atNickHodge Episode 10: Theology of the Cluetrain with Stephen Collins (@trib)

Show plan for Episode 10, 7th May 2009 #atNickHodge â€œTheology of the Cluetrain”Â

[atÂ 8:35pm] Theology of the CluetrainÂ
1. Introducing our Special Guest this evening, Stephen Collins from AcidLabs (@trib)Â
  1. (ask Stephen his background)
  2. long experience in web, html, ux, ia…
  3. which/what event put you onto cluetrain?
2. Today: #publicsphere
  1. How is the Govt going with this internet/social thing?
  2. are they doing anything at all?
    1. vs. controlled message of previous+current govt
  3. Is @piawaugh‘s addition of Senator Kate Lundy — indicates what; is it an ACT electorate thing? purely political?
  4. “aÂ brave move Minister, open government” / Yes, Minister (first episode)
3. The Cluetrain Manifesto
  1. 95 theses as a call-to-action / manifesto : business in the internet age
    1. vs.Â 95 thesesÂ of Martin Luther 1517; start of the Protestant Heritage in Europe (vs. Lollards) fighting against the power of the Holy Roman Catholic Church
  2. The manifesto was written in 1999 byÂ Rick Levine, Christopher Locke, Doc Searls, and David Weinberger.Â
    1. Pre-dates Web 1.0 (dot-com boom) Web 2.0 (R/W) and Social Media!
      1. Around David Winer, scripting.com (early blogging in 1996/7)
      2. I first met Dave in 1993.
      3. many of these, IT industry specific; aimed at Apple and Microsoft
  3. 8 “sections”
    1. Theses 1 â€“ 6: Markets are Conversations
      – mass media subverted the “village market” .. internet returns us to this concept. Information in markets drives to better stability
      Thesis 7: Hyperlinks Subvert Hierarchy
      – SM: anyone can reach out, outside PR
      Theses 8-13: Connection between the new markets and companies
      – SM: example, mini-microsoft on recent rounds
      Theses 14 â€“ 25: Organizations entering the marketplace
      – ‘voice’ is the culture, fitting in; not attempting to dominate/control
      Theses 26 – 40: Marketing & Organizational Response
      – authenticity
      Theses 41 – 52: Intranets and the impact to organization control and structure
      – fails to understand flow of responsibility; tied to risk/reward
      Theses 53 – 71: Connecting the Internet marketplace with corporate Intranets
      – voice, again in SM context
      Theses 72 – 95: New Market Expectations
      – expectation change
  4. (John C Dvorak) Is it just a Circle-jerk of Burning Man attendees
    1. and left-wing wingnuts?
  5. OK, voices: the voice of government, plainly sucks. PR speak etc. Messages in 15 seconds
  6. where does the need for transparency come from?
4. what other books/people have you read?
5. Current “marketing” oriented approach and “p0wnership” needs to be stopped!
  1. Cultural change
    “connected oriented” <———————————-> “conversation oriented”
    platform of “social media” as a replacement to “msm” (traditional media)
  2. Connection oriented is characterised by the number of people that see a viral ad; inserting this into the high end of the SM world, and watching it expand due to the network effect. Getting as many views as possible. No care as to the actual content of the conversation.
    Â
    Conversation oriented is people oriented; genuine people, conversation .. Cluetrain
    
    This has its place, but its not “social media” >> cf “Television department” in Mad Men
    Â
    I am concerned that the “digitial marketing industry” is too much on the left of the above scale as they do not understand customers or employees.Â

It is a whole-of-organisation cultural change.

The disconnect is here.
Â

It is all “vendors spruiking their wares”?Â Â Â

what is transparency? 100% transparent is impossible; where is the boundsÂ

concept of reflective transparency: transparency exists outside the organisation, whether you like it or not

how does this apply to a non-commercial organisation?

http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/05/01/1533216 Â

Sun employee documenting top 10 reasons for Sun #fail vs. SEC implications
@wacom @msretail argument vs. MS policy on blogging (vs. SM)

Fundamentalist person-oriented social media

partly due to my own success and persona, personality and cult thereof

approach to POSM within large organisations

personal brand vs. corporate brand?

finding the middle ground

[9:24pm] Ending thoughts

Here is the elevator pitch: For as long as an organisationâ€™s products and or services have existed, constituents have been talking. About the products, the price, the service they get; value, ease of dealing with you. Their personal association with the company.And these conversations are across the range from positive or negative. Traditional marketing aims and claims to penetrate the mind, and have influence over these utterances. Sales people argueÂ and negotiate around them, or to reinforce them. PR works with the influencers to influence.
Â
Citizens, constituents and customers are, or have, moved online. Their utterances, or conversations, about you are now visible to millions, if not billions. A search engine search away. We are hyperconnected and hypershare our experiences. Photos, videos or snippets of life compressed into 140 characters. Literally and Instantly. And they are permanent. And they are findable.Of course there are independent voices; voices traditionally called journalists. There are subjective voices in cacophony: SM from the organisation out. A traditional market, if you have visited one, is noisy.
Â
As a representative of your organisation, can choose to listen, or be a part of this conversation, actively choose to block it out. Ignore it. This choice is ultimately yours to make. Like all business decisions, you will need more information to make a rational choice.Â Are your constituents online? Is the effort worth the investment?Â Can you risk to your reputation by ignoring it?And here is the most frightening question of all: are they talking about you at all?

The schoolyard and tea kitchen in our officespaces are online, in the clouds of the internet.

The voices? Can you hear them?