Dialog or Conflict: Social Media and the Next Century

No one argues much today that the invention of the printing press was a wonderful thing for humanity. We could suddenly share ideas which turned into better human rights, forms of democracy and a more civil society. Eventually. Then along came the telephone and radio. A new revolution. What followed was one of the bloodiest centuries globally. Today, conflict is declining all over the world…although somedays that may seem a bit unreal.

Use of the Internet and other “Liberation Technologies” such as social media, mobile phones and such, have aided the tranisition of ideas and opinions into political action. Both positive and negative. The Orange Revolution of the Ukraine used SMS messaging via mobiles to organize. Two years later Belarus shut down the mobile networks to prevent such a revolution. The intense protests of the Iranian elections in 2009, although democracy seems to have failed so far.

The online newspaper Malaysiakini has arguably lead to increased democracy and improved human rights in Malaysia. Certainly it has tread where no other traditional newspaper can in Malaysia. China recently battled with Google and in ways, subtly continues to do so. Reports out of Pakistan indicate that Taliban leadership has “gone quiet” in Social Media channels and are resorting to human transfer of messages; although a recent Twitter battle between the State Department & a Taliban spokesperson suggests otherwise.

Personally, I rather hope that these “Liberation Technologies” such as social media tools and the devices that enable their operation, lead to greater democracy worldwide. In fragile nations however, we are increasingly seeing a fragmentation between Elites and the lower classes. Yet both are using social media services. Then we bring in the diaspora and their interconnections between the “home country” and their new “host country” and influence over foreign policies of the host country.

These interactions mean more information reaching the hands of the citizens, being shaped by citizens and communicated into the larger populace, even where Internet access is limited. That foments ideas and then change. Such change in fragile nations is rarely conducted (successful or not) without conflict. Anecdotal y, I suspect we may see less chance of global conflict than before, but an increase in more localized or regional conflict in fragile nations. It is not only Elites that are accessing these Liberation Technologies, but the common citizen. And some governments are becoming clever at using these tools to counter those who want democracy.

International relations have always been complex. With social technologies, they are going to become ever more complex. The relationship between governments, civil society, industry and global organizations is changing. Social technologies and the Internet is about human ideas, it is where ideas get developed and evolve. Now ideas and ideologies can evolve faster. Groups can form, disband and fracture faster and easier than ever before. Our research suggests the views and predictions of thinkers like George Friedman have not accounted for these Liberation Technologies – that may be their Black Swan to what does end up happening.

There is no easy answer and no clear path to the future or to what will or won’t happen. The only sure thing; social medias will result in fundamental shifts in international relations. Lets hope that dialogue reins and the values of democracy prosper.

Unions And The Double Edged Sword of Social Media

Through our research, we’ve come to find that unions are becoming increasingly active and very skilled in using social media. That’s a natural; unions are extremely good at organizing, coordinating and communicating. Three of the essential elements of social technologies. Our research shows that of the major unions, the most active and aggressive with social media is the IBEW (electricians) in the U.S. and Canada, followed by the United Auto Workers (UAW). Unions in the U.S. are more active online than Canadian or British unions, but these countries are catching up to America. Essentially, social medias were born in the USA, so that makes sense.

But there is a downside. What we’re seeing start to happen is like the disconnect in a corporation between management and employees. This disconnect is showing in unions between members and leadership. Some, it would seem, are more equal than others on the farm. The latest example is in Canada between the union representing the Air Canada flight attendants and the union leadership negotiating for them.

In a non-union corporation, employees are less “organized” in the sense a union is, so while there may be disconnect and disagreement, one rarely will see coordinated anti-management activity in social media channels. In the case of Air Canada flight attendants, they have formed their own Facebook group to gripe against union leadership. It has nearly 4,000 members out of the just over 6,000 flight attendants working for Air Canada. That is a significant statistical representation. One a leadership can’t ignore. The Air Canada pilots are in a similar group venting on issues of union management on their behalf.

While social medias can play a vital and positive role for unions to communicate their message and coordinate activities, we can see that the very same tools can be used against them. Union members implicitly understand the concept of solidarity and know how to rally in a cause. It will be a harder challenge for unions to manage this kind of social media crisis than a company dealing with some angry customers. In the case of a consumer driven social media crisis, it is about fair treatment over a wrongdoing or mistreatment. The situation also fades away fairly quickly. When it comes to unions with leadership versus members, it is about ideologies – and this is where people get passionate. This is a far more significant challenge for union leadership than a consumer issue. To the credit of the CUPE negotiators in the Air Canada flight attendant issue, they acknowledge and understand their members voice and their role as elected leaders; but realize the challenge this creates at the negotiating table.

Aside from the ideological issues, the public, government and corporate management can see a fractured organization when and if such ideologies start to clash. And that presents opportunities to those they’re negotiating with. A united front (or at least the appearance of one) is key in any type of negotiation. With news media reporting a rift in the ranks, this adds considerably more work for the representative union. One that they may not be able to contain offline.

It is an interesting paradox for unions that the very tools which fit so well with their way of operating, can cause such a challenge. From our seat on the fence, we see yet another area where social medias are impacting traditional sectors in public and private life. The one key benefit for unions over government or corporations however, is their ability to coordinate and they are generally more “in touch” with their constituencies. Exactly how these social technologies may change union culture or the concept of unions is yet to be seen. Just as with politics and business, we are still in the opening days of understanding how social media may cause significant changes.

(Photo Credit: University of Wisconsin, Madison Libraries)

What Marketers Are Missing in Social Media Analysis

Never before in the history of marketing have marketers had their toes held so close to the fire of profits by senior management. While the C-Suite may not entirely “get” social media or internet marketing, they do know that it affords the ability to collect a lot more “data” than ever before. While that’s true, the challenge is turning that data into information and that information into intelligence – it’s “intelligence” within information that we use to make decisions. But hang on…in this mad drive by marketers to validate dwindling and increasingly fractured budgets, are they missing some of the key intelligence from social media? Perhaps they’re missing the real point of engagement.

Sure, there’ve been some successful social media marketing campaigns. Note the word “campaign” here. And this is the marketing problem with social media. Marketers (driven largely by agencies) STILL see social media engagement as campaign based rather than long term. Through our extensive research, we also see that the only “long-term” engagement by most companies is customer service. And even that is a half-hearted gesture most of the time.

Values Marketers Are Missing in Social Media Analysis
Here we list a few of the valuable metrics and intelligence marketers could be pulling out of social media for their companies. While they may not seem to immediately impact the bottom-line, they can actually help in corporate strategy and long-term survival as well as new opportunities for revenues.

1. Product Feedback: Consumers leave some incredibly valuable insights into features, uses and problems with products. This information can be shared with product management and R&D teams. Try to get that information out of an online survey or focus group – just isn’t going to happen.

2. New Verticals: Some deep research and analysis may (and often has in our research) point out new vertical market opportunities that may have taken years to uncover, if at all.

3. Competitor Woes: Similarly, you can gain vital indicators of problems and challenges your competitors are having. These can be exploited through effective campaigns.

4. Seasonal Trends: Just looking at sales data doesn’t always indicate a seasonal trend. That data may show something post-event, but social media analysis can identify seasonal shifts as they’re happening or ahead of time…so maybe instead of launching your campaign in May, you start in April and get out ahead of competitors.

5. Cooperative & Partnering Opportunities: By cross-referencing your company’s products or services against a semi-competitor or complimentary business, you may find unique co-marketing opportunities. Ones that would’ve otherwise gone missing.

6. Looming Disasters: Social media channels can be your canary in a coal mine. Shifts in consumer attitudes and behaviours can indicate potential problems with your product or market. Be nice to head off a disaster and adapt ahead rather than sit in the ruins of bankruptcy in a bar.

7. Problem Areas: Sales dropping in Topeka? Spiking in Halifax? Why? You can call the sales office in the affected region if you like…you’ll get the usual ass-saving remarks, but likely not the truth. Turn to social media and you may find some answers.

These are seven of well, quite a few valuable metrics we’ve uncovered in our various research projects. Perhaps you can think of a few yourselves.

Tricky Political Tactics in Social Media

Anyone following the 2008 U.S. election knows Obama’s campaign team made very effective use of social media. From YouTube videos to appeals for small donation amounts that added up to hundreds of millions. In Canada’s 2011 election Twitter featured front and centre, not so much as a fundraising tool but as ongoing commentary. But there is a darker side to how social media is used in political campaigns. We take a quick look at some tactics we’re sure to see in the 2012 election. Some are tactics used in quasi-democratic states as well.

Sockpuppeting: In our research projects, we’ve come across this one the most. This is where an individual creates one or more sets of false identities online. These identities are then used to create negative or inflammatory commentary against an opposing political party but appear to be disconnected from a political party. Heavily used in the US, UK and Canada. Sometimes it is just an individual or organization that is aligned to an issue such as environmentalism or a union. This tactic is also known as meatpuppets and sometimes used in stealth marketing.

DeepPersona**: We’ve coined this one ourselves. This is sockpuppeting taken to the next level. One person will likely control between 2-5 personalities. Unlike sockpuppeting where the “identity” is shallow, usually just a fake name and email, in this case they may build deeper histories and profiles across multiple sites and services. These are to provide greater authenticity, although they collapse under scrutiny. In our research we often find these to be used in less democratic countries. They may also be used to influence diaspora or foreign policy in other states.

Cyber Astroturfing: Taken from the long-time practice of astroturfing where a political group rallies a large number of citizens to drive awareness around an issue, but the hiring party hides behind the scenes. In digital astroturfing, this is when the political party or special interest groups rallies others to create awareness in online channels while remaining behind the scenes with “plausible deniability.”

Cyber Provacateur: This can be a nasty thorn to a political party. Similar to the concept of agent provocateur in the real world, this type of agent urges hackers or a group of tech-savvy individuals to cause DoS (Denial of Service) or similar attacks against opponents websites or online properties. They may also foment highly aggressive activity online that is criminal in nature. Such actions are often used in nations such as Iran, Burma (Myanmar), and Ukraine etc.

Cyber Front Group: Similar to real-world front groups that act independent of the funding government, political party or agency. They are formally registered as a non-profit organization. In the US and Canada it may be a religious group or activist group that may or may not know who is providing them cash or resource support, yet they act aggressively on an issue. They target online properties (specifically in social media channels) to rally followers and create disinformation or similar.

Trolls: A well-known term. These we classify as individuals out to cause trouble because, well, they can. That’s their entertainment. They rarely if ever work for anyone but may easily become a sockpuppet without realizing it.

Cyber Quasi-State Organ (CQSO): Seen mostly in fragile, semi-democratic states where the government in power creates an arm of the government that is quasi-governmental. The aim is usually to expend a large amount of time creating pro-government content online, pushing down anti-government sentiment. Hugo Chavez has an arm of Chavistas that do this, Bashir in Sudan used an “army of bloggers” in 2011 and in Iran the Basij (a quasi-state organ) have been doing this since early 2010.

We expect such groups and tactics to grow in the coming years as Cyburbia plays an increasingly important role in the world of ideas and politics is nothing if not a lot of ideology! We have developed an algorithm that can “fingerprint” individuals who attempt to post as multiple people…not matter how much we try, a writing style is very much the same as our voice – unique. This is how we can assess our research into such uses by political groups and others.

Is Social Media a Killer of Corporate Speak?

Anyone connected with the business world has heard or read some form of “corporate speak” or “PR spin” through press releases, interview responses or even via Twitter now. I got a canned response to a “tweet” I sent a while back that was something like “there are complex realities pertaining to infrastructure investments we’re addressing” – what? Then there was the Facebook post for a company stating “while we address dynamic market shifts, we are assessing and evaluating future commitments in this sector.” Uh, right. So is dialogue in social medias going to help change how corporations communicate with consumers and the market? Perhaps is the short answer.

It’s awfully hard to create corporate speak or “spin” on Twitter. Easier in a blog or Facebook. There is a very specific purpose to Corporate Speak just as there is to Finance Speak in annual reports and quarterly results releases.

Purpose of Corporate Speak: To deflect any deeper attention by a complainer or competitor. Also to confuse a competitor as to what you’re really doing. For consumers, it is mainly to say “go away, you’re a drain on our profits and we don’t really care what you think of us.” Such a statement is usually along the lines of “thank-you for your concerns, we’ll be addressing these issues with the appropriate team members in our next meeting on this issue.” Sure they will.

Purpose of Finance Speak: Even more complicated than Corporate Speak. The language is always evolving and twisting in new turns. Financial sector language is not meant to provide clarity to the consumer, it is meant to deflect competitors and convey certain messages to certain targets. In corporate annual reports it is used when trying to gloss over the nasty stuff. For example; “we’re reassessing recent market shifts with this product line to identify new long-term possibilities for sustainable growth” – in other words “we’re screwed cause no one’s buying that product line and we have no idea why.”

But today, people are starting to call companies out, reflecting a drive by consumers and some businesses as well, to seek a more honest and grounded engagement between each other. To be genuine. People want things straight up now. Telling it like it is. Here’s an example of a blogger dissecting a corporate press release filled largely with corporate jargon. And this post about the a brand change for Wendy’s and the explanation of the meaning by the creative director.

Seth Godin is perhaps the greatest banner waver on the frustrations of corporate babble through social media channels. While there is plenty of silly content and pure entertainment in social medias, people are discussing their frustrations on corporate speak and navigating the complexities of how to engage a corporate entity – in other words, just how do you get a straight answer from a company?