Update to Mod 4 remaining posts

I had included this as a comment to the original post, but thought that it might be overlooked so I have included it here as a post in its own right.

I have been trying to undertake some reflection on my posts and will use this comment as the tool to record my reflection.

In this post I recorded my thoughts of the Marta Kagan slideshare presentation. I mentioned that I would use it as a reference for the last assignment so I took another look at it to see if it still had the same impact. I still think it is a good presentation as Kagan reinforces the points she wants to make with quite a few eye catching statistics and examples of the benefits. One slide that caught my attention this time was number 95 which is a rule that says engage. I have found through this course that I have increased my level of engagement in social networking and that in doing so people are increasing their engagement with me. You really need to post content and get involved in discussions in order to come up on people’s radars. I try and maintain engagement across a number of tools that I use which takes a bit of time. I have seen reference to the fact that the only cost to getting involved in social networking is the time but I wonder if people have an idea of how much time needs to be invested if you are going to put a decent amount of content onto blogs, Facebook, Twitter etc.

I am finding that I am becoming a bit more selective on what I post where. The reason for this is that each tool I use is geared towards a different purpose. For instance, I post a few pictures on Pinterest. Pinterest has boards where I pin content of a specific nature. This makes it easy for people to search for content on a specific topic. People who like my pictures can then pin it onto their boards and share the images around. I have increased my use of Twitter during this course. I mainly retweet others interesting tweets or links to blogs. Just recently I loaded Flipboard onto my smartphone and have been playing around with that. I have tended to tweet a few of the tech articles that I think might be relevant to the people I follow. I have found that in doing so I have picked up a few more followers. I think this has occurred because I am adding new content rather than retweeting content that is already being tweeted by the group. What this appears to highlight is that with Twitter it is about finding a niche area and providing content related to that. This will set you up as someone with credibility that others can look to for information. I see this with the people I follow who add their particular take on subjects which makes them the experts. It is about building trust as a reputable source. This is interesting because I am not sure how many people stop to check many of the stats that are included in these blogs that are deemed to be authoritative.

While being able to play with a number of tools is okay in my personal life, I don’t have the time to be spread as widely in the workplace. I need to be far more selective in what I use and make sure that is getting to as many of the target audience as possible. There does need to be some way to stay abreast of the changes that occur in the social networking and media landscape so that we are not left behind trying to play catch up. At this stage my personal use is a bit of a laboratory for the workplace in that I keep myself informed of what is happening by being involved. There needs to be something in our social communications plan with respect to how we are going to monitor change in the area of social communications and what criteria will determine if we implement a new tool or not. One idea is to draw on the experience of those who are actively using tools as a knowledge pool to draw on their experiences. By using existing networks I could call for people to post about their experiences with other tools. This is drawing on one of the strengths of Web 2.0 which is harnessing the collective intelligence of users.

Advertisements

~ by dassocmed on September 18, 2012.

4 Responses to “Update to Mod 4 remaining posts”

  1. It seems like ages since I first saw this post Dave and wanted to chat with you about it, and yet it is only two days. Perhaps it is because I’ve also wanted to comment on your other posts and have been so busy for so long and had to restrain myself.

    It is great to read your reflections on achieving engagement and the time cost and choices.

    I did not have such a positive impression of that slideshare. It was long and contained nothing new – lots of flashy pictures and statistics – but it gave me no reason to overcome my lifelong disdain for hyped numbers. I kept asking “so what” – eg: a popular basketballer has a lot of followers quickly – yeah: duh a lot of people go gahgah over sports people – this is not new knowledge. I remember my Grade 6 teacher trying to wise students up to advertising strategies based on “everyone else is…” “sexy people…” “smart people…” etc.

    Even, eventually, the ‘what to do’ did not say anything new. Not new, possibly true, but not presented with any critical analysis. For thirty years I have heard the same advice (in similar words) for achieving influence of one sort or another (making friends, selling stuff, winning a debate): Listen, engage, be real, be respectful, have fun. And the material I read twenty years ago cited philosophers of hundreds of years ago.

    To me the most significant slide is the one quoting Clay Shirky about social media being a blend of public and personal media. And even that I do not see as new because I saw it happening with the very first personal websites.

    It is exciting to read your discoveries about being heard and credible through sharing good content and having to choose your tools carefully for the audience and to manage your time. Only, (and oops, I am afraid I am going to be raining on the parade) are they not all timeless messages (ie not unique to social media)?

    When I read “I am not sure how many people stop to check many of the stats that are included in these blogs that are deemed to be authoritative” – I wanted to make a rowsing cheer. (I think: very very few). I began looking at one of the data sources the ABS cites for stats on internet usage – and was not impressed.

  2. Hi Mica. I appreciate the fact that you take time to comment on the posts.

    I agree with you about the fact that Kagan,s slideshare presentation did not have anything new to say. That seems to be a problem with a lot of posts I read about social networking in that it regurgitates the same information. You have reminded me I have to find a blog I came across which seemed to have a bit more critical analysis.

    With respect to your comment about how I share information on the work social network, you are quite correct in the fact that the content is not unique to social media. The comment was more about how we are ‘playing the game’ according to some of the reading I had done on what makes you a good social networker. My sense is that social networking and media has created a new industry and within this there are a number of rules created by those who work in the industry about what makes good content, a good blog post etc. Whether or not these rules are tested and valid is another matter altogether. No wonder a lot of the material on social networking comes from those who have worked in marketing!

  3. Hey Dave, I love having conversations with you 🙂

    I didn’t mean that your content might not be unique to social media, but that the *importance* of good content in achieving credibility and an audience applies equally to face-to-face; print; televised sharers.

    It is exciting when we get retweeted or followed, isn’t it? I used to find it exciting when I observed how many people found my blog posts (a few years back when I blogged about citing electronic sources) but I don’t think any of that led to subscribers.

    One of the “rules” that I have seen and dispute is that content should be frequent – wiser heads moderate that to say it should be “regular”; although I am not sure that is true either. When I think about my RSS feeds and Twitter stream – I tend usually to follow someone who has given great content, but if they post or tweet too often I un-follow. I will also unfollow less frequent but “regular” content if it is not often enough interesting. And that too is no different to face to face, print or television: I avoid people who only appear to be able to talk about themselves or trivia; I do not subscribe to material that comes to me faster than I can read it (newspapers); and I do not watch daily television shows.

    I look forward to hearing which blog you found contained more critical analysis. There are a few around 🙂

  4. […] not give much thought as to how the tool could best be used. In my post of September 18 entitled ‘Update to Mod 4 remaining posts’ I reflected on how my use of social networking tools has changed over the duration of the […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: