Social Media is the New Battleground in Election Campaigns

After the stunning social media victory of Calgary Mayor Naheed Nenshi in the 2010 civic election, I was waiting with anticipation to see how the leaders in the provincial election would conduct their campaigns.  As it stands now I’m a little disappointed by the usual and traditional methods being undertaken in the provincial election (We were spoiled in the civic election).  I get updates by party leaders into my facebook, but they are basically policy announcements with little effort to make a connection with a community.  One leader however has an obvious edge, which I’ll talk about later.

In reading the Globe and Mail’s article on politicians and social media entitled “Social Media Statecraft: A Multiplatform Strategy” in which three leaders were interviewed for their use of social media, I wondered if they are indeed a rare breed. The three leaders being studied are from a variety of political theatres:  Carl Bildt, Foreign Minister of Sweden; Michael McFaul, U.S. ambassador to Russia; and our very own Calgary Mayor Naheed Nenshi.  The three leaders are adept at using various platforms of social media to get their points across, and each platform appears to have a different purpose.  Blogging is used as a means to generate discussion in a format that requires more text, and more indepth interaction….but blogging has a limited reach.  Twitter is used however to quickly get the message out – in quick 140 character statements, or in the case of the Swedish foreign minister, he may tweet a URL about a new policy.  Facebook however is used extensively to communicate with the community.  As Ambassador McFaul says…He has his ambassadaor day job, and then after 10pm he interacts with the community via social media.

Mayor Nenshi of course is well known to us. His use of social media electrified and mobilized the youth of Calgary, and in doing so brought him the Mayor’s chair.  He tweeted policy.  He tweeted quick statements about reactions. He kept it positive.  He facebooked videos that showed him as a relaxed, and engaging leader.  He connected with the people of Calgary, and he is now on the verge of having more twitter followers than some major Calgary newspapers have readers.  Why would he use traditional media when social media allows a more personal connection to community, and also allows him more control in how he chooses to get his message out.  I remember Mayor Nenshi saying that he wasn’t very good at sound bites, as his just has too much to say. Traditional media is all about sound bites, and traditional media chooses what sound bites are chosen.  In this day and age where people largely do not attend political forums, we are reliant on traditional media to get the message out…..but is it the message that we want to hear?  Naheed Nenshi mastered the art of building a community, and then mastered the art of connecting to the community. In doing so he won the election, and continues to be one of the most popular mayors in the country.

Our current leaders in the provincial election appear to possess different skills in this area.  The majority are relying on sound bites to get the message across.  Their images are the result of those sound bites.  Allison Redford may have an amazing policy announcement to make, but the media may only focus on one aspect of her day that they consider to be most newsworthy.  Most leaders are missing out on an incredible opportunity, and you can just feel that the 30 and under crowd are not engaged.

When looking at the personal websites for the two main party leaders, I was surprised.  Allison Redford’s page is largely text heavy, few visuals, and a boring video. The text-heavy page focuses little on provincial issues, and instead focuses on her championing the cause of Calgary-Elbow.  There was little on that first page that showcased her as a 21^st century leader for Alberta.  As far as facebook updates, they are sporadic.

When looking at Danielle Smith’s website it is vastly different than her competitor.  There are videos, policy highlights, pictures of her interacting with Alberta citizens, and direct links to facebook and twitter.  This is one leader than upon first glance has a huge advantage over her competitor, and history tells us via the success of Naheed Nenshi, that utilizing social media in the battle ground to get votes is key to victory. 

I don’t know whom I’m voting for, but one thing is for sure…the party that best gets the message out, is most likely to get votes.  Relying on traditional media is no longer the preferred method, and social media is the new battleground. 

21st Century Dating and Levels of.........DECEPTION!!!!

As we work towards our presentation date for out Impact on Technology projects, I am amazed at what I am learning about dating in the technological world.  Some findings are not a surprise, but others are a bit of a wake up call.  Today’s technology offers a wide range of dating options and presentation methods for the tech savvy user…….some which allow dating users to present themselves digitally and in a more favourable light.  It’s hard to believe I know (sarcastic), but there’s a bit of deception going on out there.  Researchers say however that the level of deception is mostly innocent, which at first was hard for me to wrap my head around.  Deception as a term equates to purposeful attempts to deceive.  Perhaps we can say what mostly goes on in the online dating world is ‘marketing’.   Users may make themselves just a little bit taller for example, or just a little bit lighter in the weight category.  Researchers believe that what keeps most online daters from over exaggerating statistics is the hope that someday, if there is a god, that they might actually meet in person.  Saying you weigh 185 lbs in a profile, when you actually weigh 235 pounds would not go unnoticed in a face-to-face encounter.  The deception therefore is meant to market with changes that may not be perceived by the eye.  Photography software is now readily available, and often part of your computer package in fact.  In the past, the ability to modify and adapt pictures was only permitted by professional photographers, but now any online dater can remove blemishes to smooth out the skin, and of course who wouldn’t choose just the right photo that puts you in the best light.  When we go out on a face-to-face date do we not try to put our best foot forward?

Another aspect of online dating that allows you to target potential partners is the ability to edit.  Tailoring your profile to better match the likes of someone you are interested in is a common practice.  Users however, through editing features have time on their side, and can adapt and tailor profiles to fit their needs.  Is this wrong, or is it just highlighting the positive?  Making up facts that make you seem like a perfect match is of course dishonest, but highlighting certain strengths and not others I think is just good marketing.  However, one must always remember that it all comes out in the wash in a face-to-face meeting, especially if there is any hope of continued dating success with that person.

A surprising finding was the use of mobile apps incorporating GPS on your cell phone.  Users create profiles on these apps, and with the use of mobile-location software, users can see who is around them, and how close.  In the gay community this became a very popular activity, as users can tell who is gay, and how close they are……kind of a mobile ‘gaydar’, that sixth sense that lets other gay men know who is gay around them.  Now technology takes the guess work out of it.  The mobile dating site ‘grindr’ claims accuracy within +/- 25metres.  According to the Guardian in the UK, this has proven to assist people in finding each other in locations where gay rights are struggling such as the middle east or China for example. It has helped to take down walls, and allow individuals to get together with less fear than normal. For whatever reason, the mobile technology has not been as closely monitored as the usual internet use.  This technology is becoming widely used in many mobile-dating communities.  Yes, I just used the phrase ‘mobile-dating communities’!  However, there is something a bit creepy about someone knowing you are only 25 metres away.  In online dating you are safely ensconced in your own home or wherever......but no one knows exactly where you are.  Is there a fear that this type of software and use of GPS can lead to unsavoury and inappropriate activities?

Speaking of inappropriate, an alarming bit of news just released today illustrates some obvious concerns.  Three large online dating sites (Match.com, eHarmony, and Sparks Network) have vowed to make online dating safer after a woman was attacked and sexually assaulted by a man she met online.  This man had a previous conviction of sexual assault. In a joint statement Tuesday these sites have “pledged to check subscribers against national sex offender registries” (Toronto Sun).  This is an American strategy that stems from meetings with the California Attorney General, and is just another sign, like in many areas of the online world, that not every online user is honest and decent.    Most sites offer tips about how to protect oneself from inappropriate online behaviour, and as a plenty of fish user myself  (It’s True, and no I’m not listing my profile name here!), I believe there is no better strategy than taking your time – why rush as mom used to say.   However, even the best attempts at protecting oneself can lead to unfortunate circumstances.  People find ways to use technology in ways most of us can't imagine, nor want to imagine.   Online dating has become a very accepted form of meeting future partners, but the technology is progressing faster than societies ability to adapt, and like other areas of online activity, caution is recommended

Hold Your Horses!!! I'm Not Willing to Risk Privacy.

As we being our final project on the impacts technology have on society, I began to think about which technologies impact my life the most.  The answer is not simple, as I cannot pick one or two technologies that have impacted me the most.  There is however one fact that cannot be underestimated.  Most of what I enjoy in life, most of what I take for granted in life, and most of what I expect to help me in the future is based on technology and its effects.  Today’s simple activities are a perfect example.  I worked on my wireless laptop this morning, taking for granted the miracle of servers and wireless connections.  I handed in my placement form to the Calgary Board wirelessly.  I used my cellphone this morning to have a video call with a friend in Edmonton, and we both had the nerve to complain about the size of the screen.  I had a shower by simply turning on the tap (I know you’re all relieved that I shower – and do it daily too), and then I got in my car to work on assignments at the Good Earth Café where I can take advantage of their free wireless network.

Obviously technology has greatly influenced our lives in positive ways.  However, there are areas in which we have concern.  Privacy policies with google and facebook create concern.  Just how much of our lives need to be monitored in the name of financial gain?  As it stands now we seem powerless against it.  As much as I detest intrusion into my private life by large companies, I accept that they are a business and making money.  However, we as the consumer and users of technology do indeed have a voice.  Our voice however is muted by the dependence we have on technology and ease of access to information and communication. 

Government too is picking up on the trend of using information via the web to find out what Canadians are doing.  Governments have realized that by looking at our individual IP protocols they can intrude into the lives of Canadians.  They propose this move in the name of protecting society, however it is nothing more than an invasion of privacy of law abiding Canadians.  Canadians are a savvy bunch however, and utilized internet sites such as openmedia.ca as well as more traditional methods such as email to tell government that this plan simply is not okay.  The power of technology has shown itself to be a powerful force in this area.  Protecting our privacy against government is one thing, but how can we have the same affect on google and facebook? 

Baker and Hubbard talk about these concerns, and feel that there is a push to slow down technological innovation to protect society, but at the same time believe that if we want to move forward, keep pushing ahead, we cannot fall into a ‘zero risk’ mentality.  I’m just not ready yet to concede that in order to move forward with technology in society that we must be willing to accept an invasion of our privacy in ways that we as a civilized society cannot even fully imagine.

References

Baker, K. M., & Hubbard, H. W. (). The impact of technology on society. Unknown, , .   Retrieved from http://www.aavpt.org/symposia/documents/BakerHubbard16-20.pdf

On Your Mark. Get Set. Reform!!!! Now Hurry Up!!!

Blogging around issues of technology and society reminded me of a report the class read in the Leadership and Technology course last semester.  Jenkins et al. (2009) wrote Confronting the Challenges of a Participatory Culture in which they claim that students, who are indeed citizens of society, utilize technology to participate with peers locally, nationally and internationally…..and they use technology in very different ways.  According to the report, a teens use of technology is quite remarkable.

57% of teens who use the internet – could be considered media creators. For the purpose of this study, a media creator is someone who has created a blog or web page; posted original artwork, photography, stories, or videos online; or remixed online content into their own new creations.  Most have done two or more of these activities.  One-third of teens share what they create online with others, 22 percent have their own web sites, 19 percent blog, and 19 percent remix online content (p. 3).

With this knowledge, should we as educators be rethinking how we present content?  Perhaps presenting content itself needs to be rethought.  Perhaps we need to think about providing a structure in which students explore, experience and rethink ideas while participating in a community.  In fact, Jenkins et al., believe that the purpose of education is to give students the tools to fully participate within a community, and to do that we need to focus on new media literacies that help develop “social skills developed through collaboration and networking” (p. xiv).  The list of social skills that are developed are not your usual list:

• ·      Play
• ·      Performance
• ·      Simulation
• ·      Appropriation
• ·      Multitasking
• ·      Distributed cognition
• ·      Collective Intelligence
• ·      Judgment
• ·      Transmedia navigation
• ·      Networking
• ·      Negotiation

That is indeed quite the list!!  Are the education systems of the world teaching students these skills? Are we helping students understand the importance collective intelligence has on understanding the world and issues within it?  Who owns intellectual property in this environment or does it even matter?  Are we allowing students to fully play in a way that introduces them to a whole new way to explore, building on natural curiosity…..uninterrupted by curricular goals?  When I first read this report, it was as if a light bulb came on.  Finally I was reading a piece of work that in some ways was able to put into words what I had been thinking.  The education system needs to change.  Teachers need to adapt and change.  Students need to be given the freedom to play within a media culture that allows them to explore ideas with the world around them.

Education as an institution is bent on protecting students from the evils of the internet.  Fact is, today’s youth know more about media than most parents and teachers.  They have hit the ground running, and I believe are tired of waiting for the rest of us to catch up. Jenkins et al, believe we need to change our approach from one of protection, to one of engagement.  “We do not need to protect them (youth) so much as engage them in critical dialogues that help them to articulate more fully their intuitive understandings of these experiences” (p. 15).

In fact, not allowing students to participate in a culture of collaboration, spurred on by social media and other media may be doing them a disservice in the 21^st century.  We need to encourage the development of a participatory culture.  The digital divide is no longer just about who has technology and who doesn’t; it’s about who is able to participate in developing shared understandings and who doesn’t.  Jenkins et al refer to this as the participation gap, which they define as “The unequal access to the opportunities, experiences, skills, and knowledge that will prepare youths for full participation in the world of tomorrow” (p. xii).

We keep talking about educational reform and change; yet seem unable to move forward with the initiative.  What is the catalyst needed to move in this direction?

Reference List

Jenkins, H., Purushotma, R., Weigel, M., Clinton, K., & Robison, A.J. (2009). Confronting the challenges of a participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press

Youth: Mobile and on the Move. Educators Need to Catch Up.

When I view digital media, I rarely if ever view it as something that affects my social standing.  For me, digital media means communication.  That is the function it serves.  There are so many options when communicating these days.  I can communicate via phone calls, via email, via social media such as facebook, and via text message.  I can skype over my computer or over my cell phone.  I can use face time on my iphone.  The possibilities are endless.  In fact, sometimes I have difficulty tracking information from conversations, as one conversation can begin one day on the cell phone, continue the next day through text messaging, and finish over a facebook message.  The through line of solid and cohesive thought is tough to put together.  I am frustrated by this.  Not everyone shares my views however.  Apparently, a generation gap does exist.  It is a gap that involves vastly different perspectives on mobile communication.

Gitte Stald (2008) has examined the connection between mobile communication and youth identity and believes that unlike their parents, youth of today view mobile communication as practical of course, but also take note of its’ social meaning.

Because of the always there, always on status of the mobile and the pace of exchange of information, and because the mobile is the key personal communication device for so many young people, it becomes important in establishing social norms and rules and in testing one’s own position in relation to the peer group (p. 143).

Was there anything in my youth that had such a profound effect on how I interacted with my peers?  I struggle to find anything that matches the effect that Stald states.  Stald goes on to describe today’s youth as being

 . . . on the move within and between physical locations but also in virtual spaces, in well-known (as well as foreign) areas. They are processing, digesting, and exchanging information, deliberating what to do, what to choose, what to think (p. 145). 

The mobile device appears to be the perfect side-kick, encouraging, and helping the youth of today to be on the move.  “We are mobile, the device is mobile with us, but above all information is mobile, meaning that it is available independent of time and space” (p. 145).

The social connection that comes from the use of the mobile I believe influences youth more than we can imagine. The influence I don’t believe is a negative one.  Our students do function in physical worlds and virtual worlds, at times simultaneously.  They use mobile technology effortlessly, and at the same time are very aware of the social connection.  We as teachers however need to tap into this connection between the mobile and youth.  For us this use of technology and it’s connection to social status is foreign……at least foreign to the same extent.  Our students have changed.  Our education system has not.  A shift is required.  Information is no longer static, and in fact, it is extremely fluid.   Our students are not static, and they are on the move constantly – physically and virtually.

I as a 47yo, may have difficult in creating a degree of intimacy in a digital conversation that matches my face-to-face experience.  However, today’s youth appear to have an ability to create shared experiences via digital media, regardless of the situation.

Most young users, however, are able to establish intimate spaces for shared presence when they talk on the phone or have a text-message conversation.  The physical space is shut out, no matter if it is the bus, the crowded street, or the bedroom (p. 154).

Unlike myself, youth are able to establish a feeling of trust and social bonding through this type of communication.  The environment is not foreign, and they are at ease.  Educators and specifically the education system need to adapt to capture the attention of our students.  We need to let them, with guidance, explore the world around them….physically, and virtually.  We need to know and discover how to let them do that.  A paradigm shift is on the horizon, whether we want it or not…..whether we are comfortable with it, or not.

Reference List

Stald, G. (2008).  Mobile identity: Youth, identity, and mobile communication media. In Buckingham, D. (Ed.), Youth, identity, and digital media (pp. 143-164). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.   doi:10.1162/dmal.9780262524834.143

Questions About Social Interaction Using the Internet and Social Media

I’ve begun my first blog with a fairly general question, and one that I have wondered about.  Does the quality of social interaction change when people interact via social media or on the internet, compared to when people meet in person or have a discussion on the phone?  As an individual in the middle of their late forties, I have grown up with the belief that friendships are maintained through connections in a face-to-face environment.  I have however, like many people in their forties, taken up social media, the internet, and texting as a means to stay in touch with existing friends.  I am not afraid of technology.  In fact, I embrace it.  That said, I do prefer quality interactions with friends in a face-to-face environment.  Is this a generational phenomenon, or can relationships be maintained to the same level as in face-to-face?

There has been a steady increase of social media use to communicate over the last few years. Baym et al., (2004) conducted a study of college students in 2002 in which students recorded the amount of quality and significant communication interactions in a diary.   The meaning of significant was left up to the individual. 

These diaries demonstrated an online social life that was both connected to communication in other media and had its own limited but pervasive us in interpersonal communication.  Although these users were adept at using the internet socially and had integrated it into their daily lives, face-to-face communication clearly remained their dominant mode of interaction (p. 306).

Kaplan and Haenlein (2010) found different results.  Their research shows a 56% increase in the use of blogs, chat, social media and instant messaging between 2007 and 2008.  In fact, the phone didn’t ever factor into their results.  My own personal experience tells me that it is a rare occurrence when I actually rely on the telephone for personal communication.  This goes against my own personal beliefs of communication through electronic media where I don’t hear a voice is impersonal. I text, chat, email, but rarely if ever do I hear a voice.  I appear to be part of a growing trend. 

As part of my blogs for this course I would like to explore the effects that technology has on the every day lives of people and how it helps them form relationships.  In doing so, I would like to perhaps focus on some of the following areas:

• ·      Is there a generational gap when it comes to communicating through social media, and if so, how does it manifest itself?
• ·      Does the quality of the communication improve with social media, or is there a skill that is lost that we will never get back?
• ·      Does over use of social media lead to depression and loneliness?  Are social skills affected?  Are new social skills created?
• ·      How has business adapted to the increased use of social media?

I grudgingly accept the new role technology and social media play in how I communicate with the world, but is it in fact the best way when forming and maintaining relationships?

References

Baym, N. K., Zhang, Y. B., & Lin, M. (2004). Social interactions across media: Interpersonal communication on the internet, telephone and face-to-face. New Media and Society, 6(3), 299-318.   doi:10.1177/1461444804041438

Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Business Horizons, 53, 59-58.