Tag Archives: government

The Difference Between Making the News and Being the News

Collaboration. It’s such a great word. It’s also one of those words that is great say and believe in, but much harder to execute and implement. However, this is not so true for some of the top research universities in the United States, the U.K and Canada. Why? Get to know Futurity.org.

According to the website, Futurity.org aggregates the best research news from a number of top universities (see image below for the list). The site, which is hosted at the University of Rochester, covers research findings in a range of topics, including the environment, health, science, and society–and it’s interesting and made relevant even for the general consumer.

But here’s the best part: Rather than try to get their research in the news, they have become the news. And this my friends, marks a huge shift. Because I’m going to go to THEM, rather than them having to try to find their way to ME. Now–what if government did something similiar?

So let’s talk about the government:

This past week, the great Susannah Fox posted the tweet shown to the right. There’s been conversations about government opening up its data–but opening up can mean more. It can also mean content-wise. What is the government followed Futurity’s model? You don’t need to look too far to know there’s a lot of content on .govs–as well as duplicative content. But there are also the hidden gems. But to find the hidden gems, you have to dig, be savvy and subscribe to a number of different RSS feeds, blogs and email lists. Also in the content equation, the government, like universities, have worked with journalists for years to communicate their work to the public–spending both time and resources. When, we don’t have to go too far to know that in-depth and technical reporting is on the decline as newspapers are slimming down.

So, I say, bravo to the universities of Futurity.org, you’ve gone from trying to make the news–to becoming the news. Quite a big bridge to build and you’ve turned your gems into online currency I can easily find, comprehend and share. Thank you.

Collaboration + Aggregation

To see another example of what happens when collaboration meets aggregation, head over to Alltop.com. How we communicate is evolving–don’t think about how you can make the news. Instead, think about how you can be the news.

Being Empowered in Government 2.0

The other week I had the honor of chairing the Advanced Learning Institute’s “Social Media and Government” December conference. There were some great presentations, even better discussions and what I was impressed with most–many more sophisticated questions. In government communications, it’s no longer good enough to be the first or to be using social media. More and more, you have to show a return on investment. You have to tie what you are doing to why you are doing it–and focus on what you are trying to accomplish.

When it comes to social media and government, some do not know where to start. Thus, as my keynote at the conference, I presented: Being Empowered–Faces and Places You Need to Know. To me, being empowered is closely related to leadership. We can’t lead our organizations or our colleagues if we aren’t first leading ourselves. Hence, why we must become empowered. Being empowered means two things: being encouraged and being equipped. So, I share my presentation with you here to help you achieve both of those items. The faces will help encourage you and the places will work to better equip you.

If you have added “faces and places,” please leave them in the comments as we are all always learning.

Transparency Isn’t Just for the Government

It’s also for non-profits. This was the hottest topic during our first #read4change gathering–fueled by the recent revelations of Kiva and its transparency question. (Background: a NY Times article broke sharing that Kiva, a micro-lending Web site that markets “person-to-person” lending–actually works with third parties to help get loans in the hands of people who need them.) What I find most interesting–is that while this revelation has created an emotional response, most people still choose to support the cause.

An additional effect is that it has sparked a conversation around the concept of transparency in the non-profit sector. Even before the Kiva story broke, Beth Kanter got some of us thinking about transparency when it comes to a non-profit’s Web metrics. In the comments, Holly Ross added that transparency is currently on the minds of her and the folks at NTEN. And where else have we heard about the priority in transparency before? –> Government.

Since my day-job leans more into the public health and government agency arena–I couldn’t help but see the parallels between government 2.0 and non-profit 2.0 (for the sake of better terminology). We may have different goals and end objectives, but the concepts both verticals must address (transparency, policy, management, buy-in, metrics, etc.) cross both lines. I think the Path of the Blue Eye folks were onto something when they posted the other day about looking for learning opportunities outside your comfort zone. As evidence, I commend Steve Radick, who did just that when he recently posted about the crossings between government 2.0 and sports 2.0.

The sharing of the line between government 2.0 and non-profit 2.0 was further solidified when I received news today of the AwesomeGov Fund organized by GovLoop and GovDelivery. This initiative is literally–combining and furthering the collision of government people with non-profit values–think philanthropy 2.0. Either way, it has me thinking that our worlds may just be more alike than different and that perhaps–the next event/conference/meetup needs to be a variety show for all us to get out of our comfort zone and look across the playing field.

PS: This past week, I also had the opportunity to talk with Andrew Conrad about Church 2.0–and again, there was much dialogue that ran quite similiar to conversations we’ve had around the conference table or that I’ve had with non-profit leaders. It’s almost creepy.

PSS: Please forgive all the “2.0” references–it’s just the most efficient way to get the point across.

Behavior and Why It Deserves A Seat at the Goverment 2.0 Table

Table with four chairsAs I participated in the Government 2.0 events this past week, I couldn’t help but think about one word–behavior. Over and over again, I observed that often we weren’t talking about a tool, a Web site, some new blog, or a newer IT database. We were talking about influencing and changing behavior.

Almost every topic and issue discussed had behavior in common. Whether working to increase understanding across ethnicity, wanting people to be aware and address the peanut recall situation, take better care of the environment, to adopt new work processes, or to empower local citizens to help fix up their community–behavior plays a key role. Whether it’s the behavior of the American public or the behavior of those within an organization, work is being done not to be cool, not to be different, but to influence and change behavior.

The idea of Government 2.0 and government as a platform is not about tools and technology. It’s about cultivating an environment and culture that enables citizens to influence and direct its government and each other.

Now the big question: Why? Why does government as a platform matter? Why are so many smart, talented, and skilled people devoting time, energy and resources to “Government 2.0?” The Answer: Government 2.0 is a metaphor. It’s a field jazzed about influencing behavior for the better (whether they realize it or not–many of them are social marketeers). It’s a group of people who say no to the status quo, and instead says, “We can do more. We can do better.”

Herein comes the next big question: How? This is a longer answer, but I know a good place to turn to-studying and knowing about behavior. The great thing–this is nothing new. Sure, technology is new, cultures evolve, but we as humans have been and will continue to be fascinated with behavior. So if behavior plays such a huge role in the programs we authorize, products we produce and services we fulfill–here is my recommendation–more social marketing:

What do you think? Many of us participants finish this week motivated to take our lessons learned and move the needle on some of the biggest issues facing our country. What are your recommendations to implement and help realize “Government 2.0?”

flickr credit: Leo Reynolds

Social Marketing Bulletin–List of Change, Local Public Health and More

It’s been awhile since the last Social Marketing Bulletin, but all the more reason to get on with the show. The Bulletin includes items that encompass social change, social marketing and social media:

1. FEATURED: “I Know. I Took the Test.” I chose this initiative because it encompasses social change, social marketing and social media, as well as public health, non-profits, and government 2.0. What is it? The cross-collorative effort to recognize National HIV Testing Day on June 27th from AIDS.gov, the CDC, the White House’s Act Against AIDS campaign and other work by sister agencies including healthfinder.gov and womenshealth.gov. I’m excited to participate and observe this effort evolve as it is agencies walking the walk and reaching across agency lines to serve the people. (disclosure: I work with healthfinder.gov and am doing work to support this effort. However, I’d still feature it as I believe AIDS.gov is doing amazing work and blazing trails for fellow HHS agencies and public health!)

2.  SOCIAL CHANGE: Beth Kanter, Geoff Livingston and Shannon Whitley announced the launch of the “List of Change.” The list is a compilation of social change blogs and currently is over 75+. If yours isn’t added yet, feel free to join the rest of us changebloggers and help spread the word!

3.  PUBLIC HEALTH: Friend and colleague Andre Blackman recently posted an excellent interview/case study on how folks in Salt Lake City are utilizing social media for public health. Highlights include discussion on the YouTube video they created in-house with a flip camera, iMovie and a $0 budget, as well as their integrated approach.

4. GOVERNMENT 2.0: Related, I am part of the Program Committee for Tim O’Reilly’s Gov’t 2.0 Expo and Showcase in September. (This is a volunteer role.) At this event, anyone can submit a proposal to present. I am rallying anyone (especially public health agencies) at all levels of government to submit entries. I also know that the committee is looking forward to hearing from a more diverse collection of proposals from near and far, as well as more local and state agencies.

5.  GOVERNMENT 2.0: Sunlight Labs recently put together an in-depth evaluation and suggested re-design for the U.S. Supreme Court. Reading through the blog and studying the before-and-after designs, there are many take-aways in communicating online. Some themes I noticed were one: 1) Simplify. 2) Provide graphics and images to paint your story, and 3) Design, think and write from the consumer’s perspective, not the organization’s.

6.  SOCIAL MEDIA: A new Twitter study was announced from Pace University and Participatory Media Network. One conclusion from this study was that “Only 22% of 18-24 yr. olds are on Twitter.” Interestingly, another Twitter study from the Harvard Business Review came out which found that the Top 10% of Twitter users produce 90% of Twitter activity. Makes ya go hmmm…Still not sure what Twitter is? Just out Mashable’s Top 7 Twitter Tutorials on YouTube.

7.  EVENTS: Next week will be the “Games for Health” Conference on June 11 and 12 in Boston. I can’t attend, but will be sure to be following along on Twitter as my latest blog crush is the blog healthGAMERS. Other events coming up this summer include the Social Marketing in Public Health Conference later in June and CDC Health Marketing Conference in August. For more events, check out SB’s eventst page.

8. SOCIAL MARKETING: The number of “social marketeers” on Twitter continues to expand. Social marketing and behavior change folks and thought leaders I’ve identified include: @nedra (Nedra Weinreich), @chiefmaven (Craig Lefebvre), @sm1guru (Mike Newton-Ward), @stephendann (Stephen Dann), @ssuggs (Suzanne Suggs), @socMKT (Dr. Stephan Dahl), @socialmktgNW (McCann Erickson’s Social Marketing Shop), @jimgrizzell (Jim Grizzel), @mikekujawski (Mike Kujawski), and @JimMintz (Jim Mintz). Great to have more people joining us here!

9.  SOCIAL MARKETING: Worldways, a social marketing agency based in Colordo, is revving up with its new blog We Take Sides. Don’t you love that title? I think it’s great positioning because it places them as a leader, who isn’t scared about saying and doing what they believe in.

What did you catch this week in the world of social change, social marketing and social media that you think deserves a shout out?

What Creates a Revolution?

“A revolution doesn’t happen when a society adopts new tools, it happens when a society adopts new behaviors.”

–Us Now Movie Trailer Preview

Today, I was skimming through my RSS feeds and one of my favorites had an update: Mike Kujawski’s Public Sector 2.0 blog. Mike gets social marketing (the real kind), and he is also a savvy social media professional. On his site, he posted the Us Gov movie trailer, which I had seen before on Maxine Teller’s blog, but today, the last quote (located above) really stood out to me the most.

It stood out because in it I saw a profound statement being made on behavior change. It may be due to me coming away from my talk with a class of smart Yale students, where their *good* questions focused a lot on the why of social media (measurement, literacy, behavior change, clutter vs. content, society’s relationship to technology, etc.). But, I feel like this quote gest to the heart of the relationship between social media and social marketing, and why the relationship is important.

  1. It’s not about the tools (i.e. being cool or shiny)
  2. Change (i.e. revolution, small or big) is a result of adopting/influencing new behavior (whether it be that of a society, an organization or an individual).

Currently, at an increasing rate, society is experimenting and applying social media tools, both for the good and the bad. Thus, we as practitioners need to be aware of this and how it is affecting one’s behavior. For example, I tease that in 10 years, we will be doing public health campaigns for internet addiction…but how far away is that really? We already have them for TV addiction. Take a quick look here at the Us Now documentary preview, as it’ll provide some more juices to step back and do some introspection and reflection.  

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlqU1o3NmSw

If you find this interesting and what to dig beyond the tools and really get to “what does this all mean?” Then, I also highly recommend visiting the Digital Ethnography blog and getting introduced to Professor Michael Wesch, who was named Professor of the Year for 2008. He and his students have some interesting and compelling videos on what “more than the tools” have to mean and why it’s important to know.

If you want to continue discussion on “what government may/can look like,” then I also recommend following both the Government 2.0 Club and the Government 2.0 Camp conversations (if you can’t physically attend the gathering coming up soon at the end of MArch) on Twitter too.

…because after all, what creates a revolution? and what does a revolution look like?

flickr photo credit: Wesley Fryer

Federal Web Council Reveals New Study: Putting Citizens First, Transforming Online Government

“There are about 24,000 U.S. Government Web sites now online.”

“Only a minority of government agencies have developed strong Web policies and management controls. Some have hundreds of “legacy” Web sites with outdated or irrelevant content.”

“We have too much content to categorize, search, and manage effectively, and there is no comprehensive system for removing or archiving old or underused content.”

“Agencies should be required and funded to regular content reviews, to ensure their online content is accurate. relevant, mission-related, and written in plain language. They should have a process for archiving content that is no longer in frequent use and no longer required on the Web site.”

According to my twitter search RSS feed, the term “Government 2.0” is increasing in frequency and popularity. More bloggers and more blog posts continue to emerge on what and how government should improve its online Web presence, leveraging social media. Thus, I was enthused to read last week’s report from the experts themselves: government, to accomplish just this.

Last week, the Federal Web Managers Council, comprised of Cabinet agency Web Directors released its study titled, “Putting Citizens First: Transforming Online Government.” Its purpose is to “recommend specific strategies for revolutionizing how the U.S. Government delivers online services to the American people.

One of the most exciting pieces of the report (in my opinion) is what I understand as the government’s endorsement for more social media:

“The Government should use social media, not just to create transparency, but also to help people accomplish core tasks…To do this, the government must ensure that federal employees who need access to social media tools have them, and that these new ways of delivering content are available to all, including people with disabilities.”

Within this document, the Federal Web Managers Council also reveal their shared vision for the government’s presence online. This vision is for the public to:

  • Easily find relevant, accurate, and up-to-date information
  • Understand information the first time they read it
  • Complete common tasks efficiently
  • Get the same answer whether they use the Web, phone, email, live chat, read a brochure, or visit in-person.
  • Provide feedback and ideas and hear what the government will do with them
  • Access critical information if they have a disability or aren’t proficient in English.

The list of recommendations is not limited to but includes:

  • Establish Web Communications as a core government business function
  • Help the public complete common government tasks efficiently
  • Clean up clutter so people can find what they need online
  • Engage the public in a dialogue to improve our customer service
  • Ensure under-served populations can access critical information online.

For more information or to read the report in its entirety, the full report is available here.

Your Turn: What do think of the recommendations, how would you prioritize and what else might you include?

Liked what you read? Feel free to share with others: Bookmark and Share and/or connect with me on Twitter – @socialbttrfly.

Crossing the line or a Creative Cross? MySpace Research with “Dr. Meg”

Have you heard of Dr. Meg? Maybe not, but if you’re a teen on MySpace you may have. Interesting research that was first published in the January issue of Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine showed that adult supervision of MySape can raise adolescents’ awareness of how accessible their profiles are online.

To come to this conclusion, Dr. Megan Moreno, a pediatrician and adolescent medicine specialist at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and fellow researchers, embarked on two separate studies to explore this issue further. Both research studies are to 1) encourage increased parental and adult supervision by family and friends, and 2) to potentially encourage similiar outreach approaches.

Dilemma: To Cross or not to Cross the Ethical Line

The research is very interesting, however, I feel an ethical discussion must be had. I am not saying Moreno’s approach was wrong or right, but I think we should slow down and discuss it further to learn and develop best practices, as well as ethical guidelines, especially since others may adopt this practice towards younger youth.

Headlines have buzzed about “Busybody Dr. Meg,” concluding that this outreach and behavior-change may offer hope to future, similiar methods being implemented by others. To me, I feel there can be high-levels of concerns with a universal application of this approach unless the strategy and concept is stretched. Including, but not limited to – the age those being contacted, how people are being contacted, the language and type of approach involved, the privacy and the stalking-like component, among other items. Additionally, does it matter who, as in which type of organizations embark on this strategy? For example, I can foresee potential problems if adopted by government health agencies and citizens’ concerns over freedom of expression. Curious on others’ thoughts on this! 😉

Background About the Studies

Study 1. For the first, researchers located 190 MySpace public profiles in a single urban ZIP code, randomly selected from 10 U.S. Census areas with the lowest average income because researchers wanted to target adolescents who might have less access to doctors.

All the users involved revealed that they were 18 to 20 years old and their pages included three or more references to sex, drinking, drug use or smoking. Of the 190 profiles selected, half were sent “Dr. Meg” e-mails. After three months, 42% of those getting a “Dr. Meg” e-mail had either set their profiles to “private,” or they had removed both sexual or substance usage references. 29% of those not contacted made changes over the three-month period.

Study 2. In another study, Moreno and other researchers looked at 500 randomly selected MySpace profiles of 18-year-olds nationwide and found that more than half contained references to risky behavior such as sex, drinking and violence.

Your Turn: Crossing the line or a creative cross?

What do you think? I agree that there is a growing issue and concern for online safety and online identity of teens, youth, young adults and people in general, and this is an interesting new development to the field. How can you see this approach being adopted by your organization, or what would be your reaction if you were approached? Am I over-reacting?

photo credit: LoonSky

*********
Liked what you read? Feel free to share with others: Bookmark and Share

B2School Monday Minute: What is a 'non-profit'

I recently overheard a conversation that got me thinking. Here’s a clip from the conversation:

Person 1: With the rise of a third sector, defined as the non-profit sector, how will this affect both the private and public sectors? And, what are the relationships between the three and what will that mean for the future?

Person 2: Well, what is non-profit? Non-profit means merely a tax break. You have two kinds of non profits. Those that are genuinely good and advocate for their cause efficiently and effectively, but then you have those that don’t. So, when you say non-profit, you’re merely talking about a tax break.

Needless to say, this conversation got me wondering, and I’m still pondering. What is a non-profit? And, say the word ‘non-profit’ is a brand….how do current consumers perceive this brand?

I feel these questions are important because whether you are a political organization, grassroots, religions, a charity, professional organization, foundation, community oriented, advocacy organization, special interest group, etc… how the broad term non-profit is ‘branded’ and perceived could have large implications for your success.

Graduate student from Case Western Reserve University, Kate Luckert, provides a great outline on the definition of non-profits and various examples, including why they may/are important.

About. com‘s definition tends to support Person 2’s definition of a nonprofit:

A nonprofit organization is one that has committed legally not to distribute any net earnings (profits) to individuals with control over it such as members, officers, directors, or trustees. It may pay them for services rendered and goods provided.

The European Research Network states that there is no universally accepted definition to the term: non-profit sector. There is also no universally accepted social marketing definition. My view though is…. if the term non-profit lacks in credibility and reputation, the term social marketing should be used more often to describe certain effots.

Many organizations practice social marketing, but they don’t know it or realize it. Some people say that the term social marketing is too limiting, however, I see it more as an umbrella term backed with credible research.

Thoughts?

  • nonprofit.
  • social marketing.
  • private sector.
  • public sector.

How do they relate?