Grounded In Reality

I had the opportunity to attend a discussion this week about the effects of social media on the political and cause landscape. Jeff Berman, SVP of Public Affairs for MySpace, led the session and talked about the evolution of social networks as mobilization platforms.

I haven’t kept up with Myspace lately, so I was pleased to see that the site is doing more than being hacked. Myspace Impact, the site’s hub for social and civic engagement, is empowering users to locate volunteer opportunities, contribute to charities, and register to vote. Its coolest offering by far is the “Presidential Dialogue Series” where users can engage with candidates in real-time via live webcast and Myspace IM. They just announced the next series event featuring Senator John McCain. On December 3rd, the event will be streamed live on Myspace.com and simulcast on MTV and Chooseorlose.com.

This live interaction is taking YouTube’s video Q&A format to the next level. It’s also feeding Gen Y’s desire for open access and personalized experiences. Jeff shared some interesting stats that speak to Gen Y’s strong sense of civic duty:

-61% of 25 year olds feel personally responsible for making a difference in the world
-78% believe companies have the responsibility to join them in that effort
-Price being equal, 89% are likely to switch brand allegiance based on commitment to shared causes

Compared to average internet users, Myspace users are:

-Twice as likely to interact with a public official/candidate
-45% more likely to research politics and campaign information
-59% more likely to view online videos
[Cone/AMP Research: Oct 2006]

These stats aren’t surprising. What remains to be seen is how this surge of online rallying will impact voter turnout.

In the fall of 2003, a group of mostly-young Democrats became a part of American political history and legends of web folklore. They proved for the first time that web-based, user-driven media could create a political campaign. Through one of the first social networking websites, meetup.com, they rallied support for a little known governor from Vermont named Howard Dean.

They became known as the Deaniacs, and through the early stages of the 2004 US Presidential election, they proved that the web is not only a legitimate part of running a political campaign – they made it a necessity. They brought grassroots organizing, fundraising and blogging to the process. They used the web for engaging two way communication and creating online communities, and, in turn, made their candidate a contender.

And so when the countdown to the Danish national elections, which will be held November 13, began last month, my colleague Kristian Levring Madsen and I went on the lookout for the new “Danish” Deaniacs. We’ve spent time searching every corner of the .dk domain during this election for some sign of the next big thing in political communication on the web. The fact that political TV ads are prohibited here in Denmark, and that this is the first election since social networking exploded, and that this election is placed as a kind of opening act for the US Elections next year – all really fuelled our hopes.

(more…)

I recently met with Matthew Holt to discuss his The Healthcare Blog, Health 2.0 conference and now The Health 2.0 blog. We talked about agencies constantly contacting him to pitch their clients so I thought I’d give him a chance to pitch his upcoming Health 2.0 conference.

Video below.

A new user group on Wikipedia called the “Companies WikiProject” is aiming to improve the quality of entries about corporations.

Wikipedia’s freeform collaborative nature has, understandably, created gaps in the site’s coverage of certain subjects. This becomes obvious after reading entries about notable companies. Issues like executive scandals, product recalls, and legal battles often take center stage. A clear anti-corporate bias can be seen in many entries.

To fix this, the group is using guidelines for bringing company-specific pages up to par. Entries about Fortune 500 companies are first on the task force’s priority list.

Although this project is just getting off the ground, it’s promising news for executives who feel their company’s Wikipedia entry deserves a second look. Since individuals are prohibited from creating or editing topics that they are affiliated with, the challenge of cleaning up content lies with Wikipedians.

Obviously, the goal of this project isn’t to turn company entries into sparkly-perfect brochures. The good, bad, and ugly will still remain. It’s all about providing balance and prioritizing the facts. It will be interesting to see if this project takes off.