Not surprisingly, legendary Twitter community builder Chris Brogan (who in recent days has averaged 35.39 tweets/day) and Canadian political journalist Kady O’Malley (with her recent average of 23.87 tweets/day) have been rated as having Nuclear follow costs.

Discoveries like this lock you to your keyboard for hours. I started plugging other friends’ accounts into the tool: knealemann (63.72, Nuclear), suzemuse (99.85, Nuclear)… My recent average of 6.17/day is unworthy of special categorization by the tool. Meh.

That got me thinking about our Canadian politicians since I’m currently doing research on their use of social media. Thirty four of our federal MPs have earned Golden ratings by the tool including James Moore, Patrick Brown, Carolyn Bennett, Geoff Regan, John Rafferty and Glenn Thibeault.

Daryl Kramp was singled out by FollowCost as being an @aholic for his recent 65% @ reply kick. Stephen Woodworth earned a golden rating though his stream has recently boasted a full 75% @ replies on an average of 16.74 tweets/day.

Denis Coderre gets the lone Nuclear rating for the House of Commons, granted his recent average of 62.33 tweets/day pales in comparison to some of those listed above and other political journalists I won’t mention. No doubt you’ll find them out quickly enough.

Photo: Thumbs up uploaded to Flickr by Dirk Gently.

In the meantime, here’s a refresher of where things were in my original report.

Kady led an engaging Q&A on journalism, politics and digital media at PAB2010. This video features excerpts of of her session.

OPENING PITCH

I was once a committed baseball fan. That love led me to the exciting summer of 1995; the first and only championship season of the Ottawa Lynx. I worked for them that summer. I delivered my first real business pitch — on my own initiative. It was a time when companies were getting into the website craze, most of them pushing products and merchandise online rather than offering value to customers, current and prospective. I could sense it wouldn’t be long before minor league ball teams would follow suit and saw an opportunity to offer greater value to fans and ticket holders through the web. So, I approached the front office of the team and pitched the idea of creating a website that delivered value rather than a shopping cart.

The Lynx loved the idea. The plan was to publish line scores, box scores, team and player stats, season and club records and summaries of club activities (such as roster moves) on a daily basis. Basically, to offer the fans what they couldn’t get anywhere else. My proposal was designed to augment any media coverage rather than compete with it (I didn’t want the website to result in lost interest in Citizen or Sun coverage of the team).

FIRST UP

The Ottawa Lynx became the first baseball club in the International League to have a website.

As webmaster, I woke up at 5am everyday and grabbed the latest statistical information, scratched together some other relevant updates and manually coded the web pages. The information was online before the vast majority of the public had gotten out of bed. I kept a historical record of the games of 1995 on the site so fans could cross reference the information. It was all linked since site search technology wasn’t freely and easily available.

Two or three other ILB teams launched their own web pages as the season progressed. Those sites were about merchandising.

THE RALLY (AN ASIDE)

The Lynx had a great team in 95. That combined with the URL being promoted during the games helped drive interest in the site. They clinched a playoff spot at the second last game of the season (against the Syracuse Sky Chiefs, for those keeping tabs). If I recall correctly, manager Pete Mackanin celebrated by granting pitcher J.J. Thobe’s request to set the batting order for the final game. It was comical. Catcher Bert Heffernan, who usually batted mid-to-late in the lineup, was given the lead-off spot. Most of the players showed up hungover. A fun day, though not the most inspired playing. The team reserved that for the post-season.

LATE INNING CHANGES

That same year, Major League Baseball had tested out live online coverage of regular season games. It was before live video streaming, of course. They used a static cartoon-like graphic of a ball park with a line score below. After each play, the page would be updated with a text blurb that would describe what happened and provide a new version of the graphic — something like “Grissom singled to right”, and the graphic would indicate a player standing on first base. Knowing that out of town Lynx games weren’t broadcast on the radio, intrigued by scenes in the movie Bull Durham and inspired by MLB, I convinced the front office to try out online, text-based coverage of the out-of-town playoff games. I would get a call from the press box between each half inning and would update the site.

It was an idea that was ahead of its time. While the website was attracting 800-1500 hits each day, people weren’t (YET) conditioned to sit in front of their computers to consume near real-time content they couldn’t get anywhere else. Only the hard core baseball geeks like me would do that. According to my memory, that was 15 at best (including me, the person on the phone, transcribing the updates and publishing them to the site). It’s funny to consider how much has changed since that one series I put my friends on hold to be a sportscaster.

DOUBLE THREAT

Besides swimming in a sea of cool statistical information and helping promote my home team, the club gave the game-time job of “Ticker Boy” — making me a double threat in baseball parlance. My additional role was to monitor baseball scores coming off the dot matrix printer in the press box during home games and provide updates to the scoreboard operator and game announcer. For that, I was fed, paid to watch every home game with the front office staff and media, and had the added bonus of chatting with players and even getting to shag fly balls during batting practice.

I was known in the press box as the thin, geeky guy who knew all about the web. With the exception of the location, not much has changed.

CORKING THE WEB

Noone in the box, myself included, appreciated where the web was going and how our little website was part of a trend toward connecting what was then called COINS (Communities of Interest Networks) through digital channels. It was an experiment in doing things that are now basic functionality of the technology.

EPILOGUE

The Lynx won the Governor’s Cup on September 13. It was an exciting game made more-so by a lengthy mid-game rain delay. I updated the website to announce the win then joined the celebrations in the clubhouse. While there was beer and champagne flying everywhere, I didn’t drink anything that night. I grabbed a bat and carried it from player to player for autographs… Curtis Pride, Jim Buccheri, Bert Heffernan, Julian Yan, Ted Wood…

Word was F.P. Santangelo was driving to Ottawa after the Expos game to participate in the celebrations. By 2am he hadn’t arrived and players were dispersing to homes. I got in my car to head home and wondered what kind of reaction I’d get if stopped by the police reeking of alcohol and blowing a pass in the breathalyzer.

I arrived home to a voice mail message from Millie Lundgren, partner of iSTAR Internet where I’d been working on contract providing IT support for a few weeks. It was a job offer. My career was beginning.

I took our youngest daughter, Bayla to the ballpark on September 3, 2007. We’d been only a few times since the team had ended its affiliation with the Montreal Expos in 2002. However, this was the last game of the Ottawa Lynx, a team that couldn’t get fans in the seats, and I needed to be there for the goodbye. For the occasion, the team dusted of original mascot, Lenny, to share cheer leading duties with his successor, Skratch. After the 8-5 loss to Syracuse, the team opened the gates and allowed fans to run on the field. Bayla and I had a great time. When it came time to leave, we scooped some dirt from the third base line and brought it home in a container.

Baseball card created using MyTradingCards.com.

…five years since CBC Unplugged christened podcasting as an important channel for media talent to stay connected with legions of fans (and vice versa)… five years since Shelagh’s Caravan made its way from Vancouver to Signal Hill, podcasting their unregulated adventures and interactions with Canadians in homes, community centres and schools… five years since podcasting made its debut as a tool for advocacy.

Think about that.

Podcasting had barely hatched and, guided by traditional media folk, was establishing itself as a tool for connecting Canadians to each other. Given the thousands of people downloading and subscribing to “raw” regional programming from real people (media people), a case can be made that the engagement and connection made possible by podcasts played a significant role in creating a groundswell of public support for the locked out employees – people who no longer had access to transmission towers. Their content marginalized the BBC reruns on traditional CBC frequencies.

New media proved itself a substantial force in modern communication. Recognizing this, the CBC expanded its new media strategy after the lockout was settled. Now, five years later, the two types of distribution are more seamlessly integrated — as they should be.

It’s quite by accident I remembered earlier today I had supported the production and publication of Locked Out Live, the podcast created by the locked out employees of CBC Ottawa (still available on my Electric Sky site) as well as publishing a few of my own podcasts featuring locked out talent (check out I Want My CBC, The Penance-Cast and Locked Out Idol). It was my opportunity to apply my media appreciation and understanding to a new way of producing and distributing content. I remember those days fondly for the opportunity to learn from the best and was all to happy to see those people return to the airwaves.

By the way, congratulations to Alan Neal for taking over the host’s seat for CBC Ottawa’s All in a Day. Some suggest it was Alan’s appearance on Electric Sky that tipped the scales in his favour.

Thank you to James Clendenan for maintaining a CBC Unplugged mirror!

One such speaker was Mike Tennant, co-creator and (now retired) writer of the amazing CBC radio show Age of Persuasion. Using specific examples of radio programs and advertisements throughout history, Mike delivered a keynote which illustrated the role of creative in the modern age of media and how content creators can use creative to build, engage, and motivate audiences.

This video features excerpts of his talk, Beyond Words: What makes great media resonate.

Derek Miller was the first to introduce me to the idea of a Digital Executor. In fact, it’s possible he coined the term. While I didn’t act on his thoughts, he was the first person who made me consider that my content will likely outlive me. And, at PAB2010, Adele McAlear exposed us to the stories of real people left behind a digital legacy, challenging us to think about the intersection of death, social media and technology, and what things we should do to protect our digital assets.

Mr. McLoughlin punctuated his talk by saying “The world needs more content creators” and went on to explain “…every technology, every media you can concoct, requires creative content creators with something to say.”

This video is part of the Session Clips series from PAB2010 and includes Mr. McLoughlin’s five rules of communication and creating compelling content that’s relevant for your audience.

In his 2010 TEDTalk How to listen to global voices, Ethan Zuckerman explains that a myopic view of the world comes from not looking beyond ourselves, and living in a world in which data doesn’t always travel faster than atoms (as much as we might wish to believe otherwise). Mr. Zuckerman makes a fantastic case for exposing ourselves to different languages and cultures, and seeking to understand that which we don’t.

Targeting key influencers means a lot of things. I’m going to kick off the week with a sobering look at “key influencer” marketing.

OVERSIGHT

Going after key influencers means leaving behind a lot of “smaller” voices that may have an aggregate influence greater than a single big voice. The smaller voices can have significant reach and probably enjoy a closer relationship with their cozy audience than a key influencer does with his/her enterprise.

INFLUENCER AND AUDIENCE FATIGUE

Many key influencers are pitched more times a day than you can imagine. Your issue and pitch must resonate with the influencer and should come to them at a time when the issue can be wedged into his/her established editorial calendar. In considering whether or not to participate, the key influencer will consider if the audience will eel put off by yet another call to action. Key influencers will not want to engage in anything that will result in audience fatigue.

DRIVE-BY EFFECT

With large and engaged audiences comes the risk that any single Twitter message or blog post will go largely unnoticed. One Twitter message among one hundred or more in a day might come and go without capturing the interest or even the eyes of people in the community.

PUBLIC VALUE STATEMENTS

An organization that selectively decides whose voice is worth responding to in the digital world makes a public declaration of which voices have value to them and which don’t. This can be a dangerous proposition since an organization loses audience one person at a time and a company one customer at a time (oh, and a politician one voter at a time). Miscalculating who should be acknowledged could be disastrous (see The Cataclysm Effect).

THE CATACLYSM EFFECT

Ignoring a sea of “small voices” expressing concern over an issue could mean an organization will face a rather large storm if that issue hits a tipping point. For example, there was already a swell of anger growing online when, in 2005, Jeff Jarvis went public with his frustration over problems with his Dell computer and the lackluster service the company was offering him. Mr. Jarvis’ blog post became the catalyst that turned that sea of small voices into the head of the storm which was just as angry for being ignored by Dell as they were about problems with their computers and the company that had failed them.

In a conversation with a “key influencer” last year, we laughed that “A-listers” like himself have only one direction they can travel in quickly. The small voices are the ones building strong and engaged communities everyone else will join.

These friendships and that fun evening wouldn’t have happened if it weren’t for our blog and podcast. The same is true for our friendships with author Sheree Fitch who has visited us twice this year and author/illustrator Lee Edward Fodi whom I’ve visited a few times in Vancouver and who visited us when he was in Ottawa for the first time a few months ago.

This past weekend, Isabelle Michaud, Dave Brodbeck and their “kids” Madelaine and Jon visited us during their road trip back home to Sault Ste. Marie. They arrived midday Saturday and stayed overnight. We had a great visit with them, a visit that wouldn’t have happened if not for their podcast Broca’s Area, my Electric Sky Podcast and me co-creating the Canadian Podcast Buffet community and the PAB conference (both with Bob Goyetche) some years ago.

Today, Whitney Hoffman and her son Jon are arriving in Ottawa and spending a couple of nights at our place. Besides the adults spending time together at various conferences, our two families have gotten together a few times (Niagara Falls and Montreal). That friendship wouldn’t have happened if not for Whitney’s and my individual passions for podcasting and community building (and the encouragement of the aforementioned Bob) taking me to the first PodCamp Boston in September 2006.

I have many other stories of engagement and friendships I could tell you, all of which came about in a similar way and all of them about having an impact. Most of us connected folk would help (and have helped) out the others without a thought — both online and off. We would spend (and have spent) hours together chatting and developing ideas — both online and off. We may have at one time asked each other to broadcast a message to our extended networks for that quick promotional hit — that was before we knew and understood effective ways of online community building and long-term connections, rather than  treating our other online connections as superficial distribution networks (a practice which seems rampant today).

The people who say digital communication and social networking is mundane, and those who direct their exclusive attention to the “key influencers”  obviously haven’t tried the tools or figured out how to engage effectively.

Photo: Muchies by Andrea Ross.

We published a series of videos about the DII, sharing the findings with a sector-specific view. A standout video for me features John Sparks, the general manager of our Calgary office. John does a great job explaining in plain English why digital matters, how corporate executives are approaching communication the wrong way and why people pay attention to “some guy”.

However, digital is no longer a bolt-on to comms plans. Digital has become integral to all communication initiatives. Why are we still creating social media specific policies? The same rules and due care should apply to all channels, be they traditional or digital. This means I’m starting to trumpet the idea of one policy applying to all communication channels, and guidelines should be created to help communicators navigate the tools and cultures.

What are your thoughts?

Photo: If You Don’t Follow, You Will be Rejected uploaded by Dan Dickinson.

I was reminded of this when completing the Podcast Listener Preference Survey posted by Adele McAlear and Donna Papacosta. They ask participants to share expanded thoughts at the end of each section, including the section on advertising and sponsorship.

Here’s what I said.

Podcasters worth their salt and who understand the importance of their audience will work with advertisers to create an ad that is consistent with the show’s vibe and approach to communication (rather than flying-in a 30 second spot provided by the advertiser).
There’s nothing wrong with advertising so long as the new digital channels aren’t treated in the same way as traditional ones.

Besides, I’m much more likely to buy into a sponsor with a host who says “Brand X has been very supportive of my show and is helping make it possible for me to produce this show on a consistent basis. I’d be grateful if you consider their y-product next time you’re on the market for one” rather than a canned ad, played or spoken.

I should have pointed out that I will definitely consider a product or service the host loves and raves about — whether they’re paid to or not. Audiences can tell the difference between genuine praise and contractual obligations. [update: Also, I don't mean to suggest that podcasts MUST embrace advertising and sponsorship. These are my thoughts for those who are considering or have decided to go that route.]

The Catfish Show did it best when, in 2006, they were sponsored by HBO to help promote (the now long-cancelled comedy) “Big Love”. Bob and Cat worked the ad into their regular content format when Bob pulled out a guitar and tackled the key points of the ad in an apparently impromptu song. It felt in place.

Online communities emerge out of the relationship that develops from valuable content and the authentic voice. The audience needs to know that the advertiser/sponsor has been welcomed by the host for value-based and authentic reasons or the host will gamble away the trust of the audience.

Nothing resonates with online audiences more than situations to which they can relate and stories from people they feel they know.

In Online Relationships and Real Life: Finding your sweet spot, Eden Spodek told PAB2010 how she used her shopping blog to share her personal story and how she trusted her online community with it.

Related: Contested Irrelevance by Andrea Ross

This year we video taped the entire speaking program and will be releasing something from each session.

The PAB2010 JOLT! videos were officially launched on the PAB conference website this morning. Over the next week, PAB will trickle out blog posts to highlight each of the the JOLT!s. I’ll be publishing my own version of those posts, here.

Today’s featured JOLT! comes from Sylvain Grand’maison who compared the impact of healthy content consumption habits on the brain to healthy eating habits on the body, and issued a call to action for media consumers.

The PAB2010 JOLT! that started it all, though, was Andrea‘s. Her talk about discovering the impact of meaningful online relationships and communities left nary a dry eye at the conference and commanded a standing ovation and lots of hugs.

1) Enforce a time limit

It’s easy to decide that each show will stay focused on a particular topic or idea. Sticking to that rule is a lot harder. Deciding to communicate the story or idea in a finite amount of time is a perfect way to force yourself to stay focused and can ultimately help you make tough editing decisions. In my case, I set a 10 minute limit.

2) Leave space

Too many content creators find it difficult to leave breathing space in their productions. The breathing space can be actual silences or silences in the ideas. Silence in ideas means knowing the story in such a way that it’s obvious when adding something takes away from something else. This could mean eliminating one line of thought because it works better as a suggestion rather than a billboard, or it could mean recognizing that the additional thoughts are extraneous and take away from the whole. Learning to leave space is where you really earn your battle scars of great content creation and storytelling.

3) Have a hanging thought

Many of the podcasts I listened to wrapped up nicely and I went on with my day having no relationship to the people or ideas in the program. It was like the producer stole some time away from me and gave me nothing to take away. From experimenting, I discovered that having a hanging thought at the end of my show kept the people and ideas rattling around the heads of my listeners. Some sent feedback saying they wished there was more in the show; others sent feedback that they’d done their own research online or had bought a book on the subject. Wanting more meant my listeners did more for themselves and came back for the next show.

Sure there are other pieces of advice I can share such as provide value for your audience, create your show to cater to your own self interest, be authentic and passionate and have fun. Most people already do that because those are the obvious and easy choices. It’s the tough choices that make your content stand out just as it’s the tough choices in all of our pursuits that make our achievements that much more meaningful for all involved.

I had largely forgotten about those tough choices until I received a great piece of feedback from a dedicated fan of Electric Sky. It came after a new episode was published following yet another extended production break (eight months this time). And that’s all the motivation I need to dust off a few episodes that have already been recorded and to conduct a fresh interview tonight.

I’ve offered some thoughts on SMRs and how to use them effectively here and here. The use of hashtags, particularly in a headline, is a great example of how SMRs should be integrated more closely with the digital culture from which they originate in order to achieve a greater impact. In fact, within minutes of the release going live, people were already incorporating the hashtag in their Tweets.

Miranda is quick to point out the hashtag does not appear in the traditional media release for the ChipTrips campaign. However, the online version of the traditional release directs attention to the SMR where the full story is presented. I suspect it’s a matter of time before digital culture is more tightly integrated into traditional media releases.

Full disclosure: Frito Lay Canada is a client of my employer, Fleishman-Hillard.

I ended up having a bit too much fun with it. By the time I was done pulling ideas together, the music sounded like a hybrid of Prince and Barry White. So, I woke up early the next morning and embellished my morning voice to do a satirical spoken word track. I made an eight-second version as well; the long one is much more ridiculous and worth a listen.

I’d completely forgotten about it until I stumbled across it on my hard drive this morning. I had a great laugh listening to it and, since I have no shame, I thought I’d share it.

Photo of Mitch Joel and John Wall by Bob Goyetche.

Lack of time was among the reasons the candidate has given for not managing his own Twitter account. I suggested the volunteers can manage that by following Twitter activity for the candidate and breaking up the engagement into three blocks of time, selecting 5-10 messages that need to be responded to each morning, another 5-10 each afternoon and a final wave of 5-10 each evening. The volunteers should bring the messages to the candidate at regularly scheduled blocks of response time each morning, afternoon and evening, along with a summary of the ongoing conversation and sentiment. This makes sure social media is integral to the campaign and the candidate doesn’t become overwhelmed by the activity.

A similar approach can be used to manage all social network activity. Candidates can’t be expected to follow all of the activity, nor should volunteers be taking away the candidate’s opportunity to engage with the public.

By the way, I highly recommend that volunteers bring a mix of messages to the candidate. Responding only to the happy messages denies the candidate the opportunity to convert a voter. I have a great story about that which I captured in audio. I’ll publish that as a podcast.

Things get confused with the use of audio and video as a feature of the media release. I’ve become aware that many organizations believe that adding audio and video constitutes a social media release because, as it turns out, they believe this offers the media release an interactive component. I disagree. Audio and video enrich the media release and make it easier for news organizations to include the originator in the news coverage without having to squeeze a phone call or site visit into an already tight news cycle.

Basically, we now have three types of media releases:

• Traditional text-based Media Releases which need to have news value and follow language and style rules (in Canada, that’s typically Canadian Press Style);
• Enriched Media Releases are Media Releases with audio/visual components which need to have news value and follow Audio News Release (ANR)/video Broadcast News Release (BNR) style rules; and,
• Social Media Releases which need to have appeal and offer value to the public, and provide a platform through which (and the opportunity for) the public can engage with the publisher of the content.

One of the great things about blogging is, rightly or wrongly, you can develop your thoughts in public. Much like a social media release, it creates a platform and opportunity to engage with others to come to a thoughtful conclusion and help figure out how to explain things well for others. This is yet another distinction between traditional media releases and social media releases which puts opportunity over finished product. Here’s a table I’m working on. I’d appreciate your thoughts on it.

My other posts on Media and Social Media Releases:

• Communication or relationship: which do you want?
• Social media releases: five harsh thoughts

Social media has a similar problem — at least for companies/organizations that are being encouraged or find themselves with significant market pressures to adopt social media as part of their communication plan. Getting to the point where they actually pick up with social media, or following through on the effort in reaching their audience will continue to stymie businesses and leave them with a bad impression about social media and its potential.

I’ve pulled together five thoughts that can help organizations overcome the first mile/last mile problem of social media adoption and success:

Take that first step. Yesterday I blogged about press releases being a tool for communication and social media releases being a tool for relationships. The same rules applies to traditional and digital PR. Organizations that are willing to change the way they think about marketing and communication will be more likely to take a chance that will pay off. You have to take the first step to get to where you want to be.

Bring real fare. I’ve never heard of a company spending $1000 to produce and publish a national television commercial or allocate only $5000 to do a national product launch. To be successful in social media, companies need to put real money into the campaign. Real money will help yield real results.

Have a skilled driver. A car is a technology that allows people to drive between two places; without a capable driver, it’s just a tool. The same goes with social media. Organizations need real people — real capable people — to navigate the tools and make good decisions on behalf of the company.

Create a flexible map. I advocate guidelines rather than policies because guidelines offer agility and flexibility in recognition of the ever evolving nature of digital culture and tools. Just as copyright laws haven’t been able to keep up with advancements in technology, policies are cumbersome and slow innovation. They require debate, decisions, senior management signatures, enforcement and regular committee meetings for review and revision. Where policies create barriers and imply sanctions, guidelines support informed decisions and imply solutions.

Keep up. Cars need gas and oil and routine checks on tire wear and breaks; drivers need to improve skills and stay alert and agile for all sorts of driving conditions and situations. The same applies for maintaining social media tools and the people that use them. Technology and content should be current and presented in a pleasing manner, and the people behind them should develop their networking and digital engagement skills, and constantly keep up with the community that grows.

For my part, I suggested the press release is a message/communication tool and the oft-misunderstood, oft-misused social media release is a relationship/value tool. Both tell stories in different ways and, as David explained, both remain relevant and complementary.

For a press release to be an effective tool, writers need to follow a specific structure and rules about language and newsworthiness. Press releases are more valuable than ever because of the attrition of newsroom staff and budgets though I believe they have a bad reputation right now because fewer people are doing them well. A well written press release with a compelling and relevant story will be picked up by a newsroom and reused with little if any editing. I see far too many press releases with no story or a poorly told story, weak leads and with little attention to spelling and grammar.

For a social media release to be an effective tool, organizations need to think about how they can connect with one individual at a time, building a relationship using voice, rather than language. Few companies understand that and are using social media releases as a new distribution method for traditional press releases (good or bad) — much like television was radio with pictures until innovators began to experiment and discover ways of making this new media exciting and interesting. I believe SMRs need to be thought of as part of a larger strategy and should be connected with existing online efforts in order to offer amplified value. David also pointed out that properly done, SMRs can contribute to SEO which can give the organization and additional boost.

The discussion will be available on PBS.org’s Media Shift in the next few days. In the meantime, you can read my Social media releases: five harsh thoughts post for my views on how to make SMRs more effective for your organization.

In order to demonstrate things are happening, Bob and I have decided to publish information at regular intervals as it becomes available to keep people in the know. Which means we are pleased to announce the first three speaker selections for PAB2010.

• PAB alumn Adam Gratrix is the winner of the longest session title award. He will be delivering a session called Cult of Listener: Podcaster as shaman in the post-literate Global Theatre; or, How to Recruit Disciples and Brainwash your Audience for Fun and Profit.
• Susan Murphy will be participating in her first PAB and inspiring us with Making Meaning: How to Create Content that Speaks to People.
• Community leader, PodCamp den mother and longtime PABster Whitney Hoffman will be presenting Disruption of Social Contracts.

We’ve confirmed our Friday night (June 18) keynote speaker and are waiting to coordinate with this person to make the announcement. All I can say at this time is we’re very excited to have such a respected leader in media and communication to kick off this year’s event.

LISTEN TO UPDATES

CPB episode 156 was published this morning. It features an interview with original PABster Barry Lock (Barrie from Barrie and the new podcast The Sport Nerd) who’s registered for PAB after a two year absence. We also discuss some of the reasons PAB is a unique and valuable event which many folks have told us is underpriced at $150/person (listen to Chris Brogan’s JOLT in which he suggests we should be charging $400). We will begin publishing audio on the PAB website very soon.

REGISTER FOR PAB2010 AND TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE EARLY DISCOUNT CODE

Remember, the early registration discount code (PAB2010) expires at 5pmET on Friday April 16. Register for PAB2010.

The inaugural PAB in 2006 was a sold out event that drew delegates from across Canada and the United States. It kicked off with a keynote address by the CBC Radio’s Shelagh Rogers, featured a full day of speaking sessions and ended with a concert by two Canadian independent bands.

PAB has evolved into a social/new media conference and expanded from a one day to a three day event that includes speaking sessions, our popular five-minute JOLTs, workshops, concerts, social activities and a charity drive. The conference has flourished on a reputation of strong content and a welcoming community, attracting participants from as far away as the U. K. and South America.

We are currently preparing to open up for registrations. In the meantime, we are accepting speaking proposals. If you’re interested in being part of the speaking program at PAB2010, please submit a written proposal of no more than 150 words or an audio or video proposal of two-minutes or less to podcastersacrossborders@gmail.com. Your proposal must include contact information, a title, a summary of your session and your audio/visual requirements. Deadline for submissions is 5pmET, Friday, April 9.

Hope to see you at PAB2010!

I had the privilege of speaking with Liberal MP Denis Coderre and NDP MP Libby Davies about their use of Twitter. Unfortunately, Heritage Minister James Moore was unavailable. This podcast features the full-length version of the round table discussion. The podcast was recorded for the Fleishman-Hillard PoliticalView.ca group blog.

Topics addressed include:

• Twitter as a channel for personal and political-professional communication
• Twitter in humanitarian efforts and advocacy
• engagement vs broadcast mindsets
• Tweetups (gatherings organized through Twitter)
• managing individual opinions
• digital economy

The questions were recorded using hand held video cameras, cell phones and web cams in the living rooms, kitchens and home offices of our country. People wore t-shirts, sweaters and house coats. Some might not have been wearing pants. That’s the nature of social media. People can do it anywhere with any dress code.

While the format was loose and we got to see the PM reach for his glass of water between each answer (and he even looked relaxed a good part of the time) I believe Stephen Harper would have fit better in the living rooms, kitchens and home offices of our country if he was wearing jeans and a t-shirt for his video response. He missed an opportunity to be the ghost in the machine — the element that gives social media its charm.

This was an interesting digital step for the PMO; some say a novelty. I believe Canadians will be more impressed if it becomes the norm.

Earlier today I blogged about Sanofi-Aventis and the lumps it’s taking for not understanding the new culture of communication and interaction in the digital age. Around the same time, the Globe and Mail’s Ivor Tossell published a critical piece about Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his asynchronous video town hall with Canadian citizens using popular social media site YouTube. Meanwhile, many companies are unable to embrace social media due to legislative or regulatory restrictions of which most of us are unaware.

It’s culture –not technology– that scares institutions.

Many social media advocates like to blame traditional values as the reason most establishments aren’t online or for “getting it wrong”. There is truth to that. However, I believe fear plays a bigger factor. And, many of the same social media advocates are to blame for that, too.

One such example took place in December 2009 2008 when Chris Brogan came under fire for a sponsored (positive) review of a shopping experience at K-Mart. Despite being transparent about the sponsorship from the very beginning, Chris’ following (and a large group of “griefers” that emerged for the opportunity to complain about something) couldn’t believe it was possible to have a good experience at K-Mart, paid or not. What the mob didn’t consider is that for all the opportunities it seeks to encourage businesses to get involved online and to invest money in online sponsorship and advertising, it actually portrayed the web as a hostile environment of which companies should be weary (and K-Mart got some free public opinion polling in the process).

Score one for Canada.

The speed at which messages are expected, misinterpreted and amplified is scary. This leads to baby steps like Your Interview with Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Of course, politicians and governments are not known for being on the cutting edge so we can expect the digitization of those worlds to take significantly longer — what I call the Long Head of adoption.

Having said that, apparently members of the US Government were stunned to learn Finance Canada Twittered the federal budget on March 4. The Ontario Ministry of Finance announced they’ll be doing the same on March 25. Perhaps the video town hall is “ho-hum”, but it is a small step toward 2010.

The best of both worlds.

As much as they’d like to venture into the unknown, it’s safer to stay where they know how the pastures look and act. That comfort and a fear of change leads Mitch Joel to quote General Eric Shinseki who said “If you don’t like change, you’re going to like irrelevance even less.”

Organizations need to be allowed the opportunity to test the waters and know they can be effective and productive in them. That means the digital masses (and media) will have plenty of opportunities to be critical of institutions for not embracing social media quickly enough and then berate them when they do it wrong.

On March 8, Ann Adams posted a photo of her bald head on Sanofi-Aventis’ Facebook page [update: per Dave Jones' comment this is not an official S-A group] with the text “Good morning Sanofi, I had your drug Taxotere and as you can see from my photo this is what my scalp looks like 4 years later. Do you have any comment to make?” Of course, the post drew public attention to the matter of permanent hair loss resulting from Taxotere, but not nearly as much attention as the heavy-handed move by Sanofi-Aventis.

Rather than acknowledge the post, Sanofi-Aventis the group administrator blocked Ms. Adams from their Facebook account [update: again this is not an official S-A FB group. The group admin owes a great deal of care to managing a site for a brand he/she does not own. Also interesting is that Sanofi-Aventis hasn't complained about the use of their logo on the site which is particularly suspicious given the current situation.]

Ooops!!!

Closing your eyes doesn’t make the problem go away. More importantly, slamming the door on someone with even passing knowledge of social media and a personal story everyone can get behind is a heavy-handed and misguided move these days.

It didn’t take long for the same photo to start popping up in other relevant Facebook groups and gain traction in other social media sites including Twitter. Sanofi-Aventis now finds itself with two very public PR nightmares: the possible long-term side effects of their product and a very public move which suggests a disinterest in people.

It’s amazing the corporate world has learned very little from time-proven case studies like Tylenol and Maple Leaf Foods. These are classic stories of companies emerging with an even better public image resulting from their crisis management, communication and people-first values. Instead, Sanofi-Aventis took its lead from Tiger Woods and Toyota.

Certain industries may be bound by specific regulations on what can and cannot be said to the public under specific circumstances and no doubt the legal department wants to play a front-and-centre role in these kinds of situations (you needn’t look further than the language used by companies in crisis communication). However, I can’t help but think a personally-inflected reply might have made this situation a positive one for the company and industry.

Striking the balance between regulatory restrictions, legal advice and the public interest is a difficult one for many companies that are joining the new age of democratized media reactively rather than proactively — particularly since there’s a very fine line between responses that are too quick for the company and too slow for the public. Companies are learning the hard way that you can’t use new channels for pushing out traditional messages; companies derive value for themselves by delivering value for the masses.

Publicly acknowledging Ms. Adams’ situation and pain may have led to people praising Sanofi-Aventis for listening and being responsive. Journalists and Facebook followers might now be giving props to the company for putting people first and the story would be about caring and real communication rather than Big Pharma dismissing the people that paid dearly — financially and physically — for its drugs. I believe Sanofi-Aventis missed a perfect opportunity to have positioned itself as the daring champion of the industry.

This is where things will get interesting.

Response is pretty good for an online initiative that gave the public less than a week. According to the Your Interview with Prime Minister Harper webpage, the initiative attracted “170,001 votes on 1,797 questions from 5,128 people.” It’s an ambiguous stat which I’m guessing means just more than five thousand people both submitted and voted on the the questions. So, when the media give the initiative extra attention for the PMO’s use of social media, you can also expect the digital naysayers to point out this campaign attracted participation from 0.0015% of the Canadian population. It’s worth noting that the Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament Facebook group attracted more than twice that number in its first week.

Noticeably absent from the site is the ability for participants and visitors to categorize (or keyword tag) the questions (e.g. natural resources, child care, finance, general…) or sort them based on vote count. That means it’s not as easy to find RuthLBarth’s question on falling crime rates and a US-style for-profit prison industry, nor is it easy to determine if the vote count makes it more likely to get selected than George Jodin’s question about wasting money on the non-issue of global warming.

H.D. Munroe asks “How will we know that you are answering “top-voted” questions from this site, instead of picking the questions you want to answer? (The site doesn’t show vote tallies, so users can’t audit your choices independently.)“‘

Even if Francais McKellan’s and Dan Grice’s questions about legalizing cannabis don’t get answered, they are far and away two of the most voted-on questions. In fact, marijuana and medicinal marijuana appear in multiple and highly voted-on questions and Canadian cannabis advocate Marc Emery, who faces extradition to the U.S., is the subject of at least one question. Will the PMO tackle this issue on YouTube? Which issues did they expect to come up?

So, over to you Prime Minster Harper. What are you going to do with this opportunity?

For instance, I didn’t analyze the number of Twitter messages generated by each party during the assessment period. A quick check of the numbers based on my research identified that among the active Twittering MPs, the Liberals rank first for the number of Twitter messages generated (6,289), the Conservatives follow (5,209), the NDP third (4,086) and the Bloc are last (408).

The average number of Tweets generated by the actively Twittering MPs puts the Conservatives first (274), the Liberals hot on their heels (273) followed by the NDP (255) and the Bloc (102). These averages may have changed over the last few weeks, particularly since Liberal MP Denis Coderre has been absolutely on fire, publishing 1,177 Tweets between the close of the initial research (Feb. 19) and this morning (Mar. 9). The next most active Twittering MPs since the publishing of the report trail by an order of magnitude — Conservatives Patrick Brown (86) and James Moore (76). Among James Moore’s Tweets this month is the announcement that U2 lead singer Bono would like to speak with him about copyright.

Since the report was published on February 25, all of the identified dormant Twitter accounts remain dormant and NDP MP Dennis Bevington is the only MP to have opened a new account (March 3) though he hasn’t published any updates.

If I can get them in the same room for about 30 minutes, I’d like to audio record a round table discussion with James Moore, Denis Coderre and Libby Davies about Twitter as a communication tool, their approach to digital communication and engagement, and the role of digital in politics and democratic participation.

I had a particularly interesting conversation last night with some colleagues during a two hour (plus) road trip. One colleague shared that based on her experience as a campaign manager and her intention to continue to act as one, she would not allow her candidate to use Twitter, Facebook or other digital channels to engage with the public. Her core argument is that the candidate can’t afford to — that too many mistakes are made in the digital world that can ruin a campaign.

I believe that as the communication ecosystem evolves and traditional media channels have become more marginalized, digital has become a more integrated component of successful communication (including traditional media which is reinventing themselves through digital). Note that I said digital is part of the ecosystem. That means digital needs to be an integral part of the strategy rather than a tactical adjunct to it.

There are many reason why politicians need to do what Mitch Joel calls “be the media”.

• traditional media can’t or won’t always cover a candidate
• politicians can’t control how traditional media will present them
• politicians don’t need digital channels to create difficult situations (like here and here)

And the payoff…

• increasingly, people are getting their information online — specifically from Google (and other search engines)

An effective communication strategy embraces owned media, social media and earned media in a way that makes it possible for people to find the valuable information they need when they need it to make informed decisions. A politician doesn’t need Twitter or Facebook as part of their strategy, but those services and others will most definitely help them by helping the public.

As part of their decision process, voters are increasingly likely to:

• search for candidates by their riding name and affiliation
• search for information about their candidates by name
• read websites and blogs by and about the candidate and party
• skim through comments on various relevant news and blog articles
• read or skim the discussion in forums and social networking sites
• seek out and watch videos (and skim any comments on them)
• follow candidate microblogging activity

Basically, these tools shouldn’t be viewed by campaigns as intelligence gathering tools on the movements of their opponents. If your opponents are using the internet to feed the public and you’re not, you’re opponents will always remain one step ahead of you.

Don’t get me wrong, nothing will replace face time with the public through door-to-door canvassing, town hall meetings, public debates, community events, etc… Digital isn’t going to suddenly change the political landscape in the next election. However, social media is going to play an increasingly important role in how voters decide how they vote. In fact, digital played a very visible and unexpected role in the 2008 federal election when a Facebook group was credited for helping elect Edmonton Strathcona NDP candidate Linda Duncan by a small margin through vote swapping agreements based on trust between Canadian voters. Elections Canada ruled that the vote swapping agreements were legal because there was no exchange of money.

Politics has traditionally depended on a command-and-control communication environment and has remained so through the evolution of the internet to date. Talking points and messaging will always be a part of politics no matter which communication channels are used. Social media is poised to adapt this approach through authentic and personable relationships that people are becoming accustomed to — a kind of humanizing of politicians in the digital public eye.

Social media’s ability to help amplify individual voices and pitch-up the conversation on issues of importance changes the assertion about social media from “politicians can’t afford to” to “can politicians afford not to?”

Everything came together in five hours. I created the presentation deck, rehearsed, went home to get changed and arrived at the venue with 10 minutes to spare.

The session was about ways to take public affairs activities from good to great.

Knowing that most people talk about tools, statistics and case studies that largely revolve around the creation of social media content including text, audio and video on the net, and building constituencies of support on social networking sites, I decided to challenge the audience to think beyond creation and start putting more energy in participation, In fact, I plan to map the role of  owned media and earned media in digital public affairs using Dave Fleet‘s model of the social media ecosystem.

Participation is largely overlooked in most campaigns. Monitoring efforts tend to focus on the quantity and qualities of content created by others (e.g. articles and videos by news organizations, and blog posts, videos, Twitter messages and Facebook groups by individuals to name just a few). Few organizations have the resources for or the interest in wading through the comments left by site visitors. While there’s generally very little to measure in the way of comments on user generated content, there are some exceptions to that rule. The windfall is in studying the sometimes hundreds of comments left on mainstream news sites.

Organizations that develop a matrix and can apply good filters to the comments will find them to be an incredibly valuable index of public opinion and public understanding of news stories — more so than a telephone survey that asks people to park their dinner and rank their opinion and understanding of a specific issue based on a numeric scale.

I was part of a team tasked with tracking an issue that received explosive media attention last year. We built a matrix and studied hundreds of comments on news websites. That data helped us identify new elements of public concern and measure misunderstanding that was driven by both the media and the snack/skim consumption habits of the digital public. While it’s true that a decent portion of the comments were irrelevant and inflammatory, those comments sometimes drew out those who are more knowledgeable on the issue which added further value to our monitoring efforts. I developed evaluation criteria to better assess the individuals behind the comments (see Communication anthropology: evaluating five types of commenters) and shared those findings as part of my session on Friday.

Digital commentary is where organizations can find the breeding grounds for constituencies of support. For the public affairs team, this is gold and can be used to determine how to respond as part of the community on the news site or in the further development of created engagement. This ties back to Dave Fleet’s social media ecosystem.

I believe that participation drives the kind of earned media and public trust money can’t buy. Of course, if your organization tracks time for your financials so you can measure short term payoff rather then long term competitive advantage, participation can become a measurable component of your ROI.

Knowing Dave to be a natural in front of a mic, I cornered him at the bar (he was ordering a Red Bull) before his session to ask him about his session and its significance for communication professionals and the organizations they serve.

The attached podcast is the result of our brief conversation about the 2010 social media ecosystem, communication culture and integration, integration, integration.

Signal quality and the use of Twitter

Twitter is no more a channel for the mundane than social gatherings, speeches, town hall meetings, the telephone (and ultimately the cell phone), print and broadcast media, faxes, email and websites — and noone’s complaining about MP use of those technologies. It’s likely the use of those technologies was contentious when MPs first started adopting them just as it’s likely we’d be mocking our politicians for not using them now.

However, the effectiveness of the channel doesn’t determine the quality of the signal (the content/messages being posted); the quality of the signal determines the effectiveness of the channel. What Twitter offers is an easy-to-use ubiquitous technology through which politicians can share information (official and human) AND engage with the public at large. Social media is the only media which offers this opportunity to both politicians and the public at zero cost.

MPs don’t occupy themselves sending unnecessary emails, making unnecessary phone calls and conducting unnecessary meetings. I think it’s fair to say they won’t put their political work on hold to engage in a live Twitter chat. However, Twitter offers a great opportunity for MPs to conduct forums and opinion polls on matters of public interest.

Communicating in 140 characters

Twitter does not replace other forms of communication which are better suited to more thoughtful and lengthy discussion. I can’t imagine Twitter being used to filibuster a committee meeting. It’s yet another way to share information, particularly information that has some immediacy to it.

What Twitter offers is yet another way for MPs to remain connected with the public. MPs can’t attend town halls in Halifax when they need to be in Ottawa. Besides, there are strong arguments to be made about fiscal responsibility by teleconnecting. Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff’s recent Facebook public forum was a great example of using technology to engage with the public at large. It would be interesting to see if more politicians do that kind of thing more often.

Follower quality (voting constituents, non-supporters and the public at large)

One commenter (J. K. Galbraith) asked some great questions.

• How many of the people who are following the MP’s or leaders of the party are actually in their constituencies and can actually vote for them?
• How many of their followers are new supporters versus people who were already supporting them?

Politicians generally represent two groups of people: their immediate constituents, and their constituencies of interest. So, someone in Calgary might want to follow Jason Kenney as their elected representative in addition to the MPs who are responsible for debating their professional interests (e.g. Natural Resources Minister Christian Paradis, NDP critic Pat Martin and Liberal critics David McGuinty and Geoff Regan).

It’s interesting to note that Neilsen statistics report Twitter usage is highest among 35-49 year olds — perhaps the most important demographic for most politicians. Other social networks are also skewing older. Facebook’s fastest growing age groups are 35-54 and 55+ according to an iStrategy report. This means that the people politicians most want to reach are beginning to adopt and gather on social networks.

Real-time meaningful information

In a comment that suggested Twitter’s biggest naysayers have no first-hand knowledge of the service, Kristin shared a great example of how Twitter helps B. C. commuters get to work on time.

Translink, the company that manages public transit in the BC lower mainland, has a Twitter account. Translink will tweet about traffic delays or accidents that are causing buses to be rerouted. From this, I know in the mornings whether I need to leave early to catch my bus to avoid being late, or to take a different route altogether. Useful and very efficient.

Twitter as an official government channel

One commenter expressed frustration about being blocked from specific MPs’ Twitter accounts (blocking allows an account holder to selectively block other Twitter accounts from following them, sending a reply message and mentioning their Twitter account ID in a Tweet). There are ways around this, of course. For example, one does not need to be logged in to Twitter to follow messages from a specific user. Tweets are public and can be searched.

Regardless, Twitter is NOT an official government communication channel. The accounts are free (no cost to taxpayers) and held by individuals, not offices. Nor is Twitter identified in any Parliamentary act. As much as a digital geek as I am, I would never expect, nor want, Twitter to be explicitly identified as an official channel. Technology moves too quickly. Legislation needs to be agnostic if it’s to remain relevant as the digital economy grows.

I have some thoughts on what I call the digitization of democratic participation and the political process which I’ll share in another post. As I identified in my white paper, Twitter represents the “long head” of that curve.

Some of my colleagues were surprised to learn that I’ve discouraged organizations from using a SMR as part of their communication plan. So, I connected with Dave Hicks, Director of Sales for Canadian News Wire (one of a handful of popular Canadian companies that exist to help distribute MRs to the media) to talk about their relatively young SMR service. Just talking to Dave helped me realize what it is about SMRs that caused me to stay away from them — it’s not the communication vehicle itself, it’s the execution of the campaign on it. I’ve avoided using this channel because it’s being misused in a way that I feel devalues it.

Many organizations are using SMRs in a way that makes their message unappealing for both the mainstream media and social media audiences. Which means organizations that religiously look at ROI on all of their communication campaigns are putting out more I with no way of recognizing any R.

It seems to me there are some basic misunderstandings about SMRs so I thought I’d share five harsh thoughts for organizations thinking of using SMRs as part of their communication plan.

1) Social media audiences are NOT traditional audiences

Social media audiences don’t care how pleased an organization is about itself, its products or  events, or how the announcement affects the organization. If your announcement has no value or relevance to the social media audience, your SMR will have no value to your organization. And don’t forget that media organizations are looking for your wire copy, not your SMR.

2) Think engaging content NOT message delivery

The popularity of social media has grown out of the desire of people to engage with others. Tools have been created to facilitate participation and content redistribution. Messages intended for consuming-audiences and content intended for participating-audiences are very different and require different approaches and (in many cases) different creative. This also means changing the voice that engages the audience.

3) More value, less branding

In one particular SMR Dave and I looked at, the organization front loaded a 110-second video with 17 seconds of visual branding. That means from the moment the video began it seemingly took forever before the organization even started talking to its audience. In all, branding accounted for 20% of the video. Put another way, the organization stole 20% of its audience’s time. If it weren’t for the fact that Dave and I were evaluating the video, I would have given up before the 10 second mark.

4) A SMR doesn’t put your organization in the centre of social media

Organizations that haven’t embraced social media as part of their ongoing engagement with the public do not magically become social media organizations through their SMR. In fact, a SMR should augment a larger social media effort, not act in its place. At the very least, the SMR should be integrated with the campaign, not just be another channel for it. If the public doesn’t know about or can’t find your SMR, it serves as nothing more than an isolated outpost on the Internet.

5) Invest people NOT only money

One thing in common among all SMRs Dave and I looked at was the absence of the organization that released it. While this ties into number 4, what I’m really referring to here is the participation of the organization. Standing up a SMR and merely monitoring what’s being said without becoming active in the dialog makes the conversation about you, not with you. People can talk about you anywhere. If you’re going to invite the public to a gathering place, be a good host and participate. Assigning the right people to engage with others and respond to their comments, compliments and concerns, and act as a connector between the organization and its public is where organizations will recognize the value of their SMR.

Photo: Devin Castle Outpost posted to Flickr by xlibber.

That’s a fun way of summarizing the findings in my white paper, House of Tweets: Twitter and the House of Commons, a research project I undertook as part of my work in digital public affairs at Fleishman-Hillard.

The report examines the make up of the House of Commons based on active use of Twitter by MPs, which MPs are applying their innate network building skills to social networks and what our federal politicians can do to become more engaged with their constituents.

You can read more and download a copy of the report at PoliticalView.ca.

The disappointing news is that chemo number four coincided with the weekend of PodCamp Toronto (PCTO2010) meaning we weren’t able to be in Toronto to reconnect with longtime social media friends, make new ones and be present to learn and discuss new ideas about digital communication and relationship building.

PCTO is one of the few PodCamps that live streams all of the sessions — one of the advantages of being hosted in the Rogers Communications Centre of Ryerson University (THANK YOU, MANY!). The venue is fully equipped which means we could attend the sessions from the comfort of our own house at the mercy of the camera work and quality of the streams.

That’s where technology’s advantages plateau because no matter how much technology you throw at an event, whether a conference or the inaugural ceremony of the President of the United States, the technology just doesn’t exist to turn a mediated experience into a real one.

Social media unconferences have unique advantages over their formal cousins — they attract people who use technology for social engagement. This means that most of the people who attend the event have a desire to connect with others even if their own personalities or anxieties make that difficult for them.

Sue Murphy captured the reason why mediated experiences at PodCamps will never deliver the goods in her post The land of the free. In it, she relates clarity she gained from a conversation — nay, an experience –  with the “spiritual leader” of the Canadian social media community, Scarborough Dude. The Dude has always preached about authenticity and how the digital world can facilitate it.

PCTO and events like it teach us that technology can only facilitate authenticity in digital spaces. Real authenticity can only be experienced by being there.

Photos: PCTO2010 kick-off by Brad Fortner and Tod Maffin and Scarborough Dude by John Meadows.

Tod Maffin will undoubtedly be spreading the word about his new website, CaseStudiesOnline.com which boasts annotated social media marketing case studies. The interface is easy to use and provides access to summaries through a series of drop down menus which allow users to select demographics, industry, organization type and tactics. The summaries then provide a link to an outside site that hosts a more comprehensive version of the case study.

The walk-through video suggests that Tod may at some point add a reward system for people who contribute case studies to the site. He also reminds viewers that the site just launched so there may be a few wrinkles to iron out yet. My experience with the site so far has been smooth.

In the post, Justin shares his motivation for blogging and how audience participation plays an important role in moving ideas forward and providing him with motivation to keep sharing his thoughts. Without participation, bloggers can’t be certain that what they shared mattered to others.

The fascinating thing is that the traditional and digital media camps seem to be talking about a similar struggle using different language, from different stages of maturity.

Relevance

Traditional media is struggling to maintain relevance while the world around it is swirling with information, insight and one of the most important trifectas of being able to report news when it matters: location, location, location. More is being demanded of journalists with diminishing systems of support to deliver what the public wants when the public wants it. I’ve met columnists that are expected to cover the stories of interest as well as shoot and publish video on the web and write a blog post that augments and drives traffic to — not competes with — their column.

Digital media is struggling to establish relevance while the world around it watches the signal-to-noise ratio of the flood of information with a critical and suspicious eye. There are no gatekeepers and with that no quality control which both helps and hinders the trustworthiness of the information for everyone except those that are in the community. There is no specific requirement for balanced reporting except the fear of reprisal.

Here’s a fantastic opportunity for traditional and digital folks to get together and learn from each other. The traditional folks can get some guidance on the tools, culture and multidiscipline approach and the digital folks can get some guidance on sources, responsible communication and picking the relevant parts of a story. While this is important at the ground level, it’s equally important for editors, publishers and management to get in on the discussion though I expect they’re generally dismissive/suspicious of the amateur or too absorbed in financial strains and broken business models to take the time out for this kind of discussion. Of course, I might be completely wrong and they completely open to the idea.

Seems like it might be time to bring these two folks to the table. I have some thoughts on how I’d like to help make this happen. If you’re interested, drop me a line.

THE REPORT

Pew’s report shows that teens are more interested in the snack-sized bits of information associated with text messaging and status messages in social media networks like Facebook. Despite fitting this description, Twitter is surprisingly unpopular among teens.

Blogs have lost favour likely because of the relatively high word count and the amount of information contained within most blog posts. That means teens are also less likely to start or maintain their own blog.

INVERTED PYRAMID

The inverted pyramid is a style of writing developed by newspapers to ensure readers get the most relevant information first followed by supplemental information of decreasing importance.

For pure news articles, the lead –the first paragraph– is the most important element. It should tell most of the story in the fewest words possible (typically 30-40 words). Front loading the article with the most relevant information means that editors are able to cut out paragraphs from the bottom up, based on available print space, without having to rewrite the piece. Basically, the author should make sure to put the relative fluff last.

STICKY PIECES

Whether they’ve written a longer piece about a complex idea and have broken it up into manageable sections, or they’re connecting a series of smaller ideas into something bigger, many bloggers have been breaking up posts into logical sections with heading titles for quite some time. Rather than overwhelming readers with the sea of words, they write a larger piece that’s broken up into sticky pieces, each of which could be something bigger on their own.

THE EXPERIMENT

Okay… This post is an experiment. I wondered if the reason blogs aren’t as popular anymore is because authors don’t communicate their ideas effectively which artificially drives up audience-scaring word count.

I decided to take an a-la-carte-consumption view to writing this post. I also decided to remove all personality to over-illustrate how being concise ensures delivery of important information that can’t fit the mold of a snack-sized-information-culture.

The question becomes, how much of this post do you remember?

TEDNESDAY

During my second week at FH, I started a weekly lunch gathering to watch TED talks. It’s been very interesting to discuss the presentations with my co-workers and explore ways in which the ideas can influence our work. Last month, I invited one of our team members to present on extending the brand experience. Her session was very well received and led me to invite an internal speaker to inspire the office on the second Wednesday of each month.

POLITICAL VIEW

As a member of the public affairs practice, I’m automatically part of the pool of contributors to our group blog, PoliticalView.ca. Blogging about political goings-on and political issues is new for me. To develop my chops I’ve even let myself blog some of those issues right here. Today I blogged about Stockwell Day’s letter to “Treasury Board land”.

PUBLIC AFFAIRS, THE PODCAST

I’ve spearheaded Public Affairs, a podcast that will feature regular round table discussions with co-workers on issues of public affairs. The first episode which focussed on the distinction between public affairs and public relations — with a few sidebars about digital engagement — was published yesterday. Episode two will be out later this week and I hope to publish an episode each week.

DIGITAL STYLE

Today I launched Digital Style, an internal blog which I will use to help the people that aren’t as familiar or comfortable with the tools, culture and psychology of the digital world. My first post suggests reading The Cluetrain Manifesto. By the way, it’s possible I’ll cross post the occassional Digital Style blog post to this site.

WHAT’S NEXT?

The people that know me well know that once I get an idea in my head, there’s very little that can stop me. While I have some ideas I’m working on, what I’m more interested in is what I’m capable of and haven’t considered, yet.

The good news is that we’ll be able to attend from the comfort of our home and we’ve been invited to deliver a session via video Skype. Our session is called Textual Healing: The use of social media for narrative therapy, connection and support.

Here’s how our session is described:

Communities can exist for many reasons, but one of the most striking recent examples is the support community that has arisen around Canadian social media fixtures Andrea Ross and Mark Blevis, as together they work to make Andrea a breast cancer Survivor.

Their place of wellness on the web, WeCanRebuildHer.com, and the community that has gathered there is “something that’s good for them”, their supporters and for others in similar situations.

In this presentation, Andrea and Mark will join PodCamp Toronto via live Skype video from Ottawa to share their use of social media as a key tool in Andrea’s strategy to survive and thrive and will offer their top tips for healing and sharing in a digital world.

If you’re going to be in Toronto on the weekend of February 20-21, 2010, I recommend you register for and attend PCTO2010.

The resulting podcast series is informative and fun and serves to augment information from official corporate channels — as disclaimed during the intro of each episode. They record after hours (read: on the employees’ personal time), taking turns making the complicated understandable and addressing what they feel are the kinds of questions and concerns the public will have.

Powers that be within the organization recognized the value of the podcast and publicized it on the company website in a list ranked by downloads, which didn’t appear to be a problem until the thousands of downloads each month of the unofficial podcast caused it to rank (several) higher than the official one.

The disappearance of the very popular unofficial podcast from the “top” list suggests the guys who do this from their heart have been able to do something the paid folks haven’t.

Whether a senior person was protecting a financial investment or someone didn’t like being seen as second (or fourth in this case) to an unofficial effort, you have to question a decision that punishes the public and the organization to preserve pride.

All this to say, there is a fantastic opportunity for every organization — commercial, political and non-profit — to embrace podcasts, blogs, videos, etc… produced through unofficial and external channels that support their efforts. Noone’s pride needs to be hurt. In fact, you’ll make yourself more valuable to your consumers/clients, partners and stakeholders if you promote the hand that feeds.

Photo: Lion that Lunches by rofanator on Flickr.

I wonder if the issue is that third-party tools including desktop and mobile apps are making it more attractive to use third-party tools with Twitter (also noted in the article) in the same way that website visits decrease when people subscribe to a blog using RSS technology. Basically, they’re visiting you and enjoying your property from across the street.

Frankly, I’ve never understood why people get so excited about the growth and plateau curves of social media tools. It’s well known that social media sites tend to be transient in nature.

Like Rick Astley, who never had any fans and yet still sells CDs and plays to large audiences, sites like MySpace maintain a loyal following and represent solid platforms for people to engage. Facebook will have its day. So to will Twitter, and foursquare and Yelp and others we don’t know about, yet.

Social media tools don’t die; they become application interfaces.

The NoProrogue monitoring dashboard

It was a slow start… crowds were small, there was an attempt to lead a series of long and complicated chants, one of the speakers yelled at rather than spoke to crowd and a Nortel employee opened her speech with “I’m a Nortel employee so I know something about the Internet.” From my desk at home (where I was also working on an RFP), I wasn’t convinced that Ottawa’s contribution to the cross-Canada rallies against proroguing Parliament was going to help make the Facebook group-initiated day of protest remarkable.

Ottawa, indeed Canada, is just too stiff when it comes to rallies. It’s tough getting people out for any side of any cause and in the rallying mood once they’re there (especially when most of the city was enjoying the first great day of skating on the Canal). You need something to stir the crowd up. In the case of yesterday’s rally in Ottawa, there were too many inexperienced opening acts.

Then Trevor Strong of The Arrogant Worms took the stage. ”If I’m at a rally, something’s gone horribly wrong,” he said. Suddenly the gathering of an estimated 4,000 people (RCMP figures) became a rally that chanted Trevor into an encore after his song The Proroguer. Name a rally in Ottawa that encored one of its presenters.

THE BEGINNING OF THE CURVE

However, the real story isn’t the two-hour rally with student speakers, celebrity singers and party leaders. The story is that a national day of protest organized on Facebook managed to get in excess of 27,000 people rallying in cities across the country and even in major cities in the U.S. and U.K. All of the politicians and critics that thought an online gathering was cute now find themselves having to acknowledge that digital advocacy and engagement is on track to help shape our country’s government — with or without their participation.

And that’s not all. Digital tools played a significant communication role during the event. Protesters used the #noprorogue tag in Twitter, incorporated live blogging technology (which also aggregated all tagged Twitter posts), uploaded photos to Flickr and videos to YouTube, and video of the Ottawa event was live streamed to the Internet. Canadians are making this an important issue and the media has had to be a part of that or be left behind by democratized media. That certainly made it easy for observers like me.

MISSING VOICE

One aspect of the prorogued Parliament that isn’t getting much attention is the pro-proroguing opinion. Maybe one hundred prorogue supporters have been working the comments section of CBC.ca reports on the rallies, dismissing the participation rates at the rallies as being pathetic and representing less than one have of one per cent of Canada’s population.

If the measure of the popular opinion is numbers in Facebook groups and real world rallies, there is apparently no support for proroguing Parliament. [Note: a group calling itself Canadians Against 'Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament' has appeared on Facebook today. It has 47 members at the time of this post.]

IT TAKES ONE PERSON TO START SOMETHING

That’s the thing about Canada: drumming up participation and coordinated efforts for any side of any issue is incredibly difficult. Canadians, whether content or angry, just aren’t bred to rock the boat. Which makes Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament an incredible success. The Facebook group managed to convert roughly 13% of the digital participation in to a coordinated real world rally that spanned the country and the world — all because of one person, Christopher White, a student in Calgary.

Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament can now take comfort in the fact that their detractors made significant miscalculations and have a busy week ahead of them.

Mr. Ignatieff responded to 31 questions and comments during the one hour session. Not bad when you consider the amount of time it takes to receive, read, select, publish and respond to each.

I was surprised and pleased to see that the questions dealt with a wide range of issues including voting systems, poll results, legalization of marijuana, the role of youth in Canadian politics, the Alberta tar sands and (of course) prorogation. Mr. Ignatieff even gave props to the government for its handling of the Haitian earthquake.

I expected the town hall would have revolved around the Facebook group Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament (CAPP) and the rallies that group has been instrumental in organizing for this Saturday — particularly since the hour started with two questions on the subject. The fact that it didn’t either speaks to the broad spectrum of questions asked by Canadians or the careful moderation of the town hall by Mr. Ignatieff’s staff.

By the way, CAPP has 209,403 members as of the writing of this post.

It would be interesting to find out how many people registered for and actually attended the town hall, how many questions were submitted and on what topics, and which questions Mr. Ignatieff and his staff avoided — aside from the one question they accepted didn’t really answer (see the question time stamped 3:47).

An online town hall may not seem like much. I believe this represents a significant step forward by a politician to reach Canadians where they’re already gathering. Digital also represents opportunities for politicians to demonstrate fiscal responsibility by staying connected while saving travel and event costs — and maintaing some sanity in the politicians’ lives. It’s also something that can come together in pretty short order.

Coupled with his recent tour of universities, yesterday’s digital event shows that Mr. Ignatieff is committed to get young voters involved and out to the polls in greater numbers. He’ll likley pick up a few online political nomads along the way.

You can read the transcript of Mr. Ignatieff’s town hall on the Liberal Party’s website.

Photo from the online transcript.

It came to my attention when I received an email from Kiva.org via Dave Delaney earlier today. That was about the only connection the message had to Dave.

The letter opens with two salutations:

Hello!

Hi!

Dave knows the importance of addressing people by name and he’s more of a “hey” person than a stiff “Hello!” or “Hi!” and definitely not in any combination in the same letter.

I just made a loan to someone in Bolivia using a revolutionary new website called Kiva (www.kiva.org).

This is how I knew Dave hadn’t written the note. He doesn’t use the phrase “revolutionary new website” to describe sites that have been around for several years and definitely not for one that he’s been talking about for at least two years. In fact, I can’t think of a time when Dave has or would ever refer to any website as “revolutionary”.

As far as white-labeled pitches are concerned, the letter only gets worse from there. It’s very impersonal; it sounds like someone regurgitated a marketing brochure.

Even Quechup knew the importance of making messages sound believable. Despite the believability of the messages, Quechup also learned that abusing trust and exploiting social networks rather than partnering with them can bring a brand to the brink of destruction; and possibly bring other brands down with it. That’s a reality Kiva should not be flirting with.

Recognizing the potential damage this incident can have on his brand, Dave issued an apology on his blog. Yes, Dave. We can still be buds.

My colleagues and I have been immersed in reading hundreds of comments left by Canadians on media sites that covered an issue that affects some of our clients.  We built a matrix to evaluate all of the comments and discovered that the public response to and understanding of the issue was based on the coverage of each media organization. Suddenly, new stakeholders materialized and the public revealed their opinion about them.

Small and medium sized organizations should take note — when mainstream media incorporated comments on their web sites, they gave you the gift of free public opinion polling.

The excercise has led me to categorize commenters into five main categories and reinforced how much business intelligence any organization can gain from paying attention to digital conversation. That is, if you seek first to understand (and believe me, reading hundreds of comments is an important and valuable commitment) you can discover what the issue really is and who you should be reaching out to before you figure out what should be said.

Based on my share of the comments, I classified commenters into five categories:

INVOLVED – these are the people that are close to or very concerned about the issue. They know the stakeholders, they have intimate knowledge of the issue, and can analyze the different directions and effects of the issue on the fly. Involved commenters help keep the conversation relevant no matter their stance on the issue.

INFORMED – these are the people that have taken the time to learn more about the issue and its key players. They tend to know the history and appreciate the impacts. Informed commenters generally have a personal interest in the issue. They contribute new ideas to the conversation and help others understand by taking the time to offer valuable responses.

MISINFORMED – these are the people who have skimmed the article, may have misunderstood the information they received and have collected or were fed inaccurate information from other sources. This is the first level of commenter that lets their opinions cloud the issue by letting their opinions fill in the holes of their understanding. Misinformed commenters aren’t necessarily malicious.

UNINFORMED – this is where the participants in the conversation transition from being people to being commenters. The uninformed choose to let their opinion validate their broken logic. They aren’t interested in the back story and don’t know who the stakeholders are. In most cases, they’ve picked up on a single point of the article or taken a single piece of information out of context. Uninformed commenters like to pontificate and are happiest when they deconstruct what other people are saying, sometimes peppering their comments with personal attacks.

ANGRY – known for years as “flamers”, this is the angry mob of people who like to berate others no matter what the discussion is about. They’ve never heard of the issue and probably won’t come back to it. They spray their anger and leave. The angry use emotional attacks and have no interest in logic.

I decided to quantify five qualities of commenters based on several criteria with ratings of 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest). I used 0 to indicate none.

Now it becomes easier to figure out who to engage with, how and when.

It seems surreal that it’s been over two months since her diagnosis. So much has happened since October 6: three surgeries, cardiac and bone scans, x-rays, blood tests, an MRI and an ultrasound and frequent appointments with our surgeon, radiation oncologist and medical oncologist. We’ve also had a meeting with a social worker and Andrea’s met with her GP and a counsellor and spoken to a few people conducting cancer-related studies. Yes, it’s been a full two months.

Three very important things need to be noted.

1) We’re extraordinarily lucky to be close with the right family and friends, local and distant. Everyone’s generosity with their time. gifts and concern has been overwhelming. Whether it’s been emails, phone calls or visits, delivery of meals, gifts and hats, or playdates and sleepovers for our daughters, the last two months would have been very different if we had to do this on our own. Special mention also goes to the amazing team I work with for their support. And, by the way, my parents absolutely rock!

2) Social media is really making the world smaller and more meaningful. Many of our closest friends and supporters result from connections we’ve made online through blogs, podcasts and Twitter. We regularly receive messages of support and gifts from our social media friends, people we consider ourselves extremely lucky and privileged to know.

3) Andrea makes the battle worth fighting. It’s difficult being the support system — you often feel helpless. It takes a lot of energy to put on a brave face, be strong and bring some levity to the process our family is going through. However, Andrea’s courage and personality draws this out and makes it seem not only natural but the only rational approach. We actually have fun. And even though we’re scared mindless 30% of the time, we’re undaunted and laughing together the other 70%. If that weren’t true, I’d have collapsed long ago.

I know the next few months will present their challenges and there will be times we’ll get lost in the details. This a road we have to travel to get to our destination. It’s a bumpy road and we’re not the only family traveling it. Like many a road trip we’ll probably feel like asking “are we there yet” all the time — that’s only because there’s a party we’re anxious to get to; the best party in the world.

I could list the myriad of specific reasons shared by predominantly government organizations for keeping social technologies off of their internal networks. However, it would be far easier to lump them into a single category: fear (there are some political reasons as well, but fear is by far the biggest single factor right now). The fear includes impact on productivity, overwhelming amounts of content to organize and archive, and turning the intranet into a two-way communication channel. Government organizations also raised concerns about Access to Information requests (which I won’t attempt to address here).

A number of interesting statistics were presented to illustrate why organizations should be incorporating social technologies on their intranet:

• Randy Woods of non~linear creations shared the results of an unscientific study they conducted in which 45% of respondents believe “everyone owns the corporate intranet” (beating the IT, HR and Communications departments, and several others)
• Carmine Porco of Prescient Digital Media Ltd. shared Centre for Media Research findings that 39% of surveyed 18-24 year olds would leave a company if denied access to social media and social networks (social media has become a competitive advantage for productivity AND recruiting)
• I shared Forrester Reasearch‘s Canadian Social Technographics report which identifies Canadians as “the most active social networkers in any market” they’ve surveyed to date (57% of Canadians use social network sites at least once a month, 6% more than the U.S.)

The consensus among the presenters and delegates is that social intranets, or hybrids of traditional and social, are the way to go. The issue is trying to get buy-in from the decision makers.

I offered the following suggestions for deriving a Return On Fear to make corporate intranets social:

Leverage the Technology: It used to be that the cost and limited functionally of intranet software demanded centralized content management. The tools are no longer a barrier to entry, functionally or fiscally. You may even have the necessary technology in your organization already. If money is a factor, consider using proven open-source technology that meets your needs.

Keep things simple: It’s important to have a strategy and a plan to execute it. However, don’t over-think or over-complicate things. The more simple things are (reasons, language, interface, etc…), the more likely the organization will embrace the tools. Acceptable use policies should be simple to understand and short (anything more than a paragraph or two will be ignored). Consider creating five to 10 simple guidelines to help the participants.

Community of communities: Don’t think of social technologies as delegating the intranet to the employees. Give contributors a reason to contribute and they will deliver. Have the primary site be an advocate of and aggregate for the various internal communities (geographic, business unit, skills, personal interests, etc…). By the way, management and centralized communications should be viewed as a community like all others. Exceptions must be made during a crisis while still making sure to include the voice of the communities since they also have a role (and concerns) in getting through the crisis.

Support the business objectives: If the tools are deployed to support work, they’ll be used for work. Think empowering vs. policing the communities. Most people and communities will self-police since they understand that some non-work-related chatter will be tolerated. For organizations that think instant messaging, forums, etc… will destroy productivity, ask yourself why you allow employees to have phones on their desk, email and Internet access.

Make it part of the culture: For the de-centralized components to contribute to productivity and the good of the organization (operationally and socially), contributors must have time allocated to keep their community current. They also need the support of management. If management models the social intranet behaviour, the organization will follow. Yes. Management should participate in the social intranet culture.

Apply the “so what?” test: Make sure the content is relevant to the audience. Some people call this the signal-to-noise rule.

Build the basis for trust: Trust is a two-way street. If management trusts the organization with the tools and capability to connect and collaborate on the intranet, they will in turn trust management as an enabler and connector. This can only be beneficial for the organization.

We can save the discussion of creative ways to drive adoption and the management and archiving of content for another day.

I thought I’d take a few minutes to share experiences I’ve had with personal groundswell; something I’ve occasionally called support flash mobs. You’ll notice that each successive project is more ambitious and had a greater reach and impact than the previous.

POST-ADVOCACY

Tod Maffin played an important role for CBC employees locked out by management in 2005. He initiated a movement to online support and advocacy for locked-out employees and their CBC audiences. It was a group effort that included blog posts and podcasts created across the country. Tod provided invaluable hope and support to the community and was instrumental in keeping the bond strong between staff and audiences.

When the lockout ended I collected audio thank you notes from CBC staff in Ottawa and from some of the regional staff I knew were closely connected to Tod during the days of the unplugged site — people like Sean Prpick and Shelagh Rogers. All I had to do was ask. They were all too happy to give something back to someone who had given them so much. (Click here for a post that features this audio collage)

CBC Unplugged proved to be a great example of groundswell both as a tool for advocacy and influence during a management dispute, and then as a tool to give back and reflect.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY

Nine months after “Thank you, Tod”, I became involved in another example of tapping in to the groundswell when Bill Deys and Sean McGaughey wanted to do something special for Derek K. Miller‘s birthday (his first since being diagnosed with stage four colorectal cancer). Out of that was born another audio project. Emails were sent out to podcasters and bloggers, many of whom only knew Derek by name and from hearing or using Creative Commons music he’d created for the benefit of the social media community. In a few short hours, we’d collected enough audio comments to create a collage of good wishes, mixed to one of Derek’s own songs. (Click here for the post that features this collage)

Earlier this year, I coordinated a different type of audio birthday card when John Meadows and I re-wrote the lyrics to Billy Joel’s Piano Man and invited 120 people to sing them as part of a 40th birthday gift for Bob Goyetche. Forty-nine people, most from North America and a few from around the world, answered the call (including John Meadows, me and my wife). The result was a Band Aid like collaboration of people that gave something back to Bob for all that he’d given them. The final mix of the song featured solos, duets and small groups. The final chorus featured the entire ensemble. In many ways, it felt as though all 49 of us had gathered in one room to stand around a piano and belt out a song for our friend. (Click here for the podcast that features this song)

THE WARRIOR SOUNDTRACK

If Bob’s 40th birthday song was the most technically ambitious groundswell project (it took about 45 hours to mix), by far the most ambitious in reach was the one I recently coordinated for my wife, Andrea. The day after she was diagnosed with breast cancer, I sent a personal email to every one of the 220 interview guests of our Just One More Book!! children’s book podcast asking each if they would leave a voice message on our hotline sending good wishes to Andrea. My plan was to create a CD of audio messages Andrea could listen to during recovery from surgery and during her chemotherapy treatments; something I was inspired to call The Warrior Soundtrack.

The messages started to pour in immediately (Henry Winkler responded first, within minutes). In all, 126 messages came from authors, illustrators and publishers from around the world (including England, Spain and Israel) and ranged from newcomers to celebrities. Many of the messages were more than just good wishes. Some people recited poems or sang songs they wrote for Andrea. Some related their own experiences with cancer and others offered to speak on the phone anytime Andrea wanted someone to talk to. An overwhelming 75 minutes in audio! Plus, Andrea received a number of packages in the mail — handwritten cards with original artwork by famous illustrators, t-shirts, books and other gifts. Andrea even received two “bionic” candy apples.

In fact, we received so many messages that I realized I needed to also create a summary audio clip for Andrea so she could get a quick hit of support and energy any time she needed it. The result is an audio collage packaged over Sunshine and Starlight, a fantastic instrumental by Bjork Ostrom. (Click here for the post that features The Warrior Theme)

BIGGER THAN OURSELVES

Being human means we have the desire to connect, make a difference and be a part of something bigger than ourselves. Everyone has the ability to make or break a company or change someone’s life. It can start with a simple thank you and grow from there.

Issue #5: despite what you think, you’re not competing with technology

I’ve always been a fan of radio and the variety of programming it offered. When I was 13 I would wake up to the CHEZ 106 morning show. During breakfast I would listen to CBC (since it was on in the kitchen). After school I would turn on CHEZ, again. And, I would often set my alarm to listen to The Zero Hour at midnight, also on CHEZ. When I got my Sony WM-4, I listened to the radio even more. Even though I had my own cassette tapes to listen to — which I did — radio had something to offer.

Of course I also helped to raise the average daily television consumption statistics and have gone in and out of phases of being a newspaper junkie.

So, what changed when I got my first iRiver — the one with the built-in radio — and then an iPod and ultimately an iPhone? Why was it so easy for me to give up cable (beyond the fact that my wife-to-be didn’t have it and didn’t want it)? Why am I watching specific content online?

I don’t believe media organizations are competing with technology. Technology is just another delivery channel. About the only thing that portable media technology offers that the media organizations cannot through traditional delivery channels is time-shifting. The rest of the playing field is level.

I believe that the competition is with personality. Great personality breeds strong relationships.

I’ve done several informal surveys of people I know and the consensus is that radio lost its personality. As an added bonus, radio reduced playlists, over-specialized and over-homogenized their formats and programming. Portable media players allow consumers to program their own personality and expand the playlist from a limited 200 songs to a seemingly unlimited number of songs.

Ottawa’s CHEZ 106 is a great study. It’s billed as a classic rock station. If you judged classic rock by CHEZ’s playlist, you’d swear that genre begins and ends with about 250 records. In fact, I enjoy telling the story of being in my car and turning off CHEZ in the middle of Hotel California and six months later, back in my car, turned CHEZ back on in almost the exact same spot of that song.

It’s not just about the songs, either. I couldn’t find my own rhythm with the new style of on-air hosting. That applied with a number of local rock and pop radio stations. Even CBC had a few shows I left behind because I couldn’t connect with the style of the time. I’ve recently discovered new approaches and even new talent on some of those shows and have become a committed listener, again. The content hasn’t changed — the personality of the show, not just the host, has changed.

Television’s personality has also evolved. It’s a long tail coming out of the reality and pseudo-reality crazy, neither of which I really bought into. Talking with people about the reality craze is like talking about Rick Astley during the height of his fame — nobody admitted to listening to him, but his records were selling like crazy and he was playing a lot of sold out concerts. But I really didn’t listen to him.

The print publications that remain strong are the ones that have a strong macro-personality (the publication itself), or have outstanding micro-personalities (specific journalists or columnists).

In all variety of media, advancements in technology provide additional ways to reach audiences. If your personality is strong, people will continue to seek you out whether through traditional channels, through media streams online, on subscription-based content, podcasts or as programming on sites such as HULU. Each of those distribution methods offer new (possibly challenging) ways of revenue generation. How successful you are is based entirely on your personality and the relationships that personality breeds.

Suggestion: Focus on creating strong personality-based content and think more creatively about how to use technology to distribute that personality.

That approach, and others, overlook one thing: people talk and always have. It started a long, long time ago with face-to-face communications using body language, then spoken language with town criers and messenger, which led way to written language and the postal system. Don’t forget about smoke signals. Then the telephone, radio, television and this thing called the internet.

Organizations have embraced many technologies over the years to help with communications, business development and networking. None has been more controversial than the internet which offers ample opportunities to build and sometimes destroy business with a few keystrokes. As a result, an increasing number of businesses are waging war on democratized social media tools such as Facebook and Twitter.

The biggest fear is the rate at which information travels. Gone are the days when an employee would leak information to the wrong person at a social gathering and find the information reaching the press several days or weeks later. Stories break on the internet, particularly Twitter, on an hourly basis and companies don’t like that the data doesn’t know social, geographic or political boundaries.

Things have changed significantly and quickly for business. I understand their concern. Particularly since the new wave of authentic, transparent and regular communication is something the establishment hasn’t yet embraced. Old traditions die hard. We have to graduate through another generation of business leaders, perhaps two, before modern social communications finds its way into the fabric of the corporate world. Until then, communications will remain the work of an individual or specific team, not the entire company.

In my work over the last few years, I’ve become aware of a number of situations in which sweeping decisions were made with little thought about the impact. For example, many government departments I’ve worked with have blacklisted Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter. Those restrictions also applied to the communications and human resources department, teams that could benefit from using social media to monitor conversations, participate in conversations, recruit and check up on potential hires. Getting exceptions for these departments was/is challenging. Conversely, I’ve heard of some forward thinking companies that recognize making allowances for personal use of the company phones and internet connection means people are happier at work and don’t have to leave the office for extended periods or  sneakily try to do online banking at the office.

Some people I’ve spoken with noted that their management views social networks as unproductive use of time, apparently forgetting ill-planned and poorly executed meetings, many of which start late, end later and achieve nothing.

There are many ways social media tools can work for companies. The simple lesson to remember is that people talk, no matter which channel is available to them. The companies that create a culture of trust and provide support and education are best positioned to manage and even benefit from the use of social media.

…pay attention to your customers. Why? Because your children need food and as much hugs as I get in the world, I can’t eat a fucking hug.

The room, myself included, welcomed “I can’t eat a fucking hug” as a new commandment of social media. I’ve discovered that, like any good rule, there’s at least one exception.

Nearly two weeks ago, we announced that Andrea has been diagnosed with breast cancer. Life, reality and schedules change very quickly (and erratically) with this news. The outpouring of support is incredible. We’ve received a steady flow of hugs, real and virtual, and I’ve learned that while hugs may not put food on the table, they give you the will to sit down and eat and keep good care of yourself. I don’t believe that any amount of money can do that.

The best part of our list and stories is that while they were delivered with a book industry focus, the golden rules themselves are portable to any industry and community.

Here’s our list…

10. Be a champion of the industry/genre. (celebrate others)

9. Never approach a network or individual in a network with a greedy one sided agenda. –Keith Burtis

8. KNOW the site/people you’re approaching, and why.

7. Follow the site’s guidelines/policies if they’re published. (read About, FAQ, everything!)

6. Customize and personalize your message. (add value and be reasonable)

5. Address the site/people by name.

4. Never harass the site/people. (a follow-up is fine)

3. Be polite, gracious and humble. (books are not currency)

2. If the site is good enough to approach, it’s good enough to promote.

1. If you let the site/person love you and your work, they will become your champion.

Here’s another look at the state of media — traditional and digital — and how things continue to evolve in that space… Did You Know 4.0.

Hat tip: Dale Arseneault.

The trick was to call each other, collect.  The phone company had an automated attendant which prompted the “Collect Caller” to say their name after the tone.  The system allowed maybe 3-5 seconds of recording time, during which we could blurt out a brief communication.  The system would then tell the caller to wait while it sought to get the charges accepted.  When the call was answered, the automated attendant would kick in and say “You have a collect call from…” and it would play the recorded message.

This back-and-forth exchange sometimes went of for an hour or more.  As annoying as it may have been, it was the only free mode of quasi-real-time long distance communication at the time — several years before the Internet.

I’m teaming up with Greg Pincus to deliver a series of FREE webcasts that will give book publishers, publicists, authors, illustrators and enthusiasts social media savvy for outreach and promotion.  The series is titled How Social Media Can Help You Sell Books: Guidance for the book publishing industry and its stakeholders and each installment will seek to answer the question: How does this help me sell books?

Don’t miss the first four free sessions.

SEP 10, 12pmET- Finding the Conversation: Who’s talking about you and what they are saying

Understanding search and alerts to monitor the digital conversation.  This session will focus on effective use of Google with references to Technorati, Twitter and IceRocket. (REGISTER)

SEP 17, 12pmET - Twitter: More than “What are you doing?”

Why use Twitter, how to engage and craft your message, using hash tags and a few Twitter stories. (REGISTER)

SEP 24, 12pmET - Bloggers/Podcasters are People, Too: Engaging with the social media community

Recommendations for meeting, relating to and collaborating with the social media community. (REGISTER)

OCT 1, 12pmET - Remarkable Use of the Internet to Promote Books and the People Behind Them

Storytelling and interesting examples of effective book promotion in the digital age. (REGISTER)

UPDATE…

You can now register for the entire four-part How Social Media Can Help You Sell Books webcast series (or more than one webcast) in one easy step.  Follow this link, put a check mark in the box next to each webcast you’d like to attend, click the “Register” button.  Your registration form will apply to each webcast you selected.

The segment relates to the coverage of Ottawa Mayor Larry O’Brien’s criminal trial.  I’ve been following the trial closely and have noticed that there are three categories of online coverage by the media.

DIGITAL COURT REPORTER

Ottawa Citizen reporter Glen McGregor has been exercising his home-row key skills through his live “Twittering” of the trial.  His role as an online digital court reporter has meant he has to run two Twitter accounts (obrientrial and obrientrial2) as the flood updates sometimes violate a limit Twitter has set on the number of posts one can make in an hour on a single account; while one account recovers from the sanction, Glen jumps over to the other.  His 140-character or less updates are a mix of observations, paraphrased comments, verbatim quotes and the occasional humourous reflections (like who might play a particular witness in the movie-version of the trial).

BLOG UPDATES

The CBC‘s Cory O’Kelly and Alistair Steele took a few days to find their rhythm with their blog coverage of the trial.  Their posts range from extremely short (less than 200 words) to medium length and include factual accounts or light analysis of cross examination, testimony and procedure.  While the titles of their posts have become more attention-getting, there is still the occasional ”Up Next” and “Cory O’Kelly writes…” which weakly invite me to find out what’s going on.

The Ottawa Sun is also in on the action.  Susan Sherring and Derek Puddicombe have taken a more snappy approach to their blogging, using imagery and a little humour in largely one-sentence paragraphs — a digest style.

ONLINE JOURNALISM

Then there’s traditional and thoughtful journalism.  Most of the analysis and pure journalism is coming from the CBC which probably explains why Alistair and Cory haven’t been as thorough and regular in their blog.  Because they still have to file radio and television stories, and write reports for the CBC.ca, their focus is on their journalism background.

VERDICT

This is an exciting time for news junkies.  Glen feeds my need for immediacy and unfiltered facts from which I can develop my own assumptions and make my own judgements.  He’s truly doing it better than anyone else.  Alistair and Cory provide me with analysis and observations in a style I’m familiar with and that allows me to test my assumptions and judgements.  I feel like I’m in a better position to trust the media when I can get both the unfiltered details and the analysis on the same story.

Now, if the websites could only be overhauled for the user experience so that the information is easier to find, faster to navigate and that uses more contemporary ways of highlighting audio and video content!

The next day, Marc took his plan to the streets for the annual Great Glebe Garage Sale.  Decked out in a homemade sandwich board that read “Need a hand?”, Marc socialized with people, spread good cheer and handed out 4000 cards he made up the night before to promote his established photography business and his new venture doing odd jobs including (as indicated on his hand outs) yard work, painting, gardening, washing, scrubbing, lawn mowing, poop pick-up and spring cleaning.

Marc’s approach is that spreading good cheer and shaking people’s hands is a great door opener — the original social media.  It allows you to eliminate doubt about the person you are, something that is always open to question if you launch your business exclusively on the web.

That philosophy works.  Marc’s already booked business.

In my view, Marc did seven things that work very well:

• he never panicked
• he devised a simple plan
• he acted on the plan
• he met people face-to-face
• he stood out
• he spread good cheer
• he struck while the iron was hot

Good luck, Marc!

As more companies flock to social media and discover the power of text, audio and video content on the Internet (whether podcasted or streamed) we’re seeing more of that same approach to corporate communications.  The difference is the public has more power to choose the content it wants and very few of us want to listen to or watch a senior executive talk at us from his or her expensively decorated office — particularly in an age when many of their peers are in the press for unusual accounting practices, bankruptcies, use of corporate jets for personal reasons and, what the heck, Ponzi Schemes.

People relate to other people, not companies.

As exciting as a company may be, its personality is actually the personalites of its people and their ability to engage with others.  In my view, dressing the company and its management team in Hollywood production actually buffs off the humanity and showcases the marketing budget.

Having said that, many companies are actually making great efforts to embrace the social media culture.  I’m not talking the ones that are using every available tool (and there are many) and pumping out as much content as possible.  I’m talking about the companies that understand people want more meaningful information and ideas and they want the presentation to be engaging; even entertaining.

Be real.

One such example is Microsoft.  They began publishing their audio-based IT Manager Podcast in February 2007. The IT Manager team’s purpose is to be the connection point (with no strings attached) for the broad ICT community in Canada, from student to CIO. For about a year-and-a-half, they delivered slick and informative interviews which were scripted and read by both the hosts and guests, all of whom are experts in their fields.  The programs were recorded in an acoustically pristine studio and the performances were directed, sometimes requiring participants to do multiple takes of what was supposed to be a natural dialog.  You can’t disguise that as real.

I was contracted to reinvent the IT Manager Podcast and I’ve worked closely with the Microsoft team to transition them out of a recording studio with a script, to a meeting room using discussion points to impromptu discussions on the floor of a gaming conference.  Getting out of the recording studio has allowed host Rick Claus and his guests to relax and have a fun while adding energy to what some might consider to be dry topics.  And they don’t have a coach telling them how to be themselves.  You can hear how real it is.

Where do you connect with others?

This week we released something unusual for an enterprise-level podcast; an experiment.  Rick recorded a discussion with two information security experts in a coffee shop, the activity of which increased their energy.  After listening to the recording I suggested we make the coffee shop part of the story and pitched the idea of weaving together a narrative about the topic and guests with the sound of Rick ordering his coffee and pastry, adding cream and sugar and then waiting for his guests to arrive.  That led into a conversation about an important corporate issue in an environment where many business people like to conduct off-site meetings.  The result is real and relate-able, especially when the clerk at the coffee shop runs the vacuum — something we made light of in the show.  Mainstream media has conditioned us to think this kind of activity is unusual and unacceptable.

Don’t just use the tools to communicate; know how to use them to connect.

Just because a company or enterprise can afford to do big budget productions, doesn’t mean they should.  Certainly never at the expense of presenting real people and relevant information.  They must choose their media and tools carefully and then produce something as authentic as possible.

The real fun is in revealing the personality while delivering the message.  Making that happen and working with people that care about relating to their audience is why I love my work.

LESSON #1: CLIENTS AREN’T PAYING FOR THE SHOW

Chris ended his magic show by saying that he loves what he does and considers it play, not work.  His clients aren’t paying for the show, because he does that for fun.  His clients pay for the paperwork, contracts and other administravia he doesn’t enjoy nearly as much.

LESSON #2: RECOMMEND THE NEXT PERFORMER

It turns out that the organizers of this magic show also arranged a magic show by another performer last year.  At the end of last year’s show, the performer recommended Chris Pilsworth for this year’s event.

LESSON #3: EXHIBIT PROFESSIONAL COURTESY

At the end of the show, I recognized Eric Leclerc, a magician I’d seen perform before.  I approached him to remnisce about that appearance and asked him if he had any business cards with him (they’re cool… made to look like baseball cards).  He declined giving one to me noting that it wasn’t his performance and therefore not his place to promote himself.

Today, that changed.  I received an update from the group which identified the 10 bestselling CDs for February, a list of upcoming releases and some staff picks.  Suddenly, I find myself curious about this music and wanting to check it out.

I probably shouldn’t be as excited as I am about these notifications.  But, what I like most is that the people (employees and customers) that compiled this list and sent it to the group are real people that I see in my neighbourhood everyday (sometimes even the store).  This means that I know where the recommendations come from.  They’re real!  It’s not based on sales statistics, click-throughs and record company promotions.  It’s based on the musical tastes of people I can relate to.

And here’s what the message says…

Subject: Compact Music UPDATE

Top 10 Best Sellers (February):

1) Jenn Grant “Echoes”
2) Slumdog Millionaire Soundtrack
3) M.Ward “Hold Time”
4) Jill Barber “Chances”
5) K Naan “Troubadour”
6) Jeff Beck “2007: Performing This Week…”
7) Beirut “March of the Zapotec/Realpeople Holland”
8) Keith Jarrett  “Yesterdays”
9) Dan Auerbach “Keep It Hid”
10) Antony & the Johnsons “Crying Light”
————————————————————————————
*COMING IN MARCH*

Neko Case
U2
Catherine MacLellan
Bell Orchestre
Great Lake Swimmers
Diana Krall
Arvo Part
Joel Plaskett
Swan Lake
Bruce Cockburn
Handsome Furs

+ SO MANY MORE!!!
———————————————————————————-

*Staff Picks*

Ian:
Soundtrack of our Lives “Communion”
Von Bondies “Love Hate & Then There’s You”

J-Dawg:
Steven Wilson “Insurgentes”
M.Ward “Hold Time”

Rex Knightlington:
Beirut “March of the Zapotec/Realpeople Holland”
Malajube “Labyrinthes”

Alexander:
Erik Satie “Composer”
Nash Ensemble “Beethoven: String Quintets Opp 4 & 29″

Rockstar Liam:
Morrissey “Years of Refusal”
Lily Allen “It’s Not Me It’s You”

Megan:
Neko Case “Middle Cyclone”
Slumdog Millionaire Soundtrack

I learned about one particular site which boasts the tagline “If it’s worth reading, we’ve written it.”  Of course, they haven’t written anything.  The site creators are automatically pulling down content from the legitimate book review site Becky’s Book Reviews and presenting it as their own.  As with many Flogs, they’ve attached Google ads to the site (by the way, you can probably report them to Google and have their Google ad account terminated).

Today, Becky blogged about the unscrupulous site in a post she titled “Don’t be Fooled by Imitations” and, as you probably guessed, her post was pulled down to the Flog site.  Too bad it’s an automated site and the post probably won’t cause the site owner any reaction.

1. Defining broadcasting in new media
2. The significance of broadcasting in new media and its impact on the Canadian broadcasting system
3. Are incentives or regulatory measures necessary or desirable for the creation and promotion of Canadian broadcasting content in new media?
4. Are there issues concerning access to broadcasting content in new media?
5. Other broadcasting or public policy objectives
6. The appropriateness of the new media exemption orders

As part of its public notice announcing the intent to hold public proceedings, the CRTC identified preconditions that suggested a need to review the environment for broadcasting in new media.  These include:

• insufficient levels of Canadian content on the Internet
• evidence that the new media environment is having an impact on various aspects of the business model of traditional broadcasters
• increased availability of high-quality video programming on the Internet

For the purpose of the hearings, the CRTC has provided the following assumptions:

• Canadian content: Historically, the creation and presentation of most professional Canadian content has required some form of production subsidy. Generally, Canadians are the primary audience and consumers of Canadian content.
• User-generated content: As stated in Broadcasting Notice of Public Hearing CRTC 2008-11, the Commission is not concerned with user-generated broadcasting content. That is, the Commission does not seek to inquire into the content, quality or availability of material created by individual Canadians in a personal capacity.

It’s easy to get excited about all of this setup information and the framework which has been established for the public hearings.  For example, many hobbyist and amateur producers of new media content (user-generated content) are likely to get worked up that user-generated content is being specifically excluded from the proceedings.  It’s not.  And, anyone who plays or works in new media knows that user-generated content is intrinsically intertwined with all other media production and distribution methods in the world of new media.  That became clear during the first two presentations at the CRTC hearings on Canadian broadcasting in new media earlier today.

The CRTC has front-loaded the hearings with submissions from the arts communities.  Alain Pineau spoke on behalf of the Canada Council for the Arts (CCA).  Among other things, his presentation identified concerns over fees charged by Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and Wireless Service Providers (WSPs) for access to an increasingly rich pool of content that demands comprehensive data plans using infrastructure, much of which has been built using taxpayer money and government concessions “for the public benefit”.  At one point, Mr. Pineau suggested that these are “new money” not “new media” proceedings and proposed that ISPs and WSPs should be contributing to the development of Canadian content, noting that some of the same organizations that have a say over Canadian content are the same organizations that own the infrastructure over which new media content is transmitted.

While his presentation was filled with insights such as (and I’m paraphrasing, here) everything old is new again and questions including what is the difference between professional and hobbyist user-generated content, Mr. Pineau was decidedly under prepared for the cross-examination that followed.  When asked to elaborate on his request to measure the various aspects of new media, Mr. Pineau was unable to offer any concrete thoughts.  That was during the gentle and conversational part of the discussion.  Then he faced Timothy Denton’s very concise, very focused questions.  Mr. Denton cornered Mr. Pineau on the issue of the requirement of broadcasting licenses for average citizens that may create new media.

While it was hard to know exactly what CCA’s specific concern was, the Alliance of Canadian Cinema, Television and Radio Artists (ACTRA) was clear in their message.  With actors Colin Mochrie, Bruce Densmore and Charlotte Arnold on the presentation team, ACTRA was unapologetic in their efforts to solicit more money to support the creation of Canadian content.  Mr. Mochrie pointed out that a “3% levy of the 2007 ISP residential broadband revenues of $3.3 billion would generate $99 million annually” from “very substantial profits” made by businesses that “are obligated to give back to the system that serves them so profitably”.  They also pushed for regulation of new media while opposing the inclusion of amateur user-generated content in such regulations.

ACTRA was far better prepared for the debate that followed their presentation, a debate that explored the relationship between professional and hobbyist user-generated content.  Mr. Mochrie and Mr. Densmore agreed any content they created personally that promoted their work and appearances in commercial and public media would constitute professional user-generated content that would be subject to regulation under the terms of their definition.  While I applaud that, I also fear its ramifications since many people (myself included) have promoted their appearances on radio and television, as well paid speaking engagements, using audio and video programs that fall under the definition of new media.

I’m disappointed in the definition of and discussions about Canadian content, so far.  Canadian content need not be funded, nor created by established media production facilities nor experienced professionals.  There’s far more content published by Canadian citizens on a daily basis than the combined efforts of the media houses.  Dismissing amateur productions is denying the very nature of the Internet that fostered the creation of new media.

I believe we need to invest heavily in professional productions to sustain an industry that informs and entertains as well as sustains our Canadian culture and identity.  Does that mean that a levy shouldn’t also go to people that are generating popular amateur user-generated content?  Should ISPs be required to pay someone for the privilege of distributing the content that’s helping to convert an increasing number of people to broadband services?  Does creating content turn the average person into a broadcaster requiring a license?

I hadn’t intended to be so interested in the hearings.  Now, with more questions than answers, and the concern over the nature of the presentations and the level of preparedness of the speakers, I will be glued to the hearings as much as possible.

That’s because of the restrictions I set for myself.  I decided that if I couldn’t deliver an entertaining and information message in ten minutes, it wasn’t worth telling, and also that I should maximize the use of the time to deliver as much detail as I could, noting that too many radio shows skim the surface of an issue instead of refining their line of questioning to dig deep into a single issue.  I suspect that’s to appeal to a broader audience.

Like many podcasters, I wanted a large audience and decided the best way to attract one was to be completely self-indulgent; if I wasn’t enjoying myself and fulfilling my own passion and selfish curiosity while learning something new from the content and its creation with each episode, why would anyone else want to listen?

That’s worked for the most part.  I’ve found that catering to my own interests and letting MY passion drive my media production effort results in something worth listening to.  I suppose my informal mission statement is “if it’s something I wouldn’t invest the time to listen to, why would I expect that of others?”.

It’s not an easy approach.  It takes time, energy and a lot of creativity to produce the finished result.  Most of all, it requires me to make a lot of tough choices; choices that result in internal conflict.  It’s quite possible that I’ve aged more as a result.

I’ve presented and blogged about editing techniques (read blog posts on the subject of editing here and here), and I’ve also shared some ideas on how to make editing decisions.  However, I find myself thinking a lot more about what I do these days because of a presentation I’m working on at the moment and the fact that I’m immersed in a video production project that’s forcing to think more carefully about the editing decisions I make.

I’ll be talking more about this during my Workflow and Creative Process session at PodCamp Toronto this coming weekend and will blog more about the subject after the conference.  In addition to exploring the production approach of another podcaster and a radio production team I’ve interviewed, I’ll be sharing some of the main elements of my own style.  In order to help me organize my thoughts (and perhaps build a buzz and dialog about the presentation before it happens), I thought I’d put some of the main headings I’m considering here.

• Be a student
• Production restrictions
• Delivery
• Inform and entertain
• Engaging
• Story
• Tough decisions
• Listening/watching

With all of the different things there are to talk about, thirty minutes will probably fly by very quickly.  In fact, I’ll probably have to limit the number of topics I bring up in my session.  Following a recent request to conduct a webinar on interviewEE skills, I’m thinking that I may have to create a series of webinars on the art of production.

Publishing giant, Random House joined Twitter on April 11, 2008.  Their bio claims that they are the “World’s Largest English Trade Publisher”.  They haven’t issued a single Twitter update (that’s right, ZERO updates) to their awaiting audience of 577 followers (amazingly large given they’ve done nothing), and they aren’t following anyone.  That, despite a healthy number of references to Random House in Twitter.  Sadly, Random House would look a lot better if they hadn’t opened the account at all.

Little Brown Books may not be as big as Random House, but they have a vibrant community and conversation on the go.  Their follower:following ratio is almost even (2640:2655) and they’ve issued 865 updates since they joined Twitter on July 28, 2008.  Unfortunately, and perhaps due to their Twitter success, they’ve been unable to keep up with the conversation and following a recent call for input on their upcoming newsletter, failed to acknowledge a number of responses.

Social networking is an amazingly inexpensive communications tool and a fantastic way to reach out to your audience.  However, it is a commitment which carries with it a public declaration.  As marketing and communications becomes more rooted in the digital world, companies will be judged by their actions and inactions using, among other things, tools like Twitter.

We recorded the show on Wednesday.  It includes nine comments in all, each one exploring a different approach to making money from social media.  That makes each model proven.  To what degree?  We cannot say since, as Bob pointed out, only one person shared their actual gross revenue.  I will say this, though; none of the models shared was based on CPM (Cost Per Thousand impressions, an approach that pays money based on the number of groupings of one-thousand downloads).

I’m very excited about this show because it really does push the conversation forward and provides an informative destination for the people that (on their first awareness of podcasting) ask the question “how do I make money from it”.  I think that it will be to the money conversation what our September 2006 car episode with Julien Smith was to the Social Networking conversation.

CPB episode 130 will be published at 6:00pmET tomorrow (February 15).

I am honoured to be among the “Distinguished Faculty” that includes Mike Kujawski (Best Practices to Market Governmental Services on the Web), Brendan Hodgson (Practical Crisis Communication Strategies in a Web 2.0 World), Patrick Cormier (Choosing Collaborative Technologies to Improve Internal Communication in your Office), Gord McIntosh (Getting Feedback from the Media: Improving Communication Strategies with the Press), Meghan Warby and Colin McKay (Transforming a Crowd into an Audience: Creating Online Campaigns to Promote Social Awareness), and Parker Mason (Be Proactive, Not Reactive – Best Practices In Monitoring the Media and Understanding How the Media Now Monitors You).

The title of my session is Moving the Conversation Online: Reaching the Public Through Social Media Tools and the summary is as follows:

There are public and private sector offices who have found that implementing audio and / or video digital media files within their internal and external websites is a cost-effective way to transmit information to and engage with the public. Easily transferable to mobile devices, they are useful for those who do not have regular access to the Internet and for citizens with disabilities. In this session, learn the costs and benefits and lessons learned from others who are using audio and / or video digital media files, on:

• What content is suitable to transmit?
• Best tips on marketing your podcasts to the public
• The importance of targeting a demographic before you begin
• Measuring the success of your audio and / or video podcasts: Who is listening and are they getting the most relevant information?

The event is taking place April 21 and 22 at The Westin Hotel in Ottawa.  If you’re interested in attending, please contact me and I can provide you with a 15% discount code.

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=bKYeixWwyAM

I love this idea and the willingness to help out.  I wish it did something more to help move people at a reasonable pace.  If people would amp up their carpooling efforts, moving about the city wouldn’t take a couple of hours.

By the way, councillor Clive Doucet was handing out free hot chocolate to bus-strike-weary pedestrians as they passed by Bank and Third, yesterday.  What a great way to perk up someone’s day as they trudged through the heavy snowfall.

What are you doing to help out during the strike?

Neil Gaiman has become a rock star not just because of his books, not just because of his movies, not just because he’s become an icon of science fiction culture, not just because he won the Newbery Award for The Graveyard Book two days ago. Neil is a rock star because he embraced social media long before most of us and he’s good at it. In fact, he’s changing an industry with it.

I had the privilege of speaking with Neil about some of the cool things he’s doing to connect with his fans and promote his books. Besides the fascinating writing on his amazingly popular blog (it’s actually more of an online journal since he doesn’t allow comments), Neil keeps his legions of fans up to date on Twitter. Yesterday afternoon he had 13,478 followers. At the time of this post he has 15,888 followers. According to Neil, he’s been gaining about 1,000 new Twitter followers each day for the last week.

It gets more amazing. Neil convinced his publishers to post videos of him reading The Graveyard Book online — for free. If watching him read the book doesn’t appeal to you, you can browse the book online.

Neil Gaiman is helping to redefine the publishing industry on the terms of the social web. Because they’re listening to him, Harper Collins is on the cutting edge.

You can hear my interview with Neil on the Just One More Book!! children’s book podcast. I’m hoping that we’ll have a chance to interview Neil, again, to discuss the overall impact of these initiatives.

Photo from Neil Gaiman’s Twitter feed.

Let’s examine the tools and what they do.

Levelator is a free tool created to simplify the process of increasing audio levels for recordings that captured very little signal (the foreground audio you want to hear such as a person speaking or a musical instrument).  It was created by the The Conversations Network (TCN) to make life easier for the average podcaster by eliminating the need to learn how to produce audio.  TCN recognized that most people who get into amateur podcasting don’t have an interest in understanding compressors, limiters and normalizers — much less do they have the time to learn how to use them.  They just want to publish their podcast.

Simplicity is the key to the Levelator.  A user drags a file to the application and it decides the best way to increase the audio levels.  The problem is that when Levelator amplifies an audio signal, it also amplifies audio noise, some of which may not be obvious in the source recording.  So, if you have a refrigerator running in the room in which you delivered a masterful monologue, the listener is likely to hear as much from your fridge as they will from you.

For the average podcaster, that’s fine and I respect that.  Someone who bills for their audio production services should be delivering value to their client by using the right tools for the job.  This is not about someone “whose eyes have never stung from the sweet sweat of a hard day’s work” (thank you Michael Bluth), this is about being honest and realistic about the work you do and the necessary tools to do it.  Sometimes, audio level problems can be improved by tweaking the EQ; perhaps some compression or limiting could be applied.  Using a paint roller to do quarter-inch detail work is the wrong approach.  Levelator takes away the guess-work and the flexibility and the results can demonstrate that.

As the name suggests, SoundSoap is for cleaning up your audio.  It’s been designed to help reduce (maybe even remove) unwanted noise (such as hums, hisses, rumbles…), clicks and crackles from a recording.  SoundSoap has also been designed for simplicity.  The user plays a section of audio that has the noise print with no signal (e.g. the ambient noise of the room when noone is speaking) and SoundSoap determines how to best reduce that noise from the recording, even when someone begins to speak.  Then, presto, you get a better signal-to-noise ratio in your audio.

I use SoundSoap on occassion and find that in many circustances it does a fantastic job — though I often find myself dialing back the amount of noise reduction and threshold it auto-selects for me, and tweaking some other settings.

So, consider a situation where you have a recording noisey enough to merit SoundSoap and quiet enough to need something like Levelator.  Imagine what Levelator will do to the recording, including constantly fluctuating the ratios of signal and noise.  Think about which order these two tools could be applied and the effects of either order.  While both strive to increase signal over noise, these tools are not necessarily complementary and anyone who produces audio for money should not put that much trust in automation.

When I think about the monetization discussions that have been taking place on the Canadian Podcast Buffet over the last few weeks, this stands out as another example of someone who asked the question “how can I make money from podcasting?” without asking themselves if they have something unique to offer and the capability to deliver it.

From my small home office in Ottawa, I felt as though I was truly a part of two major events in world history: the inauguration of the most charismatic, inspiring and deserving man as the President of the United States, and the creation of an environment that harnesses collective energy to build a collaborative and interactive news experience.  Both take an inclusive approach to building a new world.  It’s hard to say which of these have done more to define Barak Obama as a leader of the world, not just President of the United States.

In his speech, Barak Obama delivered a powerful message “to the leaders of the world”.  He said “you will be judged by what you build, not by what you destroy”.  It’s a message that applies to everyone, really; world leaders, world citizens, corporations, etc… And true to that message, the team of CNN, Facebook, Cisco and Microsoft built something new.  They used technology to propel the feeling of community in the news world. I felt as American as I’m ever going to be.  I also felt Canadian, Spanish, French, Afghan, etc… I really felt like a citizen of the world, all from my seat.

That small collection of technology companies won’t need to advertise to me any longer.  They were guests of my house, yesterday, as I was a guest of theirs.  They didn’t pontificate to me from my television screen, they invited me to participate — in text and video — with my computer.  I became addicted to that level of engagement very quickly.

Many people will argue that television news died, yesterday.  I argue that television news was redefined.  Besides, not everyone has a computer with a decent Internet connection.

It was a “Pow! Right Between the Eyes” moment if there ever was one.

The organizations that take the social-media leap of faith will likely find that doing social media well for the long-term takes money and effort.  It takes commitment to build a community, earn its trust and develop a rhythm of delivering great content; responding effectively and consistently.  That kind of engagement can’t be automated or scripted (yet, I suppose).  People, not machines, make social media happen.

One can also argue that the level of public/community interest can wain over time if the organization’s social media engagement becomes rhythmic and predictable.

These are the reasons why event-specific uses of social media and new media are extremely attractive as an on-ramp for adopting a long-term social web strategy.  A short-term engagement can serve as a barometer for a permanent campaign and can identify the potential for greater returns — both financial and trust-based.

For organizations that have already adopted social media, events offer an opportunity to get even more creative and explore new ways of engaging the public.  For organizations that are contemplating the use of social technologies, events offer an opportunity to test the waters and experience, first-hand, what social media can achieve.

How will you integrate a social media campaign into your next conference, convention, milestone anniversary, trade show, gala or product launch?

Photo: Obama Inauguration by kodama_atpl.

Since many are free and easy to use, social media tools make it easy to create new gathering places.  Many communities have taken advantage of this and have established strong and active communities on specific areas of interest.  I belong to several of these.  More significantly, I find it easy to abandon some of these communities because, at some point, they all go through the same misguided effort to reach as many people as they can and in the process, spread themselves too thin.

“Nobody goes there anymore; it’s too fractured.”

The communities typically started by a group of established bloggers and/or podcasters deciding to create a common gathering place to discuss, socialize and even coordinate.  It usually started with a closed forum of some sort, perhaps a Yahoo! group or Google group.  Then Facebook came along and some eager member of the community would create a Facebook group.  Everyone joined the new site meaning they now had two places to go.  The community began to slowly fracture as those that preferred the new and exciting tool (Facebook) exiled from the forum.  When Ning came along, someone created a group in that site.  Again, each member of the community created a profile in Ning and tested it out.  And, again, a small number of people that preferred Ning established permanent residence there.  Then came Community Portal pages, Facebook Fan Pages, Wikis, Twitter, Jaiku, Plaxo, Plurk, etc…

At their core, all of the tools serve a common purpose and boast common functionality. So, why do we spread ourselves out so thin? Why do successful bloggers and podcasters re-establish their community gathering places all over?

Social media enthusiasts live in a bizarre paradox in which they must appeal to as many people as possible and still work to centralize the digital relationships and conversation so that any single person can manage to stay on top of the discussion. Fracturing the community means a lot of cross-posting between sites, lost conversations and chasing rathing than engaging.

Many companies that want to adopt social media internally or externally struggle with the same issue.  They want the shiny new toys, they want to look like their agile and that they embrace the technology so they adopt every tool imaginable.  The result is that noone knows where to go so noone goes anywhere.

UPDATE (this part somehow didn’t make it to the post): I’m a member of a community that is going through this struggle right now.  Among my concerns is that while this exploration into new sites may exciting and open new possibilities, it sends a very fractured message to the members of the community.  On one hand, shaking things up can reinvigorate things, but it can also be the beginning of a weakening of the foundation.

To date I’ve been happy with the plugins I use, which include:

• Enhanced WP-ContactForm
• FriendsRoll
• PodPress
• Sociable
• Subscribe to Comments
• Viper’s Video Quicktags

I’ve been thinking about adding a captcha plugin to my one of my sites.  John Wiseman suggested wp-ReCAPTCHA, though I wasn’t convinced that he’s crazy about the idea of adding captcha functionality.

Rob Blatt insisted that Meet your Commenters is a must have.  Unfortunately, it doesn’t work with WP2.7, yet.

Which WP plugins are your favourites, must-haves and stay-away-froms?

The same principles can be applied to social media and new media.  That is, reading a blog, listening to audio and watching video alone does not get to the root of how something was conceived, developed and communicated in a way that makes the final creation appealing.  You need to become a Reverse Engineer.

I found myself thinking about the concept of reverse engineering this morning and came up with the following five pointers to help guide the effort of learning from great content.

Look beyond your own interests.  This is particularly true if you want to create a Blue Ocean within your community/niche.  Explore multimedia content in areas completely unrelated to your interests.  If you’re interesting in skiing, find out what basketweavers are doing to make compelling content.  If you’re in the music industry, find out what the amateur radio folks are doing to keep that hobby and community alive and thriving in the face of changing times.  If you’re in marketing and public relations, study how IT folks communicate.

Explore all media.  One of the most exciting ways to create new content is to find ways to adapt approaches used in one media and apply them to another.  Find a writer who crafts stories/features/reports/books in a way that could be adapted for use in the audio format.  Maybe the way a movie was edited can be adapted cleverly for print.  Figure out how the visual storytelling approach of a documentary film can be applied to audio.  Watch how the sequences are cut.  Close your eyes to determine if anything can be delivered just as effectively without visuals.  Find elements of one medium and adapt them into your own style.

Study with your senses.  Good writers and journalists, audio hosts and sound artists, actors and cinematographers all deliver synaesthetic experiences in their own ways.  They’ve figured out how to appeal to their audiences’ senses and experiences.  The best of these talents are able to put us — virtually — in the situation they’re communicating, complete with the filter of our own lives.  How they do this is not limited to the words they choose and the pictures they paint.  The pauses, the inflection, the intonation, the modulation, the camera angle, the proximity of the microphone and many more elements all work together to create a full experience.

Ask questions.  If you have access to the people that create content you admire, ask them a few questions on how they do what the do.  Having said that, I’ve found that many people are thrown off when asked.  For these people, it’s intuitive and they don’t know where to begin to explain what they do.  If you do it over a coffee or beer, there may be less pressure for them to figure out how to explain things in words.  If you’re up to it, ask if you can shadow them for a day and ask questions as they come up.

Create.  Once you think you have a handle on your sources, start experimenting.  Taking things apart to learn how they work isn’t nearly as much fun as trying to apply your new found knowledge.

Photo by ctpctp.

People shouldn’t get too excited about the government taking its cues directly from social media.  I believe the Facebook group served as a vehicle for information dissemination and the debate over approaches for students to plead their case to the government.  While there was the typical flaming and pontificating of uninformed opinion, I was impressed by the amount of informed discussion, productive debate and collaborating/strategizing.  In that respect, the Facebook community, made up largely of non-voting students, served a significant purpose and achieved an incredible victory.

Did Facebook change the government’s mind?

In the end, I believe it was the letter-writing, emails and phone calls to MPs that made the difference.  A lot of that was clearly organized through the Facebook group.  Social media alone did not win the fight.  It was the balance between old and new, and speaking to the government on its terms.

Government and businesses, though, will have to learn this new way of interacting with their audiences.  The marketplaces, railway cars and town halls are now on the Internet and smart phones.  Commerce and policy are relocating and those that choose to ignore this move (or choose to fear it) are limiting their usefulness.

As part of the interview, I was asked to provide three-to-five steps for government and business to consider in their move to embrace social media.  I’ve adapted them slightly from the way in which they appear in the article:

1. Acknowledge social media– Just as organizations have used written and phone surveys to gather public sentiment and feedback, social networks – such as MySpace, Facebook and Twitter – can be a very effective means of finding out what people think of policies and what they would like the organization to achieve.
2. Join various forums – Rather than trying to block access to social networks (which seems to be the blanket approach the days), an organization should research which online “gathering places” are appropriate for its operations and then develop policies and practices on how to use these sites.
3. Create your own “gathering place” – Adopt an existing social networking tool or develop your own social networking site to create a place where people can reach you and engage with you. Many companies bolster in-house communication between leaders and employees with the use of corporate wikis, podcasts or blogs. Special sites designed to cultivate online communities are also very useful in elevating an organization’s public profile.
4. Listen to the people – Any form of communication is no good if one of its participants turns a deaf ear to the other.  Social media amplifies this need to listen.  If your organization isn’t prepared to meet the needs of its target audience, why does it exist?
5. Engage/respond – When you receive feedback or gather data, you need to act accordingly. Realize that your “community” is vital and that it needs feedback and action from you as well. Provide people with the information they need at the time they need it and provide them with suggested actions that keep them engaged with you.

It’s been easy to worry about the plugin.  Some time has past since the last update (code or even news of plans), and, more obviously, the disappearance of the support forums following a SPAM attack.

I spoke with PodPress creator Dan Kuykendall, yesterday.  Dan has been busy with work and his new dual-role as both a techie and CEO and hasn’t been able to attend to PodPress on a day-to-day basis.  He did say that he’s working on a new release and expects to put some time into the coding during the holidays later this month.

So, if you’re a PodPress user, hang in there!

CLUETRAIN MANIFESTO

Many books have been written about social media, communications, engagement, influence and interaction.  To me, The Cluetrain Manifesto is required reading to understand why all the other books matter.

MAKING A DIFFERENCE WITH SOCIAL AND NEW MEDIA

Perhaps the best example of amateurs doing what media organizations can’t do (or won’t do) to make this world a smaller place by sharing real stories about real people in unimaginable situations is the Alive in Baghdad video podcast.

PUBLIC RELATIONS RESOURCES

Since the class is about public relations, I highlighted a FEW of the MANY high-quality public relations, communications and marketing social media-based resources on the web.

• Six Pixels of Separation (blog and podcast)
• ProPR (blog and occasional media)
• For Immediate Release (podcast)
• Inside PR (podcast)

COMMON CRAFT: SOCIAL MEDIA IN PLAIN ENGLISH

COMMON CRAFT: RSS IN PLAIN ENGLISH

Workflow and the Creative Process – A discussion on how to pull together recorded content, chop it up, mix it up and sequence it in a way that delivers a message and/or tells a story that engages your audience.  This session is not about tools; it’s about proven techniques and approaches for developing and producing engaging content — whether the result is 60 seconds or 60 minutes.

The community and its events are inclusive.  Anyone who wants to attend is welcome.  Invitations to participate are implied.  Invitations to speak or submit speaking proposals are open.  Oddly, some women and individuals from different cultural backgrounds that have expressed their concerns have never submitted speaking proposals to the events I’m involved in.  I respond by requesting they submit proposals and make the effort to increase multicultural and female participation.  There’s only so much the community organizers can do and I can assure you that we have made efforts to reach out to the under-represented.

The Canadian Podcast Buffet was created as a resource and meeting place for the community.  We don’t define who’s in the community, only that it exists for all to join and contribute.  Podcasters Across Borders was created to bring the community together in a single physical space.  We don’t decide who comes, only that the event is organized and those willing to sign-up and travel to Kingston can be part of the scene.  Speaking proposals are welcome from everyone.  I know that the same is true of the PodCamp movement — events are planned and invitations to participate are open.

Andrea and I have been talking about this lately because planning for PAB2009 is about to ramp up.  The PAB community has been built on word of mouth which emanates from CPB.  If you feel that we need more people from a particular country, cultural background or gender, it’s up to you to help increase that representation by spreading the word and inviting the people you feel the community will benefit from meeting and listening to.

Communities thrive when they are made up of mixed opinions and backgrounds.  Make sure you help create the environment in which we can all grow.

Photo: PAB2007 Group Photo.jpg by Sean Joyner.

Since the dawn of the medium, the mantra has been podcast your passion.  As a result, many thousands of podcasts have been launched by content creators eager to share the excitement they have for their work, hobbies and other interests and distractions.  That’s how I got my start and that’s how I’ve maintained my momentum and interest in producing audio and video content for the web.  This has worked very well for me.

It’s only recently that I’ve realized podcasting has actually propelled my hobbies and interests to new heights.  It’s motivated me to experiment with new production styles and explore new possibilities.  In fact, in immersing mself in the pursuit of new ideas, I find that I’ve become a strong advocate for the subject of my podcasts.  That means taking on new challenges

Last week, Andrea and I and our two daughters piled in to a car for a six-day, whirlwind roadtrip which served double-duty as a family vacation and a chance to gather video and audio recordings with some of the biggest names and exciting new talent in the children’s book community for our Just One More Book!! podcast.  We had the priviledge of being the guests of Lane Smith and Molly Leach for two nights during which we had the chance to interview Lane about his illustration process and the artists and illustrators that have influenced him the most.  When we weren’t holding microphones and video cameras, we went on a hike with Lane to a small cabin on their property, ate meals with Lane and Molly (including an amazing meal prepared by Molly and served on a beautifully decorated table) and watched some videos of Lane’s books and the movie School of Rock.

We stopped at the Dr. Seuss Memorial Gardens in Springfield, MA on our way to Northampton where we had the priviledge of spending three nights at the home of Jennifer and Richard Michelson.  Jennifer and Richard were also amazingly gracious, helping us find our way around town, joining us for meals and having us in their home for a fantastic dinner on Saturday night.

Our Northampton schedule was packed and included studio visits, painting, computer drawing, interviewing, museum visiting and socializing with too many children’s book creator names to be mentioned here (click here for a summary of the things we did and people we hung out with).

Back to passion… it’ll take a few weeks to go through the 25 hours of audio and 13 hours of video recordings, and the 1,183 photographs we took while on our road trip. In the meantime, we’ve uploaded a small number of photos as a teaser of the content yet to come.

Our trip has inspired me to think beyond the work we’ve done, beyond the ideas we’ve considered and beyond the limits of promoting children’s book that I’d imagined — all because of our podcast and how it’s amplified our passion.

Thank you very much to everyone we encountered on our trip.  We had the most amazing time with the most gracious, supportive and talented group of people we have ever met.

Once I picked the music and started placing it, things started feeling right with the show.  I had wondered if I should include a second piece of music.  That can be too much, though, and I decided to limit myself to the one song.  I also decided that it would be used specifically to score the excerpts of the reading.  There has to be logic to the use of the music, it can’t be random.

The editing and refining continued, though most of the effort was in cleaning up edits, removing some bumping of the microphone and, in two cases, cleaning up mistakes made by the speakers.  Thankfully, the way each speaker corrected themselves facilitated a clean edit and you’d never know.  Purists would argue to leave the mistakes in.  However, in this particular show, it made more sense to clean up the mistakes.  They errors were minor enough and the responses to the mistakes more intrusive than the mistakes themselves.

OUTSIDE EARS

I did a thorough refinement of the first four minutes of the show and listened to it for both audio and story flow.  It still didn’t feel right.  When I played it for Andrea, she pointed out a few things that didn’t work for her.  In particular, my voice over, the readings and interviews had different energy and emotional levels.  The readings and the interviewee spoke in more bursty and extreme intonations and my voice over was mellow and reflective.

MOOD AND ENERGY FLOW

I re-recorded my narration to be more punchy and energetic and played back a rough mix.  That was much better.  The individual clips made more sense as a unit so I went back to smooth out the hand-offs between clips and mix the music.  I also boosted the level of the ambient sound during my introduction so that there was more energy in the opening.

REFINING THE MIX

The process of mixing the elements for a smooth flow seems to me like staining a quality piece of furniture; it takes several passes, patience and a lot of care.  I worked on that for a while and realized that many of the voices on the show seemed a bit sharp in the mix.  I’m not sure if that’s the mic or the qualities of the voices.  I used my equalizer to add some warmth and remove some of the clarity from recordings.  I should note that I hadn’t adjusted any of the frequencies prior to that.  EQ’ing is the last thing I do.  I only do it to make sure that each element has its own room to breath.  If you find that two pieces of mixed audio are fighting with each other spend less time with the volume faders and more time giving each piece of audio its own space in the audio spectrum.

FINAL PRODUCT

I finished the audio production work in the early evening and created a mix I was happy with.  All it took was patience, listening, feel and an iterative approach to finding the pieces that best told the story.  In the end, I went from seventy-eight minutes of recorded audio of the event to a nine-minutes and fifty-four seconds of reading excerpts and interview clips included in the show.  My entire voice-over of introduction and narration was one-minute and seventeen seconds.  The program is thirteen-minutes and sixteen seconds long and has been published under the name A Bear in War on the Just One More Book website.

SOMETHING DIFFERENT

I’m an audio guy and I often profess that audio podcasts are the best option for mass distribution and ease of consumption.  However, even I can’t ignore the popularity of video.  More to the point, no matter how hard we audio folk try to make it obvious that site visitors can press play on an audio player, many people just don’t get it.  Even if it is far more intrusive (that is, you are glued to your video screen to consume a video), video on the web is far more obvious to use.

So, we’ve tried an experiment.  We published the “A Bear in War” documentary as a normal audio podcast of Just One More Book and to help people understand that there’s multimedia content available on the site, I created a video/slideshow version of the documentary (using the same audio), uploaded it to Viddler and embedded it within the post for A Bear in War.  Given more time and energy, I would have done more to make the video more compelling for the average viewer by using transitions, pans and zooms — like Ken Burns.  I threw the video together very quickly.

Interest in the video is encouraging.  After about two hours, the unpromoted video was watched thirty-six times.

FINAL TALLY

Not including travel time and the blogging I’ve done to document my workflow, but including the research and recording times and the production of the video, it took me about sixteen hours to create the A Bear in War documentary.  It’s not unusual for a documentary to take a significant amount of time to produce which is why I don’t do many of them.  I do very little, if any, editing in most of my hobby production work which means that the average ten minute podcast probably takes about thirty minutes to record, produce and upload.

I’ll create a summary of my workflow post highlights later today.

THE THEME

As I listened more closely to the recordings I made and the way I had labelled them, it became clear to me that the main story is the blend of fantasy and reality that magics-to-life love, conflict and the passage of time.

Having made that decision, I was able to eliminate a lot of the audio as unrelated to the main theme, and then start moving pieces in place.

In order to keep things interesting, I took some liberties in the sequencing of the story and intermixed excerpts from the book reading with reflections on the real family and the process of creating the book.  I also managed to keep my voice out of the program as much as possible — a bonus.  It’s particularly effective in a documentary when the facilitator’s role can be implied or completely overlooked.  The characters and the witnesses should be the stars of the show.

Putting everything together is like solving a dynamic puzzle; any combination can work though some combinations work better than others.  And, to keep things particularly interesting, all of the pieces are interdependent; moving one piece can affect others or even the entire flow of the program.

So, I spent about four hours moving pieces about on my audio canvas.  Selecting which pieces to use wasn’t the problem.  Those feels obvious to me.

LIKE WRITING A SONG

As I think about this whole process — and, believe me, this is the first time I have really thought about what I do and how I do it — I realize that this is a lot like songwriting.  Some people write songs from titles, others write music from lyrics or melodies, and still others will back-fill lyrics from music.  In fact, some people can write in all three ways.

Sometimes, a project I’m working on will happen completely on its own just by me picking the right clip with which to kick off the show.  That’s right, sometimes the right 5-20 second opening clip will be like a creative spark and the rest will flow and fall into place.  The “A Bear in War” project began with a draft recording of a framing narrative then putting some of the storytelling elements in place.  As I shuffled and considered them, I realized that the backstory needed to be pushed through quickly to get right to the meat of the story.  So, I decided to open the show with an excerpt of the reading which, using a dialog between Teddy and Aileen, gives away the war setting of the book.

After the theme music, I use a short narrative to create a scene in the mind of the listener…

• when am I speaking
• why is this moment significant
• where are we
• what are we going to experience
• who is going to walk us through this journey

For reasons I can’t quite figure out, I’m not able to make an introduction of the program and myself as host work.  That’s still not a priority right now.  I have bigger questions on my mind like will music make a difference?  If so, what type?  I listened to some music during some errands earlier today and wasn’t able to find anything that feels right.  I’ve put a couple of feelers out to some musicians I know to see if they have time and interest in putting together two minutes of original music for me.  I want the music to convey a feeling of being connected across distance by a stuffed toy.  I want that on an emotional level, though.  I don’t want chimes and plinky crap.

BLOCKED OUT

Where the book takes a lot of time to set up the warmth of the family, I don’t have the time to do that.  What I mean by that is I don’t think I can hold the listener’s interest by getting into too much detail.  Besides, I want to introduce the book, not give it away in its entirety.  So, I move from my narration to another excerpt in the book and then I introduce the grand-daughter of the soldier — the woman that found Teddy.  From there I move to some short clips with the authors.  I let them explain that the book is about a family during wartime, not the war.

This is the first of all my book-related coverage in which I’ve used so many excerpts from the book.  I like them becomes they move the story along.  In fact, the five excerpts I use pretty much tell the main story.  But, that’s not my shining moment in this program.  I have taken it upon myself to demonstrate the importance of this book by including the voice of a child that shares what his favourite moment in the book is (a tender moment in which the soldier pins his medals of bravery to Teddy) and I include two questions (one deep and one light) asked by children during the Q&A along with the answers given by the authors.  Parents should know that there is no reason to shelter their children from the reality of life.

In its current form, the program is about twelve-and-a-half minutes long.

My next tasks are to review my narrative and make a decision on music.  After that I’ll start cleaning up the edits and mix.

The “A Bear in War” documentary program will be published at 1:00am, Monday, November 10, 2008.  That means the total time I have to work on the project from once I hit record is about 32 hours.  So far, my time investment so far has been as follows:

• Advanced Research: 90 minutes
• Recording: 180 minutes (accounts for the entire time I was at the museum)
• Step One (gather and label material): 10 minutes
• Step Two (listen to and edit audio, iteration one): 100 minutes
• Step Three (look for candidate themes and plots): 30 minutes
• Step Four (select keepers…, iteration two): 15 minutes
• Writing first draft of the opening narrative while lying in bed: 15 minutes
• Blogging my workflow: 40 minutes
• TOTAL INVESTMENT SO FAR: 8 hours

All of the recording equipment I needed for the event, along with some extra cables and batteries, a camera and a paper-based notebook fit in a single hardshell case which I was able to carry with me as I walked to and from the War Museum (roughly 40 minutes each way, not counted in my time above) to record the event.

That explains why I found myself lying in bed at 5:20am busily figuring out (in my head) how to craft the narrative for the “A Bear in War” production.  I have lots of great audio and very little of it is “soundbitey”.  I’m glad for that since I don’t want to produce a news story.  However, it means that some of my guests’ longer answers may not hold a listener’s attention.  It’s my job to keep the listener engaged and, more specifically, keep them wanting that next piece of information.  For this project, I’m thinking of using the narrative is to summarize the longer parts of the story in a concise yet visually descriptive way.  The narrative will thread the different voices together.  My body woke me up at 5:20am so my brain could start figuring stuff out.  Thanks!

In the process, I’ve decided that some ambient recording I had collected and planned to throw away may have a purpose after all.  I’ll have to listen to it, again.  I think I ditched it because there was a nearby conversation that landed in the distant foreground of the recording – just enough to be distracting.

BACKFILLING SOME INFORMATION

At 5:45am, it occurred to me that I had left some details out of part 1.  In particular, the equipment that I used to record the book launch event.

For the first time, I used two digital audio recorders in tandem.

Earlier in the week, I arranged with the audio-guy through the event planner to be able to connect a digital recorder to the mixing board.  The agreement was to take a stereo feed from the RCA output of the mixing console using a cable I have that converts that to the input for my Edirol R1 (still my workhorse; still one of the best analog-to-digital audio converters in its class; no longer manufactured).  When I arrived, we discovered the console doesn’t have an RCA output.  It’s a good thing I brought some extra cables with me.  I ended up using one of my microphone cables to take a mono signal from the mixer.  Fortunately, I travel with two of these mic cables and I was able to use the other cable with my second digital recorder.  With the signal from the mixing board, I was able to get a high-quality recording of the presenters.

I used my Zoom H2 digital recorder in two different ways.  I used the internal microphones to record some ambient sound, in stereo, as people arrived and seated themselves.  Before the event started, I connected my R0de NTG-2 shotgun mic to my Zoom H2 and used it to record the event and interviews.  A shotgun mic is a long, narrow, directional microphone that has ‘telescopic properties’.  That is, it picks up an audio signal in a very narrow range in the direction in which it’s pointing.  During the event, I aimed it at the sound system speakers.  Here’s an often overlooked fact… if you’re far away from the person speaking at a large gathering and that person is amplified through a speaker system, aim your mic at the equipment-speaker, not the person-speaker.  You’ll get a better signal.

Once the event was over, I packed my H2 away and connected my shotgun mic to my R1 for the interviews.  The shotgun mic is fantastic for interviews in a large and busy room.  Because the mic is directional, it cuts out a lot of the background noise and really puts the voice its pointing at in the foreground.  And, because it’s a powerful microphone, I’m able to hold it at waist level and simply pivot my hand to point at the mouth of the person speaking.  There are several advantages to this approach.  First, it gets the microphone away from people’s faces and lines-of-sight helping them to quickly forget that they’re being recorded.  Second, it eliminates plosives; those bursting pops of air that hit microphones and can ruin a listener’s experience.

I’m particularly trusting of myself and my equipment when I record.  While other journalists were running around with headsets on their heads to monitor their recordings, I went ‘commando’ so that the people I’m speaking with relax and remember that we’re just two people having a conversation.  Many people get nervous when they’re being recorded, others feel compelled to be articulate (whether they can be or not).  I want to record real people so I try to create an environment that allows them to be real people.

CHECKPOINT

I haven’t figured out my approach with this program yet, though I did write a first draft of my opening narration.  I haven’t listened any of the audio since I went to bed last night.  Sometimes you need that space from the recordings. When you return you may find something you hadn’t noticed before.  In fact, it’s important to keep an open mind about your production.  It’s not uncommon to discover well into your work that you’ve told the wrong story and then have to rip it apart and start over, again.  Don’t worry.  You’re in good company.  I’ve heard that Dire Straits abandoned the first several weeks of work on Brothers in Arms and started over with a fresh approach.  It ended up being their most successful album.

I’m actually working on a project right now.  So, the timing is right for me to document what I do.  Depending on feedback, I may consider this as a presentation at a future conference.

BACKGROUND

I attended and audio-recorded the launch of the children’s picture book A Bear in War at the Canadian War Museum this morning.  The book tells the incredible and true story of a stuffed bear that was mailed to a Canadian soldier by his daughter during World War I.  The soldier, Lt. Lawrence Browning Rogers, volunteered when he was thirty-six years-old (a “greybeard”) and was sent to Europe where he served as a medic in Belgium.  Lt. Rogers and his family corresponded regularly.  To help her father feel connected with home, Aileen sent her beloved “Teddy” to the front lines where it kept Lt. Rogers company for about a year-and-a-half, until he was killed in action on October 30, 1917 in the Battle of Passchendaele.  Teddy was shipped back home with Lt. Rogers’ other personal effects and military honours.  In 2002, Teddy was donated to the Canadian War Museum and is now an attraction of the World War I exhibit in the Gallery.

MATERIAL

I gathered about seventy-eight minutes of audio including the welcome speech by a museum curator, the book reading by the two authors, a brief Q&A session, some ambient sound of the event and six interviews.

THE GOAL

Tell a compelling story in roughly fifteen minutes.

STEP ONE: GATHER AND LABEL MATERIAL

I like to do things in an organized and logical manner.  The first thing I do is create a new project in my production software.  I use Cubase for all of my audio production work.  Once the project is created in its own folder on my hard drive, I import all of the source audio I have collected and I make sure that each imported file has a descriptive file name.

STEP TWO: LISTEN TO AUDIO AND EDIT (ITERATION ONE)

A lot of people map out, even storyboard, their media productions before they do anything with it.  I don’t.  In fact, to me, the story that I want to tell isn’t always obvious to me.  That is, even though I may have an idea of what I want the result to be, I find that my ideas evolve or even radically change once I start listening to the individual pieces and discover that they can be threaded together in an entirely different way to tell the same story.  Sometimes, the original story idea turns out to be terrible compared to what can be done.  So, I approach this in an open minded way and eliminate what I determine I don’t need rather than look for the stuff I want to keep.  Having said that, there are usually some clips that are quite obviously gems.

Okay… even the gems sometimes turn out to be duds.  But if you discover what you think is a gem, label it that way so you know.

All that to say I approach editing as an iterative process and, at this stage I do a simple straight-through listen.  I don’t dig in too deep or replay clips.

As I listen during the first pass, I make cuts in the audio to divide and identify specific pieces of audio.  In an interview, that would be a question.  In ambient noise, it may be a particular sound or event that has resulted in some cool audio.  For this audio program, I want to use some of the book reading so I’ve made some cuts where a particular compelling moment of the book is being read.

I use colour coding to help me identify and group related elements.  In some projects I colour code based on speaker.  In others, I’ll colour code based on theme.  In the “A Bear in War” project I’m colour coding based on known keepers.

STEP THREE: LOOK FOR THE CANDIDATE THEMES, PLOTS AND STORIES

I try not to limit myself to a single story line in my media work.  Life isn’t made up of single themes, plot elements and stories.  It’s a spaghetti of stories and ideas that weave around each other.  As long as I can travel with my listener/viewer along an arc,  I like to let a few of these stories play together.

In this step, I look at the different keepers and labels to see if anything jumps out and me and, more importantly, that there is enough connected audio that can tell the story in an engaging way.  Engaging means knowing what to include and what to keep out.  If you overdeliver the story, your audience won’t have a chance to use their own imagination.  If you underdeliver, they won’t have enough material to engage their imagination.  It’s a balance and I’m not sure that I’ve figured out how to hit the sweet spot, yet.

For “A Bear in War”, I know that Teddy is going to be one of my main characters.  That’s an obvious one which can be dangerous, too.  However, since there’s surprisingly little coverage of this in the mainstream media, particularly in the children’s book world, it’s a freebie.  It’s also universal.  Who couldn’t relate to the importance and value of a cuddly toy to a child and their parent?  Themes I’ve identified include the use of Teddy as the narrator in the book, crafting the voice of a teddy bear, connecting world conflict in 1917 with world conflict in 2008, the human factor in war time and engaging with children on an important topic (rather than pretending it doesn’t exist).

STEP FOUR: SELECT THE KEEPERS AND REMOVE ELEMENTS THAT DON’T SUPPORT THEM (ITERATION TWO)

It’s time to make some tough decisions.  The important thing to remember is that your audience doesn’t know what you cut out, only what you deliver.  So, pick the stuff you can tell well and get rid of any content that doesn’t help you deliver.

Sometimes you have to sleep on these decisions.

I think that’s what I’ll do.

Partly to bring attention to his post, partly to show that older content maintains relevance over time and partly to prove that short posts can also get trackbacks, I’m posting about his post on my blog.

I need your help!  I would like to produce an audio piece that explores this idea and I need your help to put it together.  This is what I need:

• stories from people who have mentally and/or emotionally benefited from their blogging and/or podcasting activities

• stories from people who have mentally and/or emotionally benefited from reading blogs and/or listening to podcasts

• participation of mental health professionals that have observed the effects of blogging and podcasting on peoples’ mental and emotional health

• recommendations of blogs and podcasts that cover mental and emotional health in a way that is accessible and meaningful to the average person

Please share any information you may have in the comments to this post, or email me (markblevis@gmail.com).  Also, please spread the word about this initiative.  I’d like to put together a strong documentary piece on this subject and that will only be possible if I have enough supporting information.

Thanks for your help!

Photo: the empty couch by hypowren.

Historically, I’ve publish a podcast that covers the SMB event on the same day it occurs.  I can only imagine the surprise of the SMB Ottawa crowd that I haven’t published the show, yet.  It is coming.  I have some client deliverables that I’m working on so look for the podcast to be published this weekend.