lions took me up on it. Maybe they don’t follow me on Twitter. Anyway, I found it very disappointing. It was all about mutual respect. Live and let live. You lions do your thing and we’ll do ours, and if you let us know by checking in at North Boulder, maybe even with a cute pic of you with your cubs, then we’ll be aware you’re about to eat our terriers. Or kids.

But no, they didn’t do it. And so we had a spring and summer where little dogs were chewed, and the owners had no idea. That’s just disrespectful when Brightkite was right there, all free and stuff.

So the big takeaway is to get into location-based social media. It means I can avoid seeing you. Then everyone’s happy.

*This (apt) description of SXSW was originally coined by @nsquared but I pushed him for it. He’s a nice guy. Don’t go hatin’.

The one where I’m crowdsourcing stalkers at SXSW

mediamum — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 04:14:18 +0000

Dear SXSW attendees:

I know you’re all excited. You’re going to spend a whole heap of time being all geeky and fun, and drinking and stuff. Talking about startups, design, innovation, music… ooh I’ll bet you’re all tingly.

My husband is one of you. He’s kid-at-Christmas excited. He loves Texas and had a ball there last year. As a startup geek guy, he can’t wait for a whole week of indulgence.

Good on him. I hope he has a great time.

But now to the point of this post – apart from his blue eyes and salt-and-pepper hair, my husband has an Australian accent.

I have seen the way females respond to a male with this shrimp-on-the-barby quality. It’s a little over the top. During SXSW women go a little nuts for startup guys – add the accent, and it’s all downhill for the startup widow wife.

Unlike some other (better known) startup guys who think it’s okay to flirt and carry on while away from home, as long as they “don’t go home with anyone at the end of the night,” (I’m not naming names, but you freaking well know who you are – and people do talk about you, by the way), it’s not going to cut it with me.

Stop whining, woman. What’s the point?

I’m not going to SXSW (someone has to stay here and look after the kids and write a thesis), so… I’m running a Where’s Waldo-style competition on my husband for attendees of SXSW. Let’s call it my little contribution to citizen journalism.

Ooh, a competition from a mom blogger? (Who’d have thought, right?) But how do I WIN?

This is Jed. Print it out. Keep it handy. (Note the wedding ring.) Some call it stalking, I call it love.

All you have to do is find my husband, Jed (gorgeous guy – see the pic – with accent). Take pictures of him, and post them on whatever social network you use (Brightkite, Twitpic, Flickr, whatever). Tag them ‘Jed’. You can then tweet me the link (@Mediamum), or post them in the comments for this post. Each entry will get a number, and I’ll draw a winner using the Random Generator tool. The winner will get a $25 gift card from the place of their choice. The more pics you take, the more opportunities you have to win.

I love my husband. If I squint a bit, he looks like Mark Harmon, and that’s something too good to lose. I’m sure you understand.

Thanks, and I hope you rock the world at SXSW. (Don’t make me come down there.)

*Jed has given his blessing for this competition to happen. He thinks it’s funny. That will be the case unless everyone there starts taking his picture. Then I’ll be the one laughing.

**Do not chew me out for being a loser wife. I love mah man and no biaitch is gettin’ in mah way (hair flick). That said, he has my blessing to drink and talk and stuff. Just as long as his hands are in plain view at all times.

The merits of tweeting an abortion. (Yes, really.)

mediamum — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 05:15:16 +0000

An American woman named Angie Jackson has decided it was a good idea to share her experience of aborting her pregnancy with the world, via YouTube and Twitter.

A mother of a four-year-old who goes to the trouble of outlining the reasons why she decided on an abortion with RU486, Angie says her social media posts are her attempt to “demistify” the process, and let everyone know that for her, the whole abortion thing “isn’t such a big deal.”

Here’s the video of her saying she is “having an abortion (insert dramatic pause) right now.” (Don’t worry, there are no gunky parts, which is not what the Sydney Morning Herald would have you believe in its reporting of the story, with the warning the paper placed at the beginning of the video.)

She also twittered the entire process. You can see the community response by searching the hashtag #livetweetingabortion. And there is even a twibbon. Yes, just when you thought all the really terrible twibbon ideas were had, this one leaves nothing to the imagination.

This is a story with so many news hooks in it, a news editor would begin planning a long lunch. Front page … done. Abortion, methods of abortion, social media, social media plus abortion. Oh, and atheism. Check the mainstream media stories on this, and you’ll see it all – surface level crapola about all the obvious news angles, lots of sensationalist eye rolling and no depth.

Look at the blogosphere reactions and you see some insightful commentary. Feministe, for example, reminds us how many women go to get abortions all the time, and how veiled our usual discussions of the subject are.

Deep breath.

Now, I personally switch between being pro-life and pro-choice (knowing that my choice will always be pro-life, no matter what, for me, but recognizing others may not feel that way. I actually have trouble with this whole stance – if I feel so strongly about it, then why am I not ready to instill my thoughts on others? I do it with breastfeeding, don’t I? And for some this means I can’t be a feminist. Feminists are not Sarah Palin. Feminists are not pro-life. People look at me and don’t think feminist. Oh really raised eyebrow? But I digress.) This is not something I throw around a lot, because as Feministe correctly states, it’s a heated debate that I don’t choose to enter. However, I have my views and I respect other people their rights to theirs. I am kind of okay with that, but I don’t know if I always will be. But for now, it’ll do. Until you judge me and be really nasty and call me names, and say horrible things about the size of my arse. Then you’ll push me over the edge and I won’t share my Aussie accent with you any more. And we all know who loses in that equation.

While I disagree with Angie’s views on the subject, I think her decision to speak about it in a very open conversation is a great one. (It’s okay. I’ll wait while you pick yourself up off the floor from shock.) I believe everyone should endeavour to hear every side of a conversation, especially views that don’t mesh with their own. Especially when you have a passionate belief on one side.

In fact, to take it even further – I wanted to hear what she had to say, even though I knew her decision would not have been mine. And I think other people should be brave enough to do that without a knee-jerk reaction (‘jerk’ being the operative word).

So instead of looking at the mainstream media stories reporting the incredulity of using social media to talk about such a politically incorrect subject, I think we can all learn more from reading and seeing personal stories about the subject, from all sides. Only then can we be truly educated and tolerant – if not understanding – of each other. Each to their own.

Who owns a Twitter hashtag?

mediamum — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 03:01:04 +0000

Company A says, “Let’s create an event, sponsor some bloggers, and they’ll create a hashtag around it and we’ll give out some prizes. It will be great, Twitter will be buzzing with our company’s name.”

Or a group of bloggers might come up with:

“Every week we’ll be ‘meeting’ on twitter, using this hashtag.”

Sound like good ideas? Sure. And for many it’s been working. But what works right now, or yesterday, won’t always work. And that’s something you need to be aware of, whether you are a direct representative of a brand – or one of the moms who decides to use a hashtag, even as part of a simple discussion.

Just because you begin a hashtag, doesn’t mean you control the hashtag and what happens within the conversation it starts. It’s out there for everyone to engage in. The etiquette is still evolving. What is seen by some as polite is to allow people to push products or messages using hashtags. What is seen as others as polite, is to not fill their twitter streams with obviously sponsored messages with little real value. We’re all still working out the middle ground.

No company or individual is too big in social media... to fail. Pic credit: Flickr C.C. goldberg.

If your followers allow you to bleat positive company messages without interfering, it’s because they’re respecting your space and you’re not stepping on their toes enough to aggravate them. If, however, you flood their streams with inane garbage that really doesn’t invite balanced conversation, then you will most likely get what you deserve.

Everything you’re connected to in social media, both messages and people, says something about who you are.

The use of hashtags have some calling back to traditional methods of advertising messages. Social media is not controlled media. This is not your space. It doesn’t matter if you’re a company or an individual, you can’t control the use of a hashtag. You can pretend to control the conversation by making a hashtag a metaphor for a flag of membership to a particular perspective or even a particular conversation point – but if the general population decides to discuss something else, or bring other things into the equation under that hashtag, then that’s what social media is all about.

Ironically, the things you can control are the words you use, the images you use, and the connections you make. These three-dimensional aspects of your brand are far more telling about you than simple two-dimensional things like a single targeted message in a broadcast campaign. People expect you to have a variety of connections. I’m proud of mine – from .. ahem adult entertainers, through to famous musicians and academics. I’m known for my mulitplicity (do not call me Sybil). But inauthenticity is not.

If you want a fully controlled message, use traditional advertising in a mass media you’re familiar with – where you have the opportunity to blast one-way, two-dimensional controlled messages to the public. It gives you all the control, and if done really well, can create a semblance of a personality for your brand.

If you are ready to really engage with your target audience, then social media provides you with an opportunity to demonstrate a complete, three-dimensional personality for your brand that consumers can really connect and find resonance with. When done well, it will result in brand loyalty and brand ambassadors that you don’t have to buy off.

On Twitter the use of a hashtag organizes conversation around particular things. But it doesn’t organize the thoughts of those in the conversation, unless they’re willing to have it that way.

Don’t forget you’re dealing with conversations in an even playing field now. The old rules do not apply.

Mom 2.0 Summit: You’re a ninja

mediamum — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 17:37:05 +0000

There were so many amazing aspects to the Mom 2.0 Summit in Houston, Texas this last weekend that it’s hard to really pinpoint the essence of just one takeaway. There is a great range of posts coming together about the event and you can sort of lose your entire day surf them all through this great link list by Misty Khan. But read this first, right? Come back to the top after you’re done. It will still be here. Promise.

The tagline of the conference was “What you’re doing matters,” and the theme was “Definining a movement.” At one stage of the conference Laura Mayes (@lmayes) said they weren’t entirely sure what that definition was, but it would come together.

Well, it totally did.

The words of my new buddy (one of my new buddies. I now have heaps and heaps of them. And they’re all amazing!) @Mir on my panel, “Got Strategy,” also with the amazing Susan Getgood and Isabel Kallman of Alpha Mom really resonated with me as a definition of the mommyblogging movement. Mir said that recognising she was a ninja shopper, and that she could celebrate that through her blog, was a big deal for her.

And I went “aha!” And then I went NINJA! Oh my gosh. NINJA!

As mums, we wear so many different hats – and we secretly reckon we are pretty crappy at most of them. Sometimes we share that secret suspicion with the world. And we roll around in it. We’re ready to see our faults and failures instead of embracing our brilliance and abilities. Sometimes that’s kind of fun. Most of the time though, it leaves us feeling a little less than amazing.

The Mom 2.0 Summit gave us all the invitation to embrace our inner mummy ninja. When Mir talked about realising how awesome she was at getting a bargain, and deciding to share that “shopping ninja” quality with the rest of the world through her blog, it was a way of standing up and saying “I’m really great at this, and readers of my blog will love hearing about how they can leverage my ninja quality.” And they bloody well do. I sat there, next to her on stage – and wrote it down. Really. I did. I was taking notes on the stage.

I wanted to kiss her. I reached out. And you know what, she would have totally let me if I had gone through with it. A big sloppy one. Right on the lips.

Why was being a ninja such a big deal for me? The only ninja’s I’ve run across before have been startup wankers who associate it with being awesome testosterone laden risk takers who take no prisoners. (They’re the ones that rant on about ramen noodles, and eat the expensive dishes at Hapa Sushi instead.) That’s okay if you’re five. And have a plastic samurai sword.

But the mummy ninja doesn’t pretend.

At the Juiceboxjungle Ad Network gathering, with Lauren from Vizit and Andrea of Savvysassymoms..

We don’t have the testosterone “I’m an awesome wanker” attitude. Instead, we mums are incredible at getting stuff done that shouldn’t be able to be done given the time and resources on our hands. We make it all just work. You know that loaves and fishes thing? That’s our daily reality. We pitch companies, wear an apron (even if only in the bedroom, @mublogger) and get dinner (or order it). We wash, get stains out (or leave them in and casually cover them with a loosely knotted cardi), battle tooth decay in the kids and keep them .. ahem…regular. We’re mums. And we make it all happen. And sometimes we’re just freaking dangerous. (You know, in that daring Fear Factor good way type of danger.)

I’m a startup founder mum ninja. I do frugal family stuff because I have to – and I’m really good at it. (I loved getting the coupons that came with our Mom 2.0 Summit welcome bag.) I can create a kick-ass strategic plan for any type of business – or show you how to do it so it makes sense. I am also a mummyblogging media ninja. I believe the future of media lies in the hands of all of us. And I’m using that ninja-esque power to energise, shake up and invigorate the potential content producer in everyone. And really annoy a few old-school media people too. (That’s actually a bonus.)

I’m so excited to have met so many other mommybloggin’ ninjas at the Mom 2.0 Summit, as well as the representatives of some great PR companies (many of whom are also mom ninjas – booyah!). It was simply empowering in all the best ways. If you can, you should totally come and join me at Mom 2.0 next year in New Orleans.

If you’re a ninja mumblogger, with an Active Voice blog, then you can change the world. That’s a definition of a movement I’m proud to be a part of. Thanks to all the wonderful bloggers I met – you are all ninjas. The world is a better place because you blog. (I was tempted to write something like “the blog is mightier than the ninja sword” but that would have made you groan, so I didn’t.)

Why your small business needs a social media plan

mediamum — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 01:29:54 +0000

Word of Mouth has always been a double-edged sword for small business. I remember the saying a local fish and chip shop had on their wall. “If you like our food, tell your friends. If you don’t like it, tell us!”

Once upon a time, the worst that could happen would be a letter to the editor of the local paper. With a 24 hour news cycle, the bad news would pass and your business could weather the storm.

In today’s social media world, it’s different.

Up to now, it’s been easy for small businesses to say social media was something they’d like to dabble in, but it wasn’t necessary to really put too much time into. It was a fun thing, or a sideline to their other communication tools.

Today businesses of all sizes need to be examining their online presence. Think of your customers. How many of them do you think have Facebook accounts? All it takes is one status update that says negative things about your business, and suddenly you’re suffering. How about this status update, posted by someone with 30 friends who lives in a rural area with a tiny population:

“Ugh. Feeling very sick after greasy fish and chips from Big Joe’s.”

Picture credit: Flickr Creative Commons http://bit.ly/dg3sD2 http://bit.ly/9NHDJC

How many of that person’s 30 friends do you think live in that same rural area? The same rural area that Big Joe’s counts on customers for? And how much weight do you think those 30 friends put on the opinion of the person who posted the status update?

A lot.

Word of Mouth (or WOM) carries the most powerful advertising impact of all the different forms of promotion you could use. And it spreads like wildfire.

“Sorry to hear about Big Joe’s big grease up.” “Get well soon, buddy.” “Won’t be going there again.”

Imagine now, that you are the proprietor of Big Joe’s, and you are one of the friends of this status poster. Not only would you know the negative post existed, but you’d also have an opportunity to find out more about why they were feeling ill, and possibly begin a conversation that made people think you were interested in doing good business, instead of thinking you’re a shop dealing in food poisoning.

Today, everyone is on social media. And everyone has influence. Time to claim yours.

For mommybloggers at Nestle, the medium was the message

mediamum — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 23:23:58 +0000

If you are unfamiliar with the Nestle Family incident on social media last year, there are myriad blog posts about it, as well as a single piece of mainstream traditional media coverage.

In a snapshot, Nestle brought a number of bloggers to the company’s headquarters in California from September 30-October 1, 2009, showing them the full range of its products, and using them as a focus group for the Nestle Family initiative. The bloggers began tweeting pro-Nestle messages that were not received well by some in the Twitter community. They tweeted back. Then ensued what has been called a “twitstorm”, as well as a plethora of blog posts that led to further debate and discussion.

An introduction to the research

Attendee bloggers were made aware of the complete range of Nestle-owned products, as were those at home.

I’ve begun reviewing the results of the survey I undertook during the twitstorm. Please Note: The purpose of this survey and my thesis is to investigate why people were so passionately reacting to each other, rather than to reignite debate. While I hold my own views, my thesis is focusing on the mommyblogger community, authority and political economy. I endeavour to treat all parties with respect at all times. To date, I believe this has been achieved.

Learning about our Twitter community

Importantly, most people completed the survey through the height of the twitstorm and I believe this led to their true feelings being expressed, rather than the more ‘politically correct’ responses you’d expect if they were reflecting on the storm. When asked what you learned about your Twitter community, this was the response:

SUMMARY
VALUE	COUNT	PERCENT %
I learned I like some of the people I follow even more	46	74%
I learned I do not like some of the people I follow	30	48%
I learned about etiquette on twitter	21	34%
I did not learn anything about other twitterers	7	11%

As you can see, most people affirmed their positive beliefs about their stream, but almost half of the respondents decided they did not actually like some of the people they followed. (We can probably assume they did like them before this.)

Additionally, when asked if they believed the Nestle event was a good thing for the attending bloggers to be a part of, this was the response:

SUMMARY
VALUE	COUNT	PERCENT %
I don’t know	24	39%
No	20	32%
Yes	15	24%
It made no difference	3	5%

These statistics indicate that 71%, or nearly three quarters, of respondents were either unsure or negative in their opinion of the value of the event for the bloggers who attended. When only one quarter of respondents thought attending the Nestle event was a good idea, red flags are raised for the community as well as Nestle.

Some commentary in the long form response boxes

On the #NestleFamily hashtag:

“I was disgusted to see the activists invading (use of the hashtag)”

“It was interesting to watch (the hashtag) be used by and for two completely opposing groups/ideas.”

And about the attendees:

“The event underscored the problem bloggers have in accepting corporate junkets that come with a PR hashtag, in that their ethics in attending and their PR activities on Twitter were publically challenged.”

“When blogger credibility is based on authenticity and voice, what happens to both when negative information about a corporation or brand is just a few links away and yet that information isn’t included in a blogger’s report?”

And finally, for this very short piece of introduction, I believe this respondent captured the essence of the questions that arise out of this event, and they are ones I will be seeking some indications of answers to as I progress in this research:

“There are the issues about what, exactly, are bloggers? Are they journalists or brand enthusiasts or community leaders or experts or what? Can you attend an event like this without having been said to represent the brand? And then there are the issues surrounding social media…is it rude to challenge someone’s public statements? Is it against etiquette to “crash” a hashtag? Why is a multi-billion dollar brand hosting a microsite with a twitter feed for an event without a single employee versed in Twitter?”

Thank you to everyone who responded to the survey. I am looking forward to outlining more of the responses in some further posts. If you would like to undergo a depth interview with me over the next month or so, please let me know. Also feel free to leave comments below. For the purposes of this research, anonymity is respected.

Join me at the 2010 Mom 2.0 Summit

mediamum — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 05:07:57 +0000

I’m very excited to be attending the Mom 2.0 Summit in Houston, Texas from February 18-20. The schedule of events is chock full of sessions that I want to learn from.

I think this conference is one which really does enlighten all parties – marketers and ‘moms’ – on how the other operates. I regularly hear complaints from both sides – it seems there are as many different expectations as there are companies and bloggers. I’m looking forward to seeing both sides have an opportunity to describe their experiences, and make recommendations that lead to even better relationships.

I’m even more excited to have been invited to share my insights as part of the panel for the f first professional session of the conference. In the session we’ll be discussing setting a strategic path for your blog through creating a marketing plan and SMART objectives that are both trackable and achievable. I’ve been thinking for about a month now on exactly the best way for me to support the session with additional materials – and I’m considering doing an e-workbook for attendees to use in creating their own marketing plans.

I’m about to plan all my travel arrangements and start thinking about what I’d like to achieve from this conference. I have had a number of women tell me that Mom 2.0 was the best conference they’d attended last year. I firmly believe that with the schedule and talented women I’m lucky to be surrounded by leading these sessions, and the amazing array of women and companies who will be attending, 2010 will be just as successful.

I’m looking forward to getting along and meeting all the exciting, inspiring women who will be there. Will I get to meet you?

Why my research is in Twitter

mediamum — Sat, 02 Jan 2010 00:53:32 +0000

“Twitter’s a fad.”

“The young kids use Twitter because they don’t want to have a real conversation.”

“Twitter is destroying society.”

“How do you know they’re real?”

“I really don’t care that much about what you’re doing all day.”

I’ve heard it all. From all types of people.

The only people who truly understand Twitter are those who are using it regularly, and have overcome the barriers to acceptance that it inherently presents as a tool of technology.

Academics don’t get Twitter. Including many of those doing research into social media.

Twitter represents a new way of communication. After lifestreaming on Twitter for over two years and researching it for over 12 months, I understand the nuances of the communities on it, and have watched it morph as it has moved from being a geek tool to a plaything of the mainstream.

I’ve seen people pretend to be people they’re not. Consciously and unconsciously. Romances, flirtations and breakups. Proposals, business endeavours, connections – and their destruction. Lonely and socially inept people have connected with high flyers and leaders. I’ve watched as people going through the most intense pain of their lives have dared to share emotion and feeling that they’d never divulge to their closest friends in a physical sense. I’ve seen Twitterers decide, recently, that “in real life” friends and online friends really are the same thing. For many, normal people, physical presence does not matter any more.

In 2010 I’ll be completing my thesis in the communities of mombloggers on Twitter. I’m particularly looking at some individuals who have had things happen to them that we just don’t talk about in society. People who are judged through horrid newspaper reporting that does nothing more than enable the middle class and other everyone who doesn’t fit their beige lives. People in pain. Who perhaps with Twitter have found reason to keep going, found some sense of support they didn’t have available “in real life” – and through whose journey the rest of the community is learning more about things that often get swept under the carpet. Death. Abuse. Homelessness. Why some women hate others, and appropriate responses to companies and those we don’t understand.

It’s hard.

My big wish for my work in 2010 is that I can somehow do some justice to the women in the communities of Twitter, and give them the opportunity to be heard and appreciated. I can see the opportunities and topics for my PhD dissertation being unveiled, without my pushing them.

I know it won’t be easy when some decide to be contemptuous.

But I’m ready.

Disney on Ice, Worlds of Fantasy

mediamum — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 23:11:01 +0000

Disney really has wrapped up every part of entertainment. Everywhere, the Disney organization has a presence. Even in this horrid economy, Disney reported an 18% increase in profit for the fourth quarter this year. The brand resonance of Disney is nothing short of amazing. Older women remember their favorite Disney princess, and still buy pyjamas, t-shirts and lots of other merchandise.

Feld Family Entertainment invited Harry, Charlie and I to see Worlds of Fantasy last Friday. The show was very well done, and Charlie’s favorite part was the segments of the story of The Lion King.I was fascinated by Pumba, who skated on all four skates. I couldn’t work out how the person in the suit was doing it. Charlie didn’t care about the technicalities, he just loved the images, especially of the interpretations of the animals – gazelles, wilderbeasts, lions, birds… all on skates.

The show is probably best suited to the under-10 age group, although we all enjoyed ourselves. The venue was packed, and there were so many little Disney Princesses all dressed up everywhere it was like the Royal Ball! They were incredibly cute. The show moves to Denver Coliseum from 11th to the 13th of December, and if you use the code MOM when booking through Ticketmaster, you can get four tickets for $44 for Monday-Friday matinee shows (a much better idea for little ones), and $4 off Friday night and weekend shows.

The latent sphere of the network society

mediamum — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 23:02:08 +0000

Time for a brain dump. I have just completed reading work coming from Mor Naaman, Jeffrey Boase and Chih-Hui Lai at Rutgers, slated for CSCW 2010, on the content of messages in what they’ve decided to call “social awareness streams.”

And right there I have an issue. I’m lumping it together with the term “weak ties” which found prominence in the 1940s (well before the internet was considered in social theory) and the found a new audience a few years back with its adaptation to online networks.

Today, referring to the activity on microblogging sites as either of these is probably very limited, based on myriad case studies of individuals and their very real connections and friendship strength, found through CMC. They are neither “weak” (as in traditional notions of acquaintances who can be called upon when needed), nor simply an “awareness” of others in a network. They are also not built in a heirarchical organization – they are horizontal. In fact, Castells’ emphatic assertions that when we talk about communication we are actually discussing realms of power and influence, means that “communication” isn’t a term to be thrown about lightly.

He’s right.

My theory of the strength of these relationships is discovered through a realm of CMC that is primarily representated in phatic communion. The relationships exist as communities within what I call the latent sphere of the networked society. (In this sense, I use the networked society as defined by Manuel Castells.)

You can buy Ghostbusters-type slime like this at www.midnightwarriorsentertainment.com

If Vincent Miller is correct, and Twitter is nothing more than a celebrated phatic technology-a technology which exists purely to support phatic communion, then the very real relationships being discovered today through its use are far more tangible than those discovered through discussing the weather in real life. And the fact that Twitter has existed and morphed in so many ways over these short years I respectfully suggest dispels any notion that it fulfills the “social awareness streams” suggested by the researchers at Rutgers. It, in fact, provides people with real connections, in the most concrete form – in fact (hold on to your hat) in a way that potentially surpasses that experienced in real life.

These people will regularly never have met in real life, until at least having met online first. Homophily still exists – we still form communities on this phatic network. (Just look at the hashtags to find the communities and topic areas that draw people together. And that’s before Twitter added the List function. And then also, what about all the third party tools that operate solely on allowing you to classify your ‘groups’ of people in that space, such as Tweetdeck…) But these communities are not just asking simple stuff like what the weather is like, or just passing the time of day. The depth of feeling is not just as acquaintances. This depth of connection to people we never before would have connected with, and in fact to many we would never approach in real life (such as the homeless), has never before been realised by any other form of media. It’s new. It’s potentially both scary and exciting.

Even though Twitter is accepted by the mainstream middle class to such an extent it no longer receives explanations in newspapers (and in fact is used as the basis for reporting by lazy journalists), it still has not reached critical mass. But it will happen.

I believe the mommyblogger community is leading the way in demonstrating the case study proof of my assertions. We have seen real connections, and real support – people reaching out in very real ways to support each other, typically in times of great need – within this community. This latent sphere bubbles up and is electrically tangible. Like Flubber (it’s highly viscuous, highly volatile, and has a great sense of rhythm) or the slime in Ghostbusters. (Sorry, but you’ll understand my meaning ) It’s not just “aware”.

So imagine the future – where more communities realise that potential. And then take it that step further, where the brands you love most are able to be part of that space. You know the old saying that if mums ruled the world, there’d be no more war? Here we are in a global networked society, with mums leading the way. Who can tell what comes next?

I'll pay for content when there's Twitter with penguins

mediamum — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 17:57:27 +0000

Usually, I don’t consciously pay for content. I say ‘consciously’ because if I click on a link and there’s a paywall, I won’t do it. I also don’t subscribe to any newspapers or magazines (online or in ‘dead tree’ format). Basically, the quality of the content I’m seeing doesn’t make me want to pay for more of it.

Mr Murdoch does have the right idea. Getting people to pay for content is definitely a way forward. But News Corp. is missing the biggest opportunity they have. It’s a global organization, and while about 1% of their content producers are the best in the world, they are still.. the best. Why doesn’t News identify that globally based 1%, and put it in a paid-for format? At a really, really high price?

If Mr Murdoch thinks that I, or anyone else, will pay for the other 99% of his writers who are complete crap, then he’s mistaken. I’d rather read the far more professional blogs, with the diversity of opinions and transparency News cannot offer.

After freelancing, creating content for a few different publishers it also appears that organizations don’t like to pay their contributors. Waiting six months for a payment on any work done is not a viable business model. I don’t know why some people think it’s all hunky dory. And it’s been this way for many years.

So I don’t pay for content, and I’m wary of accepting any freelance job at all these days. Because I simply don’t like waiting to be paid when my time is better spent on more pressing things.

But my kids? That’s another thing entirely. I currently pay for three social network memberships. And while I’m a member of about 15 social networks, none of these payments are for me. They’re for my kids. My kids totally expect to pay to get access to information, community and technology. They’re growing up with a pay-for-it frame of mind. At the moment it’s a mum-pay-for-it model, and I’m fine with that because the quality of content accessed by my kids on networks like Club Penguin is really worth $5.95 a month. It’s a vibrant community, with great quality stuff. If organizations continue to treat them this way, by the time they’re my age they’ll be paying for content, and believing they should.

But a key part will be getting rid of the 99% of crap for adults and creating something worth subscribing to. We need a Club Penguin for grown ups.

Sidebar: For the “something shiny” HCI people: Twitter with penguins. Now we’re talking.

Glade's sweet smell of good social media PR with Edelman

mediamum — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 01:57:07 +0000

This week I was happily invited to join some other Colorado-based bloggers for a few adult snacks, refreshments and the opportunity to build a basket of goodies to take home. It was a great evening, put on by Glade’s parent company, S. C. Johnson’s wonderful PR team from Edelman in Chicago, to promote their Sense & Spray product.

This event demonstrated Edelman actively identifies good people for brands to work with, and can put together an event that suits all parties. Edelman has fantastic staff, for a start. The company also teamed with social media expert, Ann-Marie Nichols, to ensure they are hitting the right targets.

If you ask me, Ann-Marie and Edelman are smart operators. After meeting/catching up with them on the evening, my belief is that the bloggers were hand-picked to represent ethical, good quality content providers who actively engage with their readers. Women who are authentic. At a time when companies are seeking out mommybloggers more than ever, there are now bloggers who do nothing more than run around the USA for the opening of every envelope. Smart companies, like Glade and Edelman, see beyond what I’ll call “the usual suspects.” (Yes, I’m biased. I was invited.)

Edelman’s staff were well equipped with plenty of information for us to take home in the best format – a USB drive. The activity of putting together our basket of goodies allowed us to chat about the product informally, and we also had fun coming up with possible names for a new Glade scent. (Yes, someone said Bacon. I said Aussie Bush. Ambiguity FTW.) I was so lucky to have Jen Goode so kindly say yes to drawing by freehand (magic marker) one of her lovely penguins on my mug.

It has pride of place on my desk and reminds me how special women entrepreneurs like her are. I have always loved Jen’s designs and you can check the penguin ones out on her blog, and buy a whole range of stuff featuring them. She also does other designs too. She’s an amazingly talented woman in so many areas. I feel so lucky to have actually met her too now.

The event was a great success for Glade. The bloggers discussed myriad issues beyond and including the product, and we all came away feeling positive – and that associated value rubs off. Edelman gets it.

But the goal kick for me was the extra mile Edelman went for me. Here’s the thing:

We were all offered a basket to give away on our blog. Awesome. However, I asked if it would be okay for me to give it away to anyone, anywhere – given some of my readership is in Australia. Glade is a global brand, but I completely said I understand if that’s not okay. I just needed to be clear on my blog. On the spot, the Edelman ladies said “Absolutely, we will make it work. We will send the basket to anyone who wins.” So I’m stoked. I love that foresight and appreciation of my needs.

And I’m excited to give away this lovely basket of goodies to you, even if you’re an AUSSIE!

What you'll win! (The mug will be a fresh one that you can draw on. Great if you're like Jen Goode!)

The basket contains a snuggly IKEA blanket/picnic rug, Swiss Miss mix with mini marshmallows, eye cover, ceramic mug and some permanent markers to decorate it with, and the wonderful new Glade Sense & Spray plus a refill that we have had now in our bathroom for a few days. It smells great and with the refills costing under $4 each (USD), and them lasting about a month each, even graduate students and startups can afford it (ahem).

HOW TO WIN!

To enter is easy – Leave a comment below with your recommendation for a new scent for Glade, focused on Australia. It can be funny or serious. The winner will be picked by Harry and Charlie on Wednesday and I’ll contact you via Twitter/email (make sure you leave contact details). I’ll also announce the winner on the blog. Go for it!

NestleFamily, breastfeeding and social media

mediamum — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:43:28 +0000

I have a great amount of data from the recent NestleFamily twitterstorm. Luckily, I was able to see the storm coming. As a few of the attendees began tweeting about meeting up a few days prior to the start of #NestleFamily, I could see that there was going to be some fallout. My interest had been piqued a few months earlier with the Nestle “What’s for Dinner” junket that received some backlash (which I was a part of, albeit briefly).

Even though I was prepared for it, I doubt anyone saw the enormity and longevity of the community’s outrage. The tail of it is still going. This was a key happening on Twitter, and it had far more impact than the Motrin Moms speedbump. I would argue that Twitter’s community has morphed again as a result. Focus on the types of junkets mommy/daddybloggers who call themselves “PR friendly” accept, and what it says about who they are doesn’t happen in a vacuum. There were real responses from the community. Many negative. This great post by cynematic discusses this responsibility further.

My research

I manually copied thousands of tweets using the #NestleFamily hashtag. I also created an online survey that people were invited to complete during the twitterstorm. I’m very excited to have that data. The 66 completed responses are authentic, grabbed at the time it was all happening, and the qualitative survey responses are about as true to real emotion as you can get – people were telling me what they were doing at the same time as doing it. That’s not easy to get when questioning people about their about online activity. When I write it up it will be a chapter in my thesis, and probably a paper/conference presentation as well. I’m going to write up a short version of the results and post it here on my blog soon.

The most positive outcome has been the amazing work done by Annie, aka @PhDinParenting, who took the opportunity to ask some very pointed questions of Nestle. Nestle has been responding to her questions, so good on them. And Annie has posted their responses in the best, most transparent means possible. She then adds her own analysis and research, with links that are exhaustive, informed and inspiring. It is her work that represents the future of real journalism. It’s why I say that the future of journalism is social.

My question to Nestle

I kept largely out of the limelight on this twitterstorm so as not to taint the data I was collecting. I did, however, want to find out Nestle’s views on the dismal rate of breastfeeding in the USA. Nestle promotes its substitute milk in the USA, and with the USA’s very low rate of exclusive infant breastfeeding at 6 months of age, I wanted to find out what they thought about it all. I submitted the question as follows:

As a premier substitute baby milk manufacturer and marketer in the USA, I’d like to know what your opinion is about the fact that the rate of exclusive breastfeeding in the USA lies at just 12%, when the WHO says it recommends 100% exclusivity for the first six months.

Your Nestle site states that WHO is the “gold standard” so I’m assuming you would agree this statistic is troubling.

Why do you believe this statistic exists? Do you think it can change? And if so, how?

It took a few weeks (I think Nestle lost my question, and then located it when I enquired again about their response), but their response is here:

Thank you for contacting us. We apologize for the delay in our response and we appreciate your patience.

At Nestlé Nutrition we support the positions of the American Academy of Pediatrics and WHO that exclusive breastfeeding for the first 6 months of age is best. The most recent statistics from the 2008 CDC Breastfeeding Report Card (2006 data) show that the national average from exclusive breastfeeding is around 13.6%, which is below the Health (sic) People 2010 goal of 17%.

According to the CDC Infant Feeding Practices Study (IFPS) II (http://www.cdc.gov/ifps/ , there are many reasons why mothers might stop breastfeeding, ranging from difficulty with sucking and latching to worries about producing enough milk. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/122/Supplement_2/S69#T2

We believe that optimal infant health is truly the goal and we advocate for more infant feeding support and education for mothers, regardless of whether they breastfeed, formula feed or both.

We are encouraged by the improvements reported in breastfeeding initiation and duration and will continue our efforts to educate and encourage mothers to give their babies a healthy start. That includes providing education and resources for her, and if she cannot or chooses not to breastfeed, or chooses to supplement her breastmilk, we provide high quality, iron-fortified infant formula-the only safe and healthy alternative to breastmilk.

Robyn Wimberly RD,LD.
Nestle Nutrition Contact Center

So there you go. I have my own thoughts on this response. The final paragraph, to me, is just disgraceful – it’s written very poorly. It seems to be saying that Nestle’s substitute formula is the only “safe and healthy alternative to breastmilk.” I know that those words “safe and healthy” are definitely not something I agree with. But I’m a breastfeeding advocate, ex-journalist and PR queen, and am used to spin. I have done the research. I know what I know and have made up my own mind. The US Government has initiated the Healthy People plan, but where breastfeeding rates are concerned it is failing – and it doesn’t reflect the WHO “gold standard” referred to on Nestle’s own site. There are holes all over this response. The last paragraph made me wince. I think Annie does a brilliant job of dissecting these responses and calling out the holes. I’m not going to do that here. I recommend you read all of Annie’s work, and if interested in more, you can read my short research blog piece on Breastfeeding in America, see the Ignite presentation, or email me for the full papers to see how the numbers stack up. And then make up your own mind.

So what does all this mean?

Now, I know that this storm has ended up being thrown in the “too hard” basket by many people on both sides of the fence, as well as those who sit on top of that same fence. Statistics are being used pragmatically. Manipulation of data is rife. There’s aggravation, and it becomes personal for many who feel attacked by even discussing it. For many, it sucked the ‘fun’ out of Twitter.

But the fact is, this milestone proved the resilience of the microblogging community. It’s opened a conversation that will bind the community even more solidly. It’s given us a view of people that we didn’t know before. People to both connect with, disconnect from, and understand better, even if they disagree with us. If Twitter were really nothing more than messages about eating candy and frozen dinners, then this storm wouldn’t exist. People have taken it upon themselves to get better educated about something they might not have known about before. They were provided links and questions. They had the opportunity to follow up, and go deeper into the issues than they have ever been led by mainstream media, and Nestle ended up without the buffer of media to spin their messages to.

Key Learnings

For the community: Mainstream media is no longer an excuse for not knowing about stuff. The depth of information you have is up to you and your attention span. That’s a hard responsibility to own. In Nestle’s case, I congratulate anyone (including some attendees) who tried to find out more information or followed it up, no matter where you ultimately sit on the ‘issues’. I challenge those who simply sought an easy path and blindly continued tweeting Nestle-friendly inane statements on Twitter, without addressing any of the twitterstorm. It won’t, in the longer term, help your credibility in the community. The really influential people in this equation can be easily identified. And that’s awesome.

For companies: You don’t get to own your messages any more. Social media represents a revolution, not an evolution. It’s another tool in your promotional strategy, but you have to be ready for the real conversation. The one where your comments get called on. The one you don’t direct. And you will never have the last word unless the community deems it to be okay.

The three steps to being influential in social media

mediamum — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:10:41 +0000

To be influential in social media takes effort. It doesn’t just happen. You can’t buy it. It’s not advertising.

So if that’s what it’s not, how can organizations and people get to be really influential? Here are the steps to influence. When you and your brand get it right, that’s when you get to influence others.

Find Relevance

Your first mission is to produce content that is relevant to the people you’re seeking to influence. That sounds pretty obvious, but so many people and companies don’t really have a great snapshot of their target market. They’ve spent so long with basic demographics that are ballpark indications of who their market is that they’ve lost touch with the real personalities of these people. In social media we’re no longer talking about eyeballs, or about mass market publications that look after great big segments of a market. Instead, you’re looking at individuals. Yes, those individuals tend to move in packs – they’re communities of similar people. And those communities have some people with bigger voices. But that can change in an instant, and one bigger voice doesn’t mean they influence everyone in that community. They are individuals first and they are all powerful. Some will love your brand, others won’t care much, and others might detest your brand. Spend some time working out who they are, what their interests are, and what they really think before even trying to produce content for them. Be relevant.

Find Resonance

Readers of my blog know I love to talk about resonance. You can create all the good quality content in the world but if it’s not hitting the mark and connecting with people in a solid way, you’re not getting social media right. It’s a massive error to think that simply creating good content leads directly to influence. You need more than that. You need to produce content that makes people talk about you. Retweet you. Post the article to their Facebook account or write about it on their blog. When they do that, they’re demonstrating their personal involvement with your content, and that’s what you want. Not just for the eyeballs to hit your page, but for the message to be meaningful to them. To the extent that they’ll tie their name to it and go talk about it elsewhere.

You need to create resonance.

One caveat here, particularly for brands and companies running them, is to be aware that to achieve resonance you need to really understand your audience, and remember everything you say reflects on your brand. I wasn’t kidding before with step one. These people have opinions, are smart, engaged and want to work with others in this space – but don’t think you can control the conversation or give half-assed engagement or try to pretend you’re not the person representing the brand, even if that’s not your intention. A great example is the furore surrounding Nestle right now on Twitter. The good news is that while you’ll get called out for crappy behavior of any kind, the social media community wants you to get better. They will celebrate with you when you do, and they’ll be your loudest proponent. If you really listen, and really work with the community instead of trying to manipulate it you’ll get there and find resonance (I’m kinda hoping Nestle eventually realises that.)

Nirvana – Influence

When you’ve achieved the first two steps, that’s when you can seek to be influential. And you’ll see results. You can invite people to play with your new stuff and be confident that because you have resonance with them, the brand will be welcomed enough for people to want to try it out.You can be a thought leader. You can gain a few minutes of peoples’ time to talk about stuff, and they’ll really listen to you.

It doesn’t matter if you have a personal brand or the biggest brand on the planet. Everyone wants to be influential. Using social media is a great way to discover influence through resonance with a target audience you may have forgotten. Rediscover people. Don’t treat social media like other forms of promotion. It still sits in your toolkit, along with other areas like advertising and sales promotion, but it works differently. Get it right and you’ll find the opportunities you are looking for, with the people who matter most.

Disrupting the barriers of media in the 21st Century

mediamum — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 23:38:21 +0000

This pre-internet installation was and remains a vital consideration in the future of media. It has been supposed for a long time that communication and media technologies allowed people who already knew each other to improve existing relationships. Alternatively, broadcast media were used to send corporate-owned messages to the ‘masses’. There has been very little in the understanding of communities and how they are built and morph through media. To date, due to the expense of entry to creating content for media communication technology, most middle class people have been limited to the telephone – and that form is one-to-one rather than the one-to-many formats offered by social media. This installation’s first day shows how people who did not know each other were able to create conversations and relationships – even for a short time.

People in the video respond a certain way because they realize people in the other location can actually see them. This created an ‘event’. In the 21^st Century, when everything that happens in public locations could readily and easily be posted to the web, are we seeing a change in everyday public behaviors due to the fact that we are aware, more than ever before, that someone might be posting our actions? From music concerts to classrooms, from traffic accidents to natural environments, people are creating ‘events’. The greater questions are how have we as a community become the public entity we are creating, and what impact does this have on how we relate to each other. What has made people immediately reach for their cell phone to take a picture when something happens? This is a stage of history we’ve never faced before.

While we have come through an era where “the medium is the message,” we have moved on from this. The medium is still the technology. The message today is found in the resonance of community. One is not the other. In fact, the irony as stated by Steve Harrison in his essay on this particular video (found in HCI Remixed), is key. Separation does in fact, invite a connection. If we believe that human beings seek resonance with each other, eliminating some of the barriers to finding that resonance through disrupting the accepted norms of relationships and community will in fact deliver us to new ways of ‘seeing’ each other. Through these new ways of discovering resonance we will be able to grow an international array of communities. The international would relate not just to geographical space, but also class space. We have a media which will offer everyone an opportunity to find resonance of community with the homeless, the traditional-media famous, and their neighbor.

Do online communities pretend to care?

mediamum — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 01:06:54 +0000

I am fortunate enough to have been invited to attend IMSI, the Invitational Masters Student Invitational, to be held at Rutgers University in New Brunswick, the weekend of October 16-18. Given Rutgers received over 100 applications, to be one of the 25 students invited to discuss their current research and proposed dissertation topic with Rutgers faculty, existing doctoral candidates, and other invitees is a privelege and real highlight of my academic career.

In my application I had to submit an existing paper to demonstrate my research. The paper I chose to submit was on identity work performed on twitter through the use of language and sentence structure. This paper looked at how people create and present an identity of themselves on Twitter, primarily through the use of @ replies, hashtags and retweets. While it’s a decent paper, for Rutgers I’d like to extend it to look at this identity work, and how the Twitter community sees its need to create an identity of concern in crisis and tragedy. This is where I’m headed.

Online communities and crisis

We’ve all seen media stories of tragic events, and how people are affected by them – and how they’ve gathered together online as a result. While sites exist to create online memorials, sometimes it crosses over and a personal fun page is morphed into a place for others to gather when they’ve passed on. On Twitter, I have personally witnessed multiple occasions where someone has ended up tweeting their own tragic events. The death of a wife. The death of a child. I wonder what would have happened if Twitter had been so commonplace during larger tragedies such as the Virginia Tech shootings.

I have watched the online community gather to provide concern and support to individuals directly affected by tragedy. It is this kind of resonance that led me to undertake a small content analysis on the tweets associated with the Australian bushfires last year. I wanted to find out who was tweeting about it? How were they involved? What were they saying and why?

The paper was a very small, very specific analysis in which I was surprised to discover that two thirds of people who twittered during the high point of the bushfire-related tweets were located nowhere near the tragedy. In fact, they were overseas. None of them knew people directly affected. And what were they saying?

Apart from retweeting basic information, the majority of people wanted to know how could they help?

Seeking triangulation? I’m not quite there yet…

Last week I attended the presentation of Leysia Palen’s to-date work in crisis informatics at CU. And the data appears to be reflected in her unit’s research (in particular, on the American-located Red River floods) as well. Exactly the same percentage – two thirds of people tweeting during a disaster are not directly involved.

So, is this real?

I hear a lot of people who doubt the friendships experienced in online communities. They say “how do you know they’re real?”

Now, of course they’re not doubting that the person tweeting is human (sometimes now, however, that presents an entirely different issue), but they are definitely doubting their authenticity. How do you know someone is really concerned about you if you’ve never met them face to face before? And it’s a really good question.

The Karen Walker factor

Karen Walker was a special character who found life, and resonance with many in the hit sitcom, Will and Grace. While the show has had its day, there are many Walker moments that still hit the nail on the head.It is what is swimming in my head as I plan my paper for the Rutgers Invitational.

One of these is in an episode when Will and Grace are not talking (after a massive argument in which Will tells Grace to move out, which I swear was one of the strongest bits of acting on television I’ve seen). In chatting with Jack about how to get Will and Grace to talk again, she firstly says, “pretend to think, pretend to think.” She then follows it with “Pretend to care, pretend to care.” Of course Karen does care. She’s just conscious of the need to appear to care as well. Plus it’s funny.

So here I am:

* Are people who offer support in online communities ‘pretending to care’?

* Is the expressed concern a demonstration of identity work that gains them favour and positions them as caring individuals you’d want to have as a friend?

* How does the caring from the community affect the person experiencing tragedy?

Do you have any experience of this? Would you be willing to undergo an interview for my research? What do you believe is true?

My sincere thanks goes to the SJMC at CU, without the support of which I wouldn’t be able to conduct any of my research and also in particular to Dean Paul Voakes who saw fit to support my application with a letter of recommendation that I never saw, but am convinced was highly influential in my acceptance.

Don't think influence, think resonance

mediamum — Mon, 07 Sep 2009 02:08:36 +0000

The new buzzword in social media appears to be Influence. According to conferences, some marketers it’s what people want. To influence others.

This is a mistake. It demonstrates a very shallow, one-sided view.

(cartoon from xkcd.com)

Talk to most people in social media for example, and they’ll tell you the truth. What they’re doing is looking for, and responding to resonance, not influence.

What all of us seek in social media is Resonance.

The influence part happens afterwards.

In social media, you can’t influence someone unless they want to be influenced.

Guess what… if traditional media had understood the need to find real resonance with its market, it wouldn’t be in the situation it is today.

Resonance. It’s what creates meaning. Just like the rice here.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nO0bSSXmr1A&feature=related#watch-main-area]

More than deputies: A definition of journalism for the 21st Century

mediamum — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 19:44:50 +0000

Let’s confirm who professional journalists are: People (trained or not), paid to produce content under the mastheads of traditional news outlets.

Let’s confirm what they’re supposed to do: This is a tricky one. No matter how many times I have asked, and how many people, across Australia, the USA and the UK, nobody can give me a core definition of journalism. Maybe it’s a secret. A magician’s code. Part of the smoke and mirrors used to convince everyone they’re worth being paid for over anyone without a mogul. Professional journalists promote their work as a noble art, one that demands a rigor most can not attain. With prompting, a professional journalist will usually agree you need training, you need balance, fairness, fact collection and analysis.
In a conversation I had on Twitter with people in Australia following the Twitter’s Impact on Media and Journalism mini-conference (actually a 2-hour seminar of sorts), Brad Howarth, a professional journalist who was attending says journalism will not be “harmed or replaced by Twitter.” Another Australian, Renai Lemay, followed his presentation at the same conference with a post for ZDNet where he likens his role as a professional journalist to a knight, protecting the honour of a “great lady of noble birth” and describes Twitter as a “playground for pleasure of journalists.” Somewhere to reconnect with the audience. While Renai seeks to support Twitter’s role, he demonstrates a very Lipmann-esque view – it’s still them and us, and being able to play amongst the great unwashed is a novel way of “cutting the fat out of journalism.”

Bringing it to the US, last night, on Lou Dobbs’ show on CNN, the Face Off segment featured a rather strange topical area of ‘Social Networks & Journalism: Is traditional media obsolete?’, Professor Robert Thompson of Syracuse University held the same line as Renai. He described citizen journalists as “acting like deputies … it’s just like we used to use eyewitnesses.” In what was supposedly a debate (which Dobbs pointedly remarked at the start he hoped would be won by Professor Thompson), Micah Sifryn, co-founder of the Personal Democracy Forum began well by saying “anyone can commit and act of journalism.” However he followed that up by agreeing with Lou Dobbs that it “takes more than just holding up your mobile phone and filming stuff and then putting it online to be a journalist.”

Oh really?

My issue is that all of this is either a. focused on the media used for journalism rather than what journalism actually is, or b. garbled propaganda nonsense.

Let me be clear. For those who don’t know me, I was a traditional, paid journalist for 15 years. I then moved to Public Relations, and then into teaching journalism, marketing, PR, event management and advertising at college. Happily, I’m back in traditional professional journalism myself, as the Boulder Startup Examiner for Examiner.com. (I make enough for a cup of coffee a week). I’m even currently undertaking graduate research in the School of Journalism and Mass Communication at CU in Boulder (on social media communities), and I TA on the Intro to Journalism and Intro to Advertising classes. I’m a co-founder of a startup which will enable people to create more content and make better connections online. I’m pretty well engaged on all fronts.

And my question is thus: If traditional, professional journalists (those I’ve identified above) want to say what they do is different to what is able to be done by anyone else, I believe they have to say what makes it so, in order to be understood. So let me help you professionals out. The book, Elements of Journalism, authored by Bill Kovach and Tom Rosentiel, provides 10 elements of journalism. They are:

1. Journalism’s first obligation is to the truth.
2. Its first loyalty is to the citizens.
3. Its essence is discipline of verification.
4. Its practitioners must maintain an independence from those they cover.
5. It must serve as an independent monitor of power.
6. It must provide a forum for public criticism and compromise.
7. It must strive to make the significant interesting, and relevant.
8. It must keep the news comprehensive and proportional.
9. Its practitioners must be allowed to exercise their personal conscience.
10. The rights and responsibilities of citizens to be media literate.

But I’m questioning these traditional elements. While the 10th Element only appeared in this text in 2007 as a direct response to the power of Web 1.0, I believe it’s time to entirely redefine the concept of journalism. To strip it back and challenge the notion of what it is – a notion that has root in the medium, not the craft. All of the above elements of journalism reflect a somewhat Lipmann-esque attitude. But at last in the 21st Century, John Dewey really gets a turn. At journalism’s very core is one thing – communication. So I’ve developed a new definition of what journalism is:

Journalism is communication through any means that enables two things – a. the transmission of factual information about all factors that make up society, and b. validation, authentication and discussion of opinions, beliefs and commentary.

In the past, given the limited and expensive range of tools open to people, journalists were defined as a separate group of people. Training in the media they worked in, and how best to ‘do’ journalism to communicate messages were the focus. But those constraints have left us. The best journalism does not rely on the old elements – nor the old media. It doesn’t rely on training, or a paypacket.

Will journalism still exist when the moguls move onto more profitable ventures? Yes. Is it noble and necessary for democracy? Yes. Does it need defending? No (from what?). Is it the realm of the few? No, not any more. It’s not Twitter that is changing it. It’s Web 2.0. All social media. It’s going to be even greater when even more people are creating the content. That’s democracy.

How to create a stir – write about women in startups

mediamum — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 05:10:24 +0000

I’m writing for the online news site, Examiner.com as the Boulder Startup Examiner.

Why? Am I insane? Don’t I have enough to do?

I felt compelled to do it. Boulder is a wonderful town, with a fantastic tech community of people. It’s a really big community, for a small town. It’s exciting, vibrant and smart. It’s full of incredible people. And they’re all doing their own thing.

We’re all working with a similar environment. We see lots of familiar people every week, and there are lots of tech events focused on the community. But we have different lives, experiences and industries. There are lots of people here I’ve never met – and when many of those people are ones I’ve heard of and I know have heard of me in our ‘small’ community, that’s disappointing. We have a wealth of things to draw on that don’t get any focus, simply because there’s no professional journalism covering it.

So that’s what I’m trying to do with my Examiner role. I’m treating it as I would a professional journalistic venture. It’s not personal (that’s what my blog’s for). It’s actual journalism. The way I used to do it. It’s amazing how you never forget. And I’m really enjoying it.

I’m putting together a plan of writing one article a week on five different topic areas. (Let’s see how my time management works with that!) Today’s topic area was Women in Tech. I’ll be writing on that once a week. And today’s story relates to how women who work in Boulder startups simply don’t seem to have the same networking opportunities the men of Boulder do. A pretty self-evident post, I thought. I got to interview some wonderful women (another bonus of working on Examiner is chatting with local startups I’ve never run across, or have only met briefly!). I said to Tara and Grace I wanted to focus on women in Boulder startups. It wasn’t their idea, it was mine. And they came to the party. We had a lovely chat over coffee last week. I recorded the chat, and I wrote the piece.

It seems to have hit a bit of a nerve with some people in various elements of social media, and I couldn’t be happier. I believe the article is respectful of Boulder, the community and both men and women. If you read beyond the headline (as any journalism school will explain, the headline is just the foothold into the story) you get a balanced view of women in startups here in Boulder.

I invite you to read the article yourself, and leave a comment. I now know I’ll definitely be covering women in startups in Boulder every week. Because it’s a great topic, obviously close to my heart. And nobody else covers it.