"Digital Handshakes in Networked Publics: Why Politicians Must Interact, Not Broadcast" by danah boyd has been recently published in the book Mobilizing Generation 2.0, and is also available online via boyd's blog.

I've been following danah boyd's work for a few years now and have yet to read a paper that didn't turn my toes pink with glee. boyd has been studying online community since back in the livejournal days, when I believe she was actually involved in the early days of the website. Her writing fits perfectly with the studies I was doing back in my academic days, which is why I follow her so closely.

This new paper is angled towards the current US election and how politicians use digital media to reach voters - I think there are still some great general social media learnings, and even some that are particularly relevant to higher ed.

The Internet is very exciting, and social networks are one of the biggest buzzes over the last few years. Politicians are clearly excited to tap into this potential, but are doing so rather awkwardly and without deep understanding of how these communities work. While social networkers routinely "befriend" individuals who they wouldn't normally consider literal friends, there are still rules and patterns to how people build their networks. For example, you might add a band that you want to follow on myspace, or a girl from your chem class that you may need to get in touch with. You may add a random comedian because you want to show that you think she is funny, etc. danah sees politicians as scrambling to build the largest networks they can, adding new contacts frantically to build a mass audience to broadcast to, and the result is "their enthusiasm more closely resembles a dorky 14-year old boy trying to appear popular than a celebrity supporting and nurturing fans." Social networks are not about "you," but rather they are about "me." If you add "me," you better make sure it will be of interest or benefit to me or not only will I delete you, but I will contribute to a buzz of others who have noticed your Facebook sins.

So why would anyone add a politician that they have never met and are most likely never going to hear from? And the corrollary, why would any individual add a college or university as a friend? What's the point? Schools are not even people, after all. danah writes "A connection to Barack Obama or John McCain or even Stephen Colbert signals political affiliation, political engagement (or lack thereof), and philosophical bent." Again, it's about "me." They are saying something about themselves by adding politicians or even schools. And depending on how your brand is perceived and how the user portrays their connection to you, this can work to your advantage. Thousands added Virginia Tech groups to their profiles last year to show solidarity and support for the institution - a huge boost that nudged applicants to see the tight-knit, loyal community at VT rather than a possible security risk. (NOTE: SkoolPool's inspiration was to allow students to show school interest/affiliation by displaying logos on their personal profiles - one of the perks of our free registration...)

The other reason a user may add an entity like a politician or school is to "create an open channel for communicating with the public figure through comments." These comments are visible and an assumed right. Users expect to be able to leave them on your wall, to position themselves in relation to you in front of their own networks, or just to share a thought. The "I" generation is increasingly full of itself so to speak and is likely to actually expect a response from any page they post a comment on - even if it is a politician with 6,000 friends to look after. boyd points to how bands have used social networks, particularly MySpace; "Imagine what would happen if politicians sincerely reached out to some of their Friends and began commenting? Whenever bands do this, teens go wild and tell all of their friends ... The key is that these need to be genuine messages rather than mass-produced spam."

I said there were learnings right? Here goes:

• Be genuine. This one isn't new, but it always merits a mention.
• Understand the community you are trying to reach - know their habits and social rules.
• Social networks are about individual users, not silent spongy mass audiences.
• Allow (and enable) users to link to your institution - give them the tools to show their support and to feel like a part of the school and its success.
• Social networks are about interacting and engaging - not broadcasting. Even if you can only respond to 10% of comments, do what you can.

So that ends the useful stuff. I also want to exalt danah for calling YouTube a "media-sharing site" rather than a social network. Over the last year I have heard so many presenters and marketers throw YouTube into their lump list of social networks, and while there are elements of an OSN* there, it is not the primary use of the site. (Check out Ken's "Connecting with the Facebook Generation" or Michael Wesch's "An Anthropological Introduction to YouTube" for the opposite point of view).

I also want to take ten seconds to think about the sentence "These sites ... are networked publics where people gather en masse to do the things that they would normally do in public places." I think as far as Facebook goes, this is for the most part right on. But this is also what sets Facebook apart from sites such as MySpace. MySpace is a haven for subcultures and nicknames. It is a free space that you can link to your offline life - or you can maintain as a completely separate second life. There is no requirement for first and last names, and there is no expectation to use your real name. Most MySpace users, even those who are not trying to remain anonymous, use nicknames or jokes rather than their actual names. All you need to sign up for MySpace is any email address that you can check and respond to the verification email from - even a temporary account will do. This is somewhat the case on Facebook now, however the expectation for true information was set by Facebook's early days that required a campus email address and the concept of an online Facebook representing the actual offline students of an institution. So yes, I agree that some users use social networks to do the things they would normally do offline - such as keep in touch with friends, share thoughts, whatever. There is an entirely separate world of users that use online communities and forums to do things differently than they do in the world. For example, young LGBT youth have been noted as exploring their sexuality and alternate lifestyles online before coming out to their offline friends and family. Social networks and other websites can be a safe place to explore yourself, or simply an online project of your offline self - and either one is fine.

Thanks for reading,

Melissa CheatereStrategy Consultant, Education Marketing

Academica Group Inc.
Full Cycle Marketing for Higher Education™

email | web | blog | facebook | twitter | del.icio.us | skype: MelissaAcademica  

 *Online Social Network