Evolving Our Social Currency (Whether Objectionable or Not)

An interesting thing happened today on the ThinkState Facebook fan page. Manolith.com had posted a propaganda image of Barack Obama (on his birthday no less), depicting him as the Joker (Batman's nemesis) along with the label of 'socialism'. I happened to find the image via my friend Charlie Ferguson's posterous page. The image is certainly evocative, but what really struck me was the power of individual use to convey a sentiment that, regardless of its basis in fact, had a perceptible impact that transcended the words themselves.

The thought arose: if we label people - especially public figures - we should be prepared to visualize them in that context. In other words, imagery can shape semantics and can impose a cultural value system upon us, no matter how small or self-contained.

So my longtime friend and colleague, Adam Goldberg, responded: "We should also be prepared to suffer the consequences of our own labeling and lies. And if need be, own them. If slanderous propaganda, God forbid, incites some kind of vigilantism against Obama, do you think that those who disseminated those mistruths will hold themselves accountable? No way. Freedom of expression should be a two-way street."

Then he posted an augmented image of his own to the comment thread and labeled it 'racism' - the image you see above.

This through me for a loop, because now there was a clear and conflicting relationship between the words and the image. It jumped right out at me. 

Was this new augmentation suggesting that Obama represented racism, or was he the victim of it? Was it saying that he was two-faced, or the victim of party posturing?

This is just one example - where the possibilities can reach epic proportions - of how media influence and social currency can shift perceptions in an instant. Looking at this hypothetically, imagine if the images had reached a wide, long-tail net of users. Further, imagine the lengths to which people could attack and counter-attack using these productions of words and imagery. Who knows, they may by tomorrow, or sometime in the next hour. We can never underestimate a groundswell of elicit conviction and perceived moral fortitude.

Ultimately, it forces all of us to ask ourselves about the role we play in sharing the responsibility of our messages and their subsequent actions.

Going forward, what role will you play?

Crowdsoothing (Who Am I, Who Are You, Why Are We?)

I've decided after many sleepless nights, apishly grooming myself in bed while the blue glare of the television screen loops random images across my imperious face, that I am a cross between William Safire and Andy Rooney. 

Professionally, I call myself a "Digital Brand Strategist", which really means that I reposition phenomenae with what I think are somewhat interesting labels and ascribe to them what I think are fairly quirky, sometimes serious and/or humorous aspects of human behavior. Oh, and then, where appropriate, I sprinkle in a neurotic dose of technological knowledge to make things a little more compelling. In a nutshell, all this mumbo jumbo often times produces results for my clients, at which point I let out an exasporated sigh, say to myself "How the fuck did I do that?", take a day or two off, and then decide to get back on the merry-go-round for another ride.

Why do I do this? Well, I suppose I do this for a few primary reasons:

- No one really knows shit anyway, so why not try to make sense of all this shit? The operative word here is "try".

- Human behavior never ceases to amaze, especially when there's technology behind it. Automate us monkeys. Turn us into robots with feelings. Make that brand talk back to me (or dirty to me). Simply fascinating stuff.

- One of these days (hopefully before a nuclear holocaust), we're all going to call each other's bluff and go back to wearing pelts anyway, wielding clubs over our shoulders. At this point, I'll be out of a job and all the crazy platforms I've helped build will be obsolete. And hopefully I'll still be with my wife-to-be... if she hasn't been dragged into a cave by some other dude.

So what does this all mean?

It means that it's time we formally made a return to the truth. It's happening anyway, albeit at a clip that tends to blindside us. All the hype around digital next, and behavioral that, and cloud thinking over there is a train wreck of assumption and often surprising pieces of the obvious. But what we don't know how to do is obviate the need for these obsessions. 

Welcome to "Crowdsoothing", a way of calling into question, and answering, the who am I, who are you, why are we of our media-consuming existence. Let's face it: we are a culture saddled by fear, so we need a little consoling, a little soothing in our consumption. The experience is sorta like the movie studio exec in Barton Fink - I'd like some milk with my whiskey, please.

Crowdsourcing, a phenomenon brilliantly identified and formalized by Jeff Howe (yes, we follow each other on Twitter, thank you very much...), talks about how virtual communities have formed out of shared interest. As remarkable and inspirational as this groundswell is, an interesting thing often arises when we actually witness or participate in the wisdom of crowds, a "yang" if you will: we pull back or shut down altogether. 

Gary King, a social scientist and statician at Harvard University (yes, we also follow each other on Twitter, thank you very much) talks about unifying statistical analysis, vetting out partisan symmetry and establishing conflict causality in his white papers as things that are ultimately products of human behavior that are largely predetermined and heightened by an inherent need for rational and practical explanation. A common theme throughout (excuse my layman's interpretation) is the idea that our decisions, particularly within groups, are predicated on individual identities that shift when we are observed or take part in observation.

So let's apply this to social media. In a recent data-point analysis conducted by HubSpot on the usage of Twitter, it was discovered that only 24% of people actually put a bio description on their page, down from 80% a year ago. It was also discovered that...

79.79% failed to provide a homepage URL

68.68% have not specified a location

55.50% are not following anyone

54.88% have never tweeted

52.71% have no followers

This is simply alarming. All this shared interest and potential currency, yet there is a blatant lack of commitment to any sort of formal relationship with the crowd. Further, the ambiguity new microbloggers employ suggests that they want to be a part of the conversation, but fear they will somehow not be accepted. 

Now let's come full circle. The reason why I shared with you a truthful and self-deprecating account of who I am at the top of the post was to illustrate a point: aside from exchanging information and experiences, it is imperative that we offer up pieces of ourselves. Technologies themselves don't cause us to become disconnected or disenfranchised, it is our perception of who we are and why we are in relation to those technologies that does.

So let's ask the questions and soothe the mode of consumption so that we can create a background of relatedness:

Who Am I? The discourse or continued action of my role as it pertains to you, my functions, my role, my importance and relevance to you.

Who Are You? The discourse or continued action of your role as it pertains to me, to others, those functions, newly discovered roles and the importance of spreading commonality as well as trust in the form of currency.

Why Are We? The discourse and continued action of our collective conscience; desired needs, wants and passions, observations sourced through shared wisdom, and personalized or internalized as to cyclically affect individual thought and/or action.

If we now apply these queries to a profile, it might look something like this: 

Name John Doe

Location Somewhere in Particular

Web http://www.realurl.orpersonalurl.com

Bio Professional Description, colorful character description, several descriptors evoking a sense of personality and interest to engage with others, along with a higher purpose proposition.

And if we summarize what this person's posts might look like or do, they would:

- Share interesting information endemic to a trade

- Share interesting experiences endemic to local culture

- Generate insights about the world at large

- Offer guidance in the explanation or use of relevant technology

- Show humility, not hubris, in these observations

- Be aspirational in nature

- Invite people, even those with very different backgrounds, into the conversation

Crowdsoothing is mere theory, but can very easily be indoctrinated into the daily flow of our digital, or even real-world, interaction. We have something special - many things that are special - within our new channels of communication. Let's not fuck it up by allowing history to constantly repeat itself... or at least dictate how we think or feel.

Thin-Slicing Our Communication Streams (Being Personable)

95% of the web is hidden from us. It is a distribution and communication pipeline that, in the simplest of terms, cannot possibly reveal itself visually to all people, in all places and at all times, although ironically, it still exists within this construct.  But what if we could do our best to represent ourselves as brands in the best and most dynamic of ways? Further, what if we could connect via the grey spaces in between? The semantic part of the web is creating what Malcolm Gladwell calls the “adaptive unconscious”; this is a form of rapid cognition in which user-generated media (blog content, video content, podcasts, etc.) form patches of streaming thought that allow us to connect on a higher and more focused level. It is important, therefore, that we are heard, even if we can’t always be seen.

Thin-slicing, as Gladwell describes, is the process by which we can make quick, informed decisions. If we go step further, we can postulate that social media communication thin-slices tribal interaction, and marries brevity and poignancy in our active dialogues with each other. Being personable, therefore, allows us the chance to tap into our collective conscience so that our purchase decisions represent a value system that we all share. Further, those in hiding – people who exist within the grey spaces of the web and are not visible – have a new opportunity to participate and become influencers.

It may sound lofty, but a simple landing page on your website can serve as the gateway for one of the most important and prolific conversations you can have with potential advocates of your brand. And it all happens through the thin-slicing, or optimization, of your brand communication streams.

Every thought we convey in writing or through multimedia is a means of dynamic self-expression. Being personable is all about articulating our emotional touch-points beyond words and pictures and through utility. Utility allows each one of us to be relevant to others who want to be a part of or are already a part of the conversation. In other words, our conversation.

What brings about our conversation is essentially what Louis Cheskin describes as “sensation transference”. This means that our words represent very acute and powerful emotions that not only describe our state of being, but the desire to relate with others. Therefore, it is critical that we choose our words wisely when we represent ourselves to others, and of course this translates to the various forms of media we choose to deliver these modes of self-expression.

The currency we create in the form of words, pictures, videos or even gadgets reflect a part of ourselves that is indelible. If we consider the social web as its own grid or matrix, we become lifestreams that connect with a build new social graphs. In essence, we become an active and influential part of the world at large. Further, the connections we make are predicated on a foundation of common interest, making our dialogues transparent and authentic.

ChiRunning Across the Media Landscape

In thinking about the notion of transmedia planning (engagement marketing) and the thoughtful expositions drawn out in Henry Jenkins' book, Convergence Culture, it struck me that the delicate practice of developing sound brand strategy and successful tactics is sort of like running through a marshland. Danny Dreyer's ChiRunning concept seems to be an interesting analogy/discipline for how we can navigate the wild and wooly landscape and align consumers with touch-points that keep them in safe harbor from the pratfalls of technology inhibition or "message envy". Let's explore.

There are four primary tenets to ChiRunning:

- Run injury free

- Increase efficiency with a mid-foot strike

- Increase your speed while reducing the effort

- Finish a pain-free marathon and look forward to running again

So, starting with the first tenet, running injury free, let's take this to mean that we can remove or reduce any transgressions relating to past brand experiences, i.e. "brand baggage". This is the first real thrust into reputation management. With a new campaign or open-ended initiative, we have an opportunity to wipe the slate clean and establish new parameters for conversational development, primarily through full disclosure and transparency. Further, by allowing consumers to become stakeholders, a weight is lifted in having to prescribe messaging or push sales. A new story is about to unfold, and it evolves through channels that are organic to idea- and experience-sharing, off- or online.

Now we've re-entered the landscape, and in increasing efficiency with a mid-foot strike, we are effectively riding the wave of mid-tail content and respective utilities that are on offer for these consumer advocates. Text, video, photos and other forms of social currency are gladly created and bartered, and the brand is providing tools to enable these experiences. The groundswell surges. Opinions take shape. In some cases, new product ideas are being developed. Most importantly, brand advocates are creating communities that begin to dictate the ebb-and-flow of branded conversation, and the content being created in and around that conversation hits specific focal points within the tail that raise the bar on quality.

At this next stage, we're increasing the speed at which these dialogues are being had and reducing the effort in guiding them. The relationship with the brand is becoming intimate. Social rules have been implemented. Crowdsourcing generates new insights, yet keeps the rules in check, allowing the brand to mature at a steady pace. Most remarkable, the brand, in taking on this new life and perspective, is responsible for an invisible parallel that puts people who share common interests in line with one another. The balance is undeniable.

Finally, we find ourselves, as brand stewards, running a pain-free marathon, exploring different media avenues, and protected by enough brand equity to be able to experiment without great risk. We can stage that event, Tweet-Up or conference podcast, or form that Ning group; if nothing else, we can see where we stand within specific environments. Our humility and transparency keeps us alive and well. And we look further to the road ahead...we look forward to running again.

Having made the traverse, we can now sit back, reflect and plan the next adventure, knowing that we may not necessarily be able to predict outcomes, but that we can adapt to them and shift our perception within the landscape at any time, and at any given place.

 

Video Microblogging: Social Currency of Our Immediate Future?

A colleague of mine apprised me of an app called BubbleTweet, which allows you to create and post a video on your Twitter page, the idea being that you can make a personalized introduction to fellow Tweeters. I'm actually going to be creating my video this weekend, and it got me thinking about the possibilities.

There's been a lot of debate within the ad community about the effect that microblogging tools like Twitter will have on brand marketing -  pundits on both sides have very valid things to say. The folks at BubbleTweet have a disclaimer that basically says that the videos uploaded onto the app should not be used for "commercial use", which is an interesting statement when you consider that nowadays, there are a few ways to slice that orange. To boot, when you look at the videos from the BubbleTweeter community, you notice that many of them are used to promote articles or books they've written, as well as events and other TweetUps. 

So, what does this mean for the immediate future? Probably a few different things.

- Brand marketers who have Twitter pages will have a field day introducing new product launches or releases; the content doesn't have to be "commercial", it can come directly from an "ambassador".

- Brand advocates (or detractors) can now illustrate their affinities for a brand or product, utilizing creative ways to show placement, i.e. real world experiences.

- The viral aspects are potentially incredible; if you can integrate players like YouTube or Vimeo, think about all the ways you can optimize and syndicate that content through search, as well as provide access to fields of other relevant content.

- Messaging takes on a whole new perspective; it is likely going to be more didactic in the sense that brands can then instruct people on the uses of product or services, and then elicit the same type of video responses in their consumer feedback loops.

- Video content itself will embrace the newer, more experimental "shorter burst" medium, in which :05 second or less "interval" spots will be used to build longer storylines (think of :30 theater on TiVo - BBDO's invention a couple of years back).

I could go on and on...this is sure to shake things up. I'd love to hear what other folks think about this.