I’m speaking at Fundació Escacc (Fundació Espai Català de Cultura i Comunicació) in Barcelona next week, as part of their series of ten lectures on digital communication and new challenges for journalists, covering everything from “Writing techniques on the Internet” (Ramón Salaverría), through to “Monetization of personal branding” (Ben Hammersley) via “Management of corporate digital identity” – that’s mine.
I did an interview with the organisers the other day, which is now up on their site. But for those of you who don’t speak Catalan and may struggle with Google’s rather hit-and-miss translation, here are the questions/answers in English (the questions are as sent to me by the organisers, with my emailed response below each one):
Q: The corporate identity of a digital media is directly related to strategic planning and can not be based solely on knowledge of different media channels and technology. What are the guidelines of your digital presence? A: The guidelines of our digital presence are actually based firmly in our overall editorial guidelines and ethical code. Digital is a different publishing and engagement platform, but we need to act consistently across all platforms. We try and ensure that staff understand that digital (and especially social media) presence doesn’t mean we can let standards drop (though of course we may use a different tone or approach, appropriate to a particular platform).
Q: How does the Guardian manage the involvement of its employees? Do you have a style manual? A: As already mentioned, we have editorial codes which govern the production and publishing of content. But in terms of social media, we think it’s better to educate, inform, inspire and support staff, rather than telling them exactly how to tweet. To this end, we have an extensive social media intranet site of resources, best practice and guidelines for the use of different platforms and approaches. We regularly train and refresh training in social media activities. And we have clear guidelines for staff participation, which are very rarely required – by educating and helping people to understand the culture and norms (and what is appropriate) for each social medium, they tend to make more appropriate choices.
Q: Knowing the audience is key. How can one assess the perception the audience have of a media? A: Our Research and Customer Insight department are very good at helping staff understand the makeup and movements of our audience on site. But on external social media platforms – like Twitter, Flickr, Facebook and so on – there’s no substitute for spending time with the communities, talking and listening to them, in order to understand them better. Anthropologists might call this “participant observation”. Journalists may call it “networking”. But it’s basically just hanging out, meeting people, and paying attention. It never hurts!
Q: The Guardian has over 50 Twitter accounts. What is the purpose of this diversity, what is the approach? A: There are two reasons why we have so many official accounts: accident, and design. The accident is really a reflection that our journalists are often early adopters in social media spaces, and several Twitter accounts were created separately by different desks (technology media, and so on) back before Twitter got popular. I’m delighted that our journalists like to experiment with emerging technologies and platforms to see whether there’s anything which might help further or enhance our journalism in them. We also noticed through this that journalists were able to engage more directly with interest groups (and vice versa), so the initial somewhat random approach was followed up by a purposeful strategy – to create a Twitter presence for every desk or section, powered by them, and engaging with a specific audience. Because that’s important to remember, too – on Twitter, people don’t have to limit the number of accounts they follow, and user feedback indicated that by following a number of relevant Guardian Twitter accounts, a user could customise the signal they were receiving, rather than having a single brand account spitting out stories so fast it clogged up their Twitterstream.
Q: “Communities must not distract people, but empower them”, you said in an interview. How can a community of readers of any media be empowered? A: When I said that in an interview, I meant that communities already exist and have ideas, motivations and ways of working. Any media organisation (actually, any company) hoping to engage with communities would be wise to think about how it can work with those established communities, and help them do what they want to do, act as a platform or a way of extending and enhancing their activities rather than trying to get them to do something else – usually, something which suits the business, and not the individuals who make up the communities. That’s why we talk about engaging in contexts of mutual interest, for mutual benefit.
Q: Some months ago, you published that guardian.co.uk has half a million comments a month added to the website, more than 2 millions followers across all your Twitter accounts and that a study puts The Guardian top of a list of news organisations that engage readers. What is your main advice to an online media which wishes to strengthen the engagement of its readers? A: Social media is two-way, and often companies embark on a social media strategy which puts emphasis on marketing *to* a community rather then engaging *with* it. So listen more than you talk, be prepared to learn from your audience and community members – and let that change what you do in future. That’s mutualised media.
Posted: April 14th, 2011 | Author:Meg | Filed under:Creative, Projects | Comments Off
Bunting season is nearly upon us – an incipient royal wedding (with accompanying jingoism and jelly at street parties), a clutch of bank holidays and the next thing you know it’ll be summer and time for fairs, picnics and barbecues.
But you don’t need an excuse for bunting, really.
I like bunting. I’ve never really had a reason to string it outside, but my study (painted white) has a picture rail running around the top of the wall, and I had an idea to string some miniature bunting along it (and along the frames of a couple of pictures) as a sort of alternative decoration.
So I did a bit of online research (of course) and discovered that you can pay not very much for fairly ugly and cheap-looking big flappy strings of bunting. You can pay quite a lot for the fruits of someone else’s labour on etsy, folksy or ebay and the like. Or you can make it yourself.
Several of the methods I found require cutting things out with pinking shears (I don’t have any, and John Lewis were out of stock when I went in to check) and/or making shapes which you sew and turn inside-out (far too much faff).
So I decided to see if I could figure out a way to make simple no-sew, no cut shapes which would look good front and back, not fray on the edges and would have some structural integrity. I came up with his origami-inspired kite-shape approach.
It works!
You will need:
– Some material, cut into squares (about 30)
– 16mm bias binding tape (about 5m)
– Pins
– A sewing machine (could do it by hand, it’s not that hard or much)
– (optional: webbox)
– An iron + flat surface to press on
When managing a community, creating new community functionality or developing a social- or contribution-centric projects, avoid using words like allow and let (e.g. “we’ll allow people to upload their photos…” “we let users comment on articles…”)
Using words like these will negatively influence – or betray – your perception of the project, as well as giving a strong indication to everyone else (including the community) of user involvement: barely tolerated, and only made possible through your largesse.
Instead, think about using words like invite, empower and encourage, even in your internal emails and planning documents.
It may sound silly, but the right frame of mind can help you make good community decisions on a site, and the words you use even to think about it or describe it can influence your frame of mind. If you think about users as troublesome, bothersome, people doing a thing you’re graciously allowing them to do, then you’ll expect them to be pathetically grateful/need constant supervision or management/will want to break the rules.
Contrast that with a message that you’re inviting users to get involved, or encouraging them to share ideas and images. See how different it feels? Already, the kind of community management you’ll be thinking about might include curation, reward, conversation development, and so on.
So think about – and influence – your subconscious approach via the words that you choose to describe community participation. In other words: mind your (negative) language.
A little while ago, I did an interview with Joe Pike from Spin Your Web (a site about journalism and communities). Joe’s now uploaded the interview as a number of bite-size video chunks, and I’m posting them here, along with links to the notes and blogposts on the Spin Your Web site.
I’d love to hear your thoughts about the ideas in these series of videos. Do let me know in the comments.
(and in case you’re wondering – most of the meeting rooms at the Guardian offices have original photos by our staff photographers and others, commissioned for Weekend magazine etc. That’s why Al Pacino is glaring over my shoulder throughout the conversation….)
I’ve been blogging for over eleven years now – since it began with a W – and being involved with something from the beginning, plus passionate (and sometimes despondent) about its potential and usage in the years since means I’ve had a lot of time to watch and think about how it has matured and been used. There are certain things which we can now look back on and consider milestones in the development and maturing of blogging – like how the media responded to it, how people embraced and used it and how it penetrated mainstream web usage over time.
Likewise, Twitter.
Like blogging (which I started doing in January 2000, and used Blogger to publish my blog from April of that year), I’ve been using Twitter since relatively early on – my earliest update via Twitter was in November 2005. I’d link to it, but
a) it’s in my private/personal account (@megp) and
b) all my archived tweets (pre July 31 2009) have disappeared, as experienced by many others in this thread on the Twitter help forum.
It’s actually that help forum – and the appalling petulant and rude manner in which some users are addressing Twitter staff – which got me thinking more specifically about how, in so many ways, the timeline of the Twitter story mirrors that of Blogger and early blogging. Both have seen similar patterns of early usage and behaviour and adoption by certain functional and social groups, and both have learnt – the hard way, sometimes – about technical and social scaling issues as well as being a playground for emergent behaviours and activities, and all the fun and challenge that comes with that.
This isn’t an attempt to demonstrate that startups and new technologies are subject to many of the same pressures and reception issues – that’s been clearly documented and brilliantly expressed in Gartner’s Hype Curve. Rather, I wanted to explore some of the striking similarities in specific situations, movements and experiences in the early days of both micropublishing and blogging, from the perspective of an early settler and long-term resident of both of these strange and wonderful new(ish) countries.
So here’s something I’ve been working on for a little while: it’s a very approximate timeline of the activities, patterns, behaviours and reactions experienced by both Twitter (/micropublishing) and Blogger (/early blogging) during their first few years. Read the rest of this entry »
Based on my own previous experiences of commuting with a bouquet, and today’s observations of people struggling with blooms on public transport, I present this handy guide to how to carry flowers (either given to you or on your way to present them to someone else), without looking ridiculous.
There are in fact six main carrying stances:
1. The Bride
Stance: Single or double-handed, bouquet held in front of the body.
Notes: Tendency to look like blushing bride. Must avoid slow-walking, or wearing of white clothing.
2. Nonchalant
Stance: Single-handed, bouquet held upright but tilted at a slight angle.
Notes: Pose suggests that the holder is unaware that they are holding a lovely bouquet of flowers, or that this sort of thing happens all the time. “What’s that? Nice flowers? Eh? Oh, you mean these flowers? Yes, I suppose they are…” NB: Can play havoc with weak wrists.
3. The Sweep
Stance: Single-handed, bouquet grasped around the base and facing downwards.
Notes: Signals embarrassment about receiving or carrying flowers. Usually accompanied by intense blushes. Very effective for de-petalling the blooms, as downwards-orientation and pendulum motion conspire with gravity to cause petals to drop off.
4. The Torch
Stance: Single-handed, bouquet held upright, slightly aloft and at a right angle to the body, but at some distance.
Notes: Usually adopted by boyfriends/husbands, this posture signals that the carrier has bought the flowers for someone else, and is merely conveying them to their intended recipient, plus do you really think I’d be caught dead carrying flowers around in the street? Do you? Well, do you? What sort of bloke do you think I am? etc etc. NB: Can be painful on upper arms/shoulders if used for a long time.
5. The Award
Stance: Single-handed grasp, with bouquet resting in the crook of the opposite arm.
Notes: The award for best flower carrying posture goes to….*drum roll*…. whoever carries their flowers like this! Impossible not to seem as if you are receiving an award, or holding a large, florid baby.
6. The Microphone
Stance: Single-handed, bouquet held upright and slightly aloft directly in front of the body, near the face.
Notes: Can seem as if you are about to break into karaoke, depending on the type of flowers. Avoid bulbous blooms.
Posted: February 11th, 2011 | Author:Meg | Filed under:Work | Comments Off
I’ve been doing quite a few interviews and things over the last few months, mainly about social media, digital engagement and my role at The Guardian. I thought it might be useful to aggregate the links here, for reference.
Bottom Up Media: an interview with Meg Pickard
Talking about digital engagement and the history and impact of “user-generated content” among other things.
MediaWeek:60 Second Spot: Meg Pickard
A profile interview from March 2010, in which I talk about why Guardian readers are like a Bolivian tribe (they’re not really, but there are similarities whenever you’re looking for patterns of behaviour and activity in groups of people), and why social media isn’t killing off traditional news brands. Read the rest of this entry »
On Channel 4′s 10 O’Clock Live this evening, Charlie Brooker provided an excellent rant about Cameron’s attack on multiculturalism in the UK. As part of this, he mentioned the Twitter reaction to another popular Channel Four series, My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding. As I pointed out on 18 January, much of the Twitter contrail has been full of casual racism and prejudice towards Gypsies.
To illustrate this, Brooker read out some tweets, which were shown on screen.
Include the Twitter logo in close proximity to the Tweets for the duration that Tweets appear in broadcast.
Make sure that the Twitter logo is a reasonable size in relation to the content.
Include the username with each Tweet. If you have concerns about user privacy or broadcast standards, please contact us regarding exceptions unless you have a prior agreement with Twitter.
…but they also appeared to attribute the offending words to Twitter users called Phillip, Anabel and Hooligan.
…and not, in fact, @phillip (a programmer from Portland, Oregon), @anabel (a renegade psychologist from Mexico) or @hooligan (a writer in California who hasn’t tweeted since August 2009).
So what happened here? My suspicion is that whoever prepared the research, on-screen graphics and script for that segment of the show wasn’t sufficiently familiar with Twitter to recognise that that there’s a difference between real name and username, and that they had accidentally put offensive words into the mouths of unsuspecting Twitter users.
And what’s the moral of this story? If you’re displaying tweets on screen (or for that matter, in print), be aware of the Twitter usage guidelines for media, be familiar with the product and how it’s generally used, be careful to respect the company and community and be mindful that an unintentional slip could very likely land you in hot water.
As with life, so with social media. They’re not that different, really.
1. Avoid hubris/constant self-promotion.
Even if you’ve got a pet topic or issue, change the record occasionally.
2. Listen as much as (possibly even more than) you speak.
You’ll learn something about the environment you’re in, the interests, preoccupations and social patterns of people around you.
3. Give credit where it’s due.
Use social & tech norms/tools to show source and point your followers towards others you value.
4. Bring insight/resources/wit to topics, issues and conversations.
Add something. If you can’t add anything, question the value of opening your mouth.
5. Follow and seek the opinions of people outside your bubble, so you don’t fall into the trap of thinking everyone is just like you.
I was in Cairo for nearly a week in July last year, training independent Egyptian news organisation Al-Masry Al-Youm in social media and digital engagement/community management. It was a great few days with a lovely group of people.
Because I was there for work, with a very packed schedule of all-day workshops and presentations, there was no time for sightseeing (and it was far too hot anyway), so instead my main impressions of Cairo are whatever I could see and hear from the back of a taxi, zooming from one place to another – airport to hotel, hotel to office, office to restaurant, restaurant to hotel.
The other day, searching my computer for Cairo photos, I came across a text file I’d made containing notes from my visit there – impressions on arriving, things seen and heard and scribbled down on my iphone in the back of a taxi, trying to make sense of the city.
Unedited, and without further context, here they are.
Glint of the Nile as we entered Egyptian airspace.
Off the plane, the fug of the city, hot and thick like a badly-ventilated bathroom after a shower, dusty and heavy like the side of a road in summer.
People everywhere. No signs in the airport. No indication where to go, what to do.
The taxi, haring through the night streets.
Families picknicking on patches of ground at the side of the road, nestled into the shade of a tree despite being past one in the morning.
From the freeway, a glimpse down a dun-coloured dusty alley: children in bright shorts, illuminated by streetlights, playing scratch football.
1. The Bride
2. Nonchalant
3. The Sweep
4. The Torch
5. The Award
6. The Microphone
You said…