My reason for being

Beckblogic inspired this post. Her loving talk about her family made me realize it was time for me to properly acknowledge mine. If there’s any doubt who the loves of my life are, here’s a picture of all of them.

We the Media

Perhaps it is fortuitous that I overlooked our We the Media blog entry until now — the very end of this course. In the beginning, I would have told you that no matter what bloggers and other social media users produce, they aren’t the media.

Although I read Dan Gillmor’s book, I was reticent to accept new media; it didn’t have the credibility and credentials of the real thing. I subscribed to the idea that traditional journalists are superior to people who blog because they are more committed.

What I wouldn’t have been able to do was understand how being a part of the process of reporting on life around me has made me feel more connected to, responsible for, and committed to the information I disseminate.

Journalists benefit society by providing information and perspective about new things that are happening and sometimes supplementing that with thoughtful analysis.

Social media tools have put that capability in the hands of us all. We are all journalists. And as hard as that has been for me to accept, it’s one of the things I feel most empowered by now.

This course has shown me how I can amplify my voice to a point where it actually makes a difference in society’s discourse. I can learn, form opinions, share my thoughts, learn some more, and take action — in each step being a participant instead of a passive recipient.

The rules have changed because of social media. Truth and objectivity are no longer trumped up calling cards of the elite class; instead, they are the real lifelong pursuits of all of us.

The First Campaign by Garrett Graff

Before I started reading Garrett’s book, The First Campaign, I read the New York Times review of the book. The reviewer, Michiko Kakutani, highlighted the thing we’ve all been baffled by this semester: he’s “astonishingly young.”

More importantly though, Kakutani acknowledges the breadth and depth of the issues Garrett covers in his book. I expected The First Campaign to focus almost completely on how a campaign should use social media to accomplish the goal of getting a candidate into office. I had no idea the issues I would find in the pages of Garrett’s book.

Although I don’t see the world exactly as Garrett does, I was extremely interested in his perspective on how profoundly new media would change our world and how important it would be for the next president of the United States to fully understand the gravity of it.

I can’t possibly comment on all of the points addressed in the book, but I can’t NOT comment on the state of education and 21 Century workers. My grandfather grew up in River Rouge, near the Ford facility, and he was educated at the University of Michigan. Even though he lived there in Ford’s hayday, he would tell you that even then, the University of Michigan produced something far more important than the spectacular Ford complex. The university produced ideas and innovation.

This country has been struggling to bolster education, but its pace of decline just seems to gain momentum. I really liked Garrett’s point about the obsoleteness of some material we teach: “Today’s schools are still relying on teaching ‘who, what, where, and when’ when today’s environment asks students to know ‘how’ and ‘why.’ All of the other information exists at one’s fingertips with Google.”

That way of teaching to yesterday’s specifications reminds me of the old adage: “If you always do what you’ve always done, then you’ll always get what you’ve always gotten.” That wouldn’t be so bad if what we needed didn’t change and grow exponentially every year.

Though Garrett’s book doesn’t present answers to the myriad questions it asks, hopefully it will start a conversation around the issues and we can begin to work (or wiki) them out right after The First Campaign is decided.

Should I keep blogging after Garrett stops counting?

Okay, so it’s the end of the semester, and like Jennyfromthefarm, I’m trying to decide whether or not I should continue to blog. Jenny’s main point is that it’s easy to maintain a blog when the topic for each post is dictated to you and the content is going to be graded. I share her view, and wonder what I would blog about in the absence of preselected content.

Furthermore, I enjoy a somewhat captive audience for my blog right now. I have selfishly enjoyed watching my visitor number grow each day, but if Garrett weren’t driving traffic to my site, what would? I’m not sure I would enjoy the blogosphere so much if I ended up feeling like I felt on the first day (like I was standing in a big empty auditorium with no one around to hear my voice).

Drawing readers has as much to do with who I am and how I communicate my points as it does with what topics I cover. Blogging isn’t just about what I write about. It’s also not just about who I am. Blogging — and doing it well enough to attract an audience — has to be a combination of both. The determining factor is what the blogger himself, or in this case herself, brings to the table in relation to the topic.

With that in mind, I’ve considered blogging about military communications, the world of subprime mortgages, funny things that nephews say, and different cultures in this country. I’m not an expert in any of these areas. But is being curious about them and having a tiny bit of experience with them enough to propel my blog to readable status? And if not, do I really need to have readers to be satisfied by blogging?

I’m really excited to take what I’ve learned in this class and find ways to help the Navy use new media, but do I have what it takes to keep doing it for myself?

If anybody wants to weigh in, I’d love to hear what you are thinking about the prospect of maintaining your blog after April 24.

The Dean campaign: when social media works

Learning about the Dean campaign was fascinating. Before we delved into this for our Social Media class, I knew almost nothing about Howard Dean and his brand of politics. And truthfully, what I learned from looking at his campaign was far less about him — or even politics for that matter — and more about the practical applications of social media.

As we looked at pictures of Dean at some of the Meet Ups, I noticed he wore a white shirt with a tie tied tightly — very traditional politics. But there was a twist: he had his shirt sleeves rolled up to his elbows, which was clearly an effort to meet his new audience where they were.

You might be wondering why this ridiculously insignificant observation even warrants space on my blog, but that variant from the norm made me start wondering about Howard Dean’s real personality and how well suited it was for an online (read: young, energetic, nontraditional) campaign.

In actuality, Dean would have preferred a much more formal contest, but in the beginning, he didn’t have the resources to fight a traditional political battle. Thus, Joe Trippi and the rest of Dean’s campaign staff used social media tools to put the traditional politician on the map.

Did that mean his brand of politics was compromised to some extent? Did he lose control of the direction of his campaign when he became beholden to his unchosen online audience? Do social media tools leave you at the mercy of those to whom they allow you to communicate?

The answer is yes, and Dean’s rolled up sleeves are a tangible sign of that.

All semester I’ve grappled with the question of how social media tools fit into the corporate communications mix. Dean’s campaign shows how useful the tools can be, but it also highlights an important point. Their use should be strategic. Communicators should never use them just for their gee-whiz factor. The tools should create solutions to problems (not enough resources to compete head to head) or provide unique opportunities (opening conversation about the candidate/product/service/cause to new groups).