Social Media And Its Role In The Panic-demic

As former member of the fourth estate, I feel quite elegiac about the sound of the presses slowing towards an inevitable stop. Ever since I saw His Girl Friday as a very small child, I wanted to be a reporter. [And who wouldn't - Roz Russell was gorgeous, bantered beautifully with even more beautiful Cary Grant and got to do good through the power of the word!]

Today, however, I find myself in the surprising  and uncomfortable position of being more than a little miffed at my paper- and broadcast-based journalistic brethren. Their eagerness to point the finger at social media as panic-mongers of DOOM as the Swine Flu crisis develops.

REACTIONARY REACTIONS?

An example of the digi-pointing can be found in a blog by Milo Yiannopolous of the UK’s Telegraph who notes:

Twitterers are saturating the Twitterverse with scaremongering and nonsense about swine flu via the #swineflu hashtag. Let us be clear: swine flu aint some hot internet meme. It’s not a lolcat or a great flash game. It is a serious disease.

The speed with which idle chatter about swine flu is propagating, at the hands of those (it seems almost wilfully) ignorant of the facts, is terrifying and may cost lives. It has now become impossible to separate hysteria from vital news. For perhaps the first time, Twitter has become a hindrance and not a help to newsgathering and to the public seeking information.

And closer to home, the usually level-headed and excellent news source NPR has also chimed in, with  Evgeny Morozov noting that

despite all the recent Twitter-enthusiasm about this platform’s unique power to alert millions of people in decentralized and previously unavailable ways, there are quite a few reasons to be concerned about Twitter’s role in facilitating an unnecessary global panic about swine flu.

You’ll forgive me if I state that this sounds a bit like sour grapes. True, one of the justifiable concerns about social media is that there is a dearth of fact-checking. And yes, there are idiots out there who will play the Web 2.0 version of the game of telephone, terror edition.  But has there never been a panic caused by a broadcast network or a newspaper? Truly? Rumours never have flown because of a hyperbolic headline or an over-emphatic piece on a 24 hour news network?

ANOTHER LOOK AT SOCIAL MEDIA IN RELATION TO SWINE FLU

No one is downplaying the fact that this is a potentially deadly illness and that people have been tested positive for it on several continents. The threat is real and frightening.

However, it is also true that almost nobody has looked at the positive ways social media has been used in the course of this porcine pandemic.

Just to offer a few examples:

The Centre for Disease Control has been offering updates on Twitter such as

“20 confirmed cases of swine flu in U.S. 1 hospitalized. All have fully recovered. http://bit.ly/uycgL #swineflu”

And over on FriendFeed, one of its users has created a Swine Flu room which aggregates “various real-time information streams on swine flu from across the web,” making it a reliable and timely source of information.

The CDC has also used YouTube to present a video by Dr. Joe Bresee of its Influenza Division dealing with the signs, symptoms, transmission and treatment of Swine Flu.

So, in fact, social media has been a means for calming the public and providing it with a stream of accurate and useful information – which is not a story you are likely to see in your local paper, if in fact you still have one.

Deep Down, Are We Pretty Shallow? Lessons Learned from the Susan Boyle phenomenon — or not…

BACKGROUND

Susan Boyle might put me out of a job – and I couldn’t be more delighted.

In case you were in a coma, Susan Boyle is an unprepossessing Scottish woman with a voice so beautiful it will literally make you weep — and she’s become the biggest thing since sliced bread via YouTube over the past five days. Her glorious performance of  the tremendously challenging ballad “I Dreamed a Dream” from Les Miserables on an episode of  Britain’s Got Talent has amassed nearly 13 million hits.

Back the 21st Century P.T. (that’s Pre-Twitter), it would have been the job of a professional communicator, likely of the publicist variety, to hype this woman — to remake her as a more suitable brand by spiffing up her image and promoting her to any and all media outlets.

Instead, one of the things remarkably talented woman has demonstrated — again– the power of social media and how effective the public itself can be in terms of calling attention to something or someone in whom they are interested. Instead via YouTube as well as discussion on Facebook, Twittter and FriendFeed, the woman has – via viral marketing that she herself did not set into motion – become a superstar.

Heck, she’s even generating press for Demi Moore and Ashton Kutcher because they tweeted about HER performance.

WHY IS THIS HAPPENING?

What it is about her that appeals is that she is (or at least seems) genuine. In this era of people who are Photoshopped and Botoxed to the point of near waxworkdom, this woman looks like an honest-to-goodness 47 -year-old lady. So strong is the expectation that our female talents now must be young, size two lovelies that one wonders if Janis Joplin– an off-kilter beauty with a killer voice — would be able to have a career today.

WHAT DOES IT ALL MEAN?

Perhaps the scariest thing of all is that she has revealed the ugliness in our society’s current attitudes about beauty and talent. Screen goddess Ava Gardner once joked “Deep down, I’m pretty shallow” – what a pity that this may have been revealed as the current dominant mindset for humanity.

Watching the audience’s initial mocking reaction to her demonstrates that. And it makes her victory all the more powerful in this era of narcissistic twit(terer)s.

And it makes me particularly worried about the world my daughter will inherit -  if the response of MTV’s bloggers can be taken as typical- that they could react to her talent in the following callow manner:

It wasn’t until this morning that I got wind of the Susan Boyle craze. Along with the rest of you cynics out there, I have to admit that I was too quick to judge and giggle before she opened her mouth. Not to follow the crowd, but she seriously gave me goose bumps and watery eyes. (I discovered that closing your eyes to her bushy brows and just allowing yourself to hear her voice is the trick.)Her talent is undeniable, regardless of her cat collection and homely frock.

Perhaps there is a future in public relations: Teaching narrow-minded narcissists how to relate as people. Perhaps?

Twitter Feeling Less Chirpy: The Migration is Well Underway?

Despite the fact that there must have been a chorus of “hosannas” when Jon Stewart briefly referenced them on The Daily Show the other night, the folks at Twitter might not be feeling too chipper (or chirpy) at the moment.

Over on FriendFeed as of late, amongst many of the early adopters and A-listers, much of the discussion has been about leaving Twitter.

Alas, microblogging service, they just can quit you.

The Early (Adopter) Warning Signs

It’s not like anyone missed the signs that this was coming. Citing FriendFeed once again– mostly because that’s where the flock with foresight have flown –there have been innumerable posts about Twitter’s status noting whether it was up, whether tweets were vanishing into the ether or whether it was so down that nothing was happening and even the fail whale was too ashamed to make an apologetic appearance.

But What About Those Who Came Into the Conversation Late?

As a recent but really curious newcomer to social media, it’s been fascinating to actually watch the adoption curve of the trend in action. Because just as the earlies are flying off for more hospitable climates, there are many late adopters who are using Twitter and enjoying the process. For example, it has been a way for classmates to keep each other apprised of cancellations and summarize the substance of classes missed.

Personally, Twitter and I had more of a flirtation than a love affair. I only gave it a whirl (or twhirl?) for a few months before leaving it last week.

I didn’t like the fact that its concise nature seemed to encourage or even crystallize narcissism in some cases, or that you couldn’t really place a conversation in context.

That’s one of the things I like about FriendFeed. You can get the whole conversation and its offshoots in one spot. It often makes for fascinating reading as well as engaging participation.

What Does This Mean For Twitter- and for Its Users?

Poor Twitter – you can’t help feeling sorry for the former favourite. Especially as the disappointed and displeased word-of-mouth by former influential fans has spread in intensity and scale faster than a nasty virus at a preschool.

Is Twitter doomed? Or has it merely lost the favour of the tech elite? Is the mainstream still using the microblogging service – or are they leaving in droves also? And where are they going- Jaiku? Plurk? FriendFeed?

I know my chirping days are over but what about you: Will you continue to tweet? And if you do, will there be anyone to answer back at this point?

And if you were Twitter- how would you handle this increasingly dire situation?

Life is but a stream? Musings on FriendFeed

If you’ve been on Internet lately, you’ve undoubtedly heard about FriendFeed. For awhile, it seemed like everywhere you clicked people were praising it to the heavens or railing passionately against it. (Their PR person must be doing quite the dance of joy.)

So what does it do besides divide opinions?

The name gives you a clue right off. FriendFeed is a social aggregator (or lifestream) that consolidates and centralizes a user’s public activity streams from multiple services across the Internet and basically syndicates them.

It’s pretty nifty actually, to have your comments from Twitter, your blog updates, your videos from YouTube and your music from Last.fm all converging in one place

There are other similar services- like Socialthing! and SecondBrain - but none of them seem to have caught fire with the key early adopters the way FriendFeed has.

Launched this past February, the site had attracted many of the key names of the Web 2.0 world by early March. In fact, Louis Gray soon published a list of the “significant number of top tier ‘name brand’ bloggers” already using the service.

What’s really odd is that somehow the hype about the service has devolved in some quarters to the most hotly-contested turf war since Team Aniston vs. Team Jolie, only much more intellectual and without the T-shirts (so far).

Now it is Friend Feed vs. Twitter. Louis Gray has been practically evangelical in his praise of Friendfeed. Thomas Hawk posted this image that should prove satisfying to everyone who has had to deal with the “fail whale” one time too many.

Steve Gilmor proved the best representative of the other camp, penning a spirited defense of Twitter.

But though the battle lines were clearly drawn, it seems that whatever inflamed this supposed skirmishing has receded and calm has been restored.

And that’s good – because the animosity made no sense. Basically these two services do very different things. Twitter is great for broadcasting and quick real-time contact whereas FriendFeed allows for the experience of a threaded conversation away from the anchoring of a blog. There’s really room for both, unless Twitter’s problems with downtime continue extensively and then its demise will be self-inflicted.

Have any of you used both services? Do you prefer one to the other? Can you see room for both? And why do you think this issue blew up so rapidly?

Maybe the big question is the one Steve Rubel asked a few weeks ago:

Is Friendfeed the Next Big Thing or are We Just Bored 2.0?

UPDATE: NOOO! There’s another way Twitter and FriendFeed are alike. I just got this message on FF:

“We encountered an error on your last request. Our service is new, and we are just working out the kinks. We apologize for the inconvenience.”

Oh dear.

Got Get Satisfaction?

Get Satisfaction is an intriguing step ahead for customer service. Not only is the site blessedly free of the muzak that many of us have endured while waiting endlessly to talk to a customer representative, but it has also taken the collaborative approach that is one of Web 2.0’s hallmarks and applied it so that users of a product can obtain customer support in the truest sense of the word.

Users of this site support each other, using it as a forum to share ideas, discuss problems and propose solutions. It also provides a welcome sense of not being alone in a particular predicament.
The design aids in this with its “I have this problem too” button so that they can be notified when an effective solution is proposed. Site users can also mark any successful solution with a star so that others will know that it really works. Users can also propose ideas to any companies that happen to be wise enough to have employees interacting with their customers.

Not that the design is without flaws. The “how it works” link is at the bottom of the page where it is harder to find for the people who need it most, those who are less comfortable with technology. Also, the page is a bit cluttered, it’s a lot for the eye to take in all at once.

Twitter has been very savvy in its use of the site. The company has responded to some user suggestions and has been wise enough to post alerts about dates when their IM service will be down for revamping. The company has 14 employee representative, including the CEO and a co-founder, and they do interact with and give the indication of “listening and participating” as the site puts it, though they reacted faster when fewer customers were involved.

But this site does not work as well for companies with a lower profile, as Greenbox demonstrates. This company, which “provides simple hosted software for cause-based non-profits,” has almost no participation, despite the efforts of its official rep to generate discussion. He’s started three out of six topics and only received replies from one user. Without a community of users, a company representative is just shouting into the ether.

The site can also backfire on a company. As PR professionals well know, communicate badly or communicate the wrong message and there will be consequences. Twitter is facing a backlash about their handling of a user reportedly dealing with cyberbullying . Discussions around that have devolved into griping. When companies do not participate fast enough (or at all) their portion of Get Satisfaction seethes, despite the well-intentioned and well-worded company-customer pact that Get Satisfaction has crafted.

Get Satisfaction is a great way for companies to find out what people are saying about them and their products. It can help them shape their PR by knowing what their users’ s concerns and desires are. If the site continues to grow in popularity, it should force companies to get real and it will definitely motivate them to get busy.