Here in the freeRADlab we have been discussing the idea of Digital Diplomacy since late 1998. We believed then that the Internet was the great enabler by providing the common person with access and a voice to "millions" of actors. We also knew that the idea then was to achieve "views" as part of any Web strategy. We chose to use the already coined term - "user" or "actor" instead. (It did not fail to register that the only other group that falls under the category "user" was Drug User). We associated "addiction" and "repetition" to this person(s) or group and determined that info driven process could deliver "needs".
We applied interaction in as many ways as possible to produce "sticky" "addictive""integrating" "immersive" results. We were provided with:
1. These results allowed for more user time in our (work) sphere of influence (Pre-Information ECO-System).
2. This provided us with a feedback loop that fueled our way forward. People (want) wanted more.
notes:
We first niched down and targeted communities based on defined make-ups and strategies that focused on quick wins. Who do we think wants what we have?
We wanted to build momentum. Sometimes we supposed - other times we asked questions - many times we lurked.
As an end game, we always identified impact as an essential part of the decision making process
---------
Ongoing ...
Most of the time, the project defined a type of user it needed. They just needed to be able to find what we had.
In 1996 while working for cable company Comcast online, a job I was later to loose because of an inability to handle SPAM assaults, the online group was tasked to provide a "web browser" that would reflect the online presence of the new Broadband offering. At this time, Comcast could count maybe 12,000 subscribers. The idea was to harness the content, frame it for ease of use, and act as a "portal" to all that you needed. The key was to drop the Netscape interface and make the "chrome" work as a tool. We were working with Excite@Home. At this stage it was as much a technical project as it was a content based solution.
ref:
----------------------------------------------------------
http://techpresident.com/blog-entry/clinton-calls-barnard-grads-engage-digital-diplomacy
Showing posts with label TechHeadz. Show all posts
Showing posts with label TechHeadz. Show all posts
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Monday, February 9, 2009
Jeremiah Owyang: web-strategist blog spot.
While looking for tech spots that focus on SN I came across Jeremiah Owyang
in the SF Bay Area. Owyang is a Sr Analyst at Forrester Research on Social Computing. These web strategy reviews and blogs are excellent reading and will serve you well in helping establish a SN strategy. Check out the posting of reports that obviously come from actual research, so it's possible that you are getting nuggets of information that might otherwise cost thousands of dollars. As well, apparently when Jeremiah contacts people for lunch, they call back. 'nuff said.
http://Twitter.com/jowyang
http://www.web-strategist.com/blog/
ongoing.
in the SF Bay Area. Owyang is a Sr Analyst at Forrester Research on Social Computing. These web strategy reviews and blogs are excellent reading and will serve you well in helping establish a SN strategy. Check out the posting of reports that obviously come from actual research, so it's possible that you are getting nuggets of information that might otherwise cost thousands of dollars. As well, apparently when Jeremiah contacts people for lunch, they call back. 'nuff said.
http://Twitter.com/jowyang
http://www.web-strategist.com/blog/
ongoing.
Saturday, February 7, 2009
The Obama Database ... Who owns the data? (draft)
blogging:
draft v02
-Blogging on the Barrack Obama Campaign 2008 Database.
Return for ongoing updates or subscribe to our feed. Thank you.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The massive "opt-in" database launched in early 2007 by Joe Rospars (New Media Director) and the Obama team had provided the Obama '08 campaign a unique opportunity (but not a unique idea) to develop and interact with a rapid (post early adapter) following. These citizens provided an unprecedented amount of personal information while volunteering and contributing funds via Facebook, YouTube (via Obama’s own “channel”), IM, and other “real time” digital interfaces. Viral political campaigning had taken hold for good in this time frame changing the political landscape once and for all, forever. But we knew that already!
Since the Obama campaign opted out of taking matching funds and essentially had not used the DNC apparatus to run its campaign, BarackObama.com took what many (drDigipol, CAP, Politico, Salon, Media Bureau, and many others) already knew was going to happen – a virtual candidate that owes nothing to (but is more than happy to use) old media and the old political guard while being able to take over their own destiny via an online centric advocacy campaign.
It had finally become mainstream that (starting at the RNC’s Digital Alley at the 2000 Republican Convention in Philadelphia and followed at the DNC in Los Angeles) online advocacy and activity can translate to offline, on-the-ground results. This was done not just by connecting via the Internet but allowing the user to be enabled and featured. This is contrary to all past campaigns that spent so much time and money "controlling" the message as well as the medium. With the verticalization of (the web) Social Networks such as YouTube, MySpace, and Facebook, and IM as a new strategic Real Time activator/enabler, Obama's New Media team established a permanent platform through which people could identify with (they were already “adapted” users) and use themselves as “activists.” In a rudimentary way, citizens were now part of the campaign, or so they thought. The goal was to quickly activate citizens in the following ways:
1. Ensure that all people would be accessible via a "Mobile" interface and therefore, in touch, at all times, anywhere.
2. Allow and enable for the creation of "Niche Campaigning" via use generated posting of Web Campaign based Videos.
3. Establish Microtargeting scenerios and deliver "themes" and "candidate produced" video and txt interaction directly to people who want it 24/7.
4. Utilize an already existing "Smart" user base generated on Social Networks and the skills they (users / Citizens) have acquired.
5. Buy time on networks that include (niche programming) Cable shows via country wide local programming and reinforce via txt and local “meetup” style home “events.”.
6. Openly engage the Blogosphere instead of shunning them (and in turn establishing counter control problems that could go viral) and interacting as a partner, contrary to your opponents, while offering a “possible” voice in policy and –e-government.
7. Purchase and produce Rich Media Online Ads in content rich niche markets to as to stay “interactive” with Citizen users.
8. Speak directly to niche audiences in the manner in which they are accustomed (language and content style are customized based on hyper market analysis).
9. Provide a central repository (portal) to all that is Barack Obama with http://barackobama.com that enables citizen / users to:
1. Find and take part in “local” events and groups
2. Be enabled to contact undecided voters within your demographic
3. Be heard.
So with the above, we now have a tightly controlled but an apparently loosely based, group strategy to engage and enable the Digital (2.0) Citizen .
So when the citizen / user signed up and provided the Obama campaign their personal information, did they believe that they were providing the Campaign or the DNC such personal information? We think, clearly, people volunteered their information because they believed that it would be used by the Obama campaign, not the DNC or any other entity (there was no disclaimer to state this would be the case – or was there?) Where will this information go and will citizens who signed up be asked if their information can be used for "party" happenings?
Tactics to generate such information were personal and widespread. For example, “… as the primaries and caucuses neared, what [Steve] Goodstein calls "a big experiment" started paying off. One Sunday afternoon in early December, minutes before Oprah Winfrey and Obama addressed about 29,000 people at a rally in Columbia, S.C., Jeremy Bird, Obama's state field director, asked the crowd to take out their cellphones and text "SC" to 62262, Obama's short code. The code spells "Obama" on phones.” This was done repeatedly through out the campaign generating “millions” of phone numbers and other personal info.
So, who owns the data?
Well, since it is now housed at the DNC, clearly the DNC.
Ref:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29069515/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/19/AR2008081903186_pf.html/
http://www.newpolitics.nethttp://wizbangblue.com/2008/04/29/obamas-database-a-treasure-trove-of-riches.php
draft v02
-Blogging on the Barrack Obama Campaign 2008 Database.
Return for ongoing updates or subscribe to our feed. Thank you.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The massive "opt-in" database launched in early 2007 by Joe Rospars (New Media Director) and the Obama team had provided the Obama '08 campaign a unique opportunity (but not a unique idea) to develop and interact with a rapid (post early adapter) following. These citizens provided an unprecedented amount of personal information while volunteering and contributing funds via Facebook, YouTube (via Obama’s own “channel”), IM, and other “real time” digital interfaces. Viral political campaigning had taken hold for good in this time frame changing the political landscape once and for all, forever. But we knew that already!
Since the Obama campaign opted out of taking matching funds and essentially had not used the DNC apparatus to run its campaign, BarackObama.com took what many (drDigipol, CAP, Politico, Salon, Media Bureau, and many others) already knew was going to happen – a virtual candidate that owes nothing to (but is more than happy to use) old media and the old political guard while being able to take over their own destiny via an online centric advocacy campaign.
It had finally become mainstream that (starting at the RNC’s Digital Alley at the 2000 Republican Convention in Philadelphia and followed at the DNC in Los Angeles) online advocacy and activity can translate to offline, on-the-ground results. This was done not just by connecting via the Internet but allowing the user to be enabled and featured. This is contrary to all past campaigns that spent so much time and money "controlling" the message as well as the medium. With the verticalization of (the web) Social Networks such as YouTube, MySpace, and Facebook, and IM as a new strategic Real Time activator/enabler, Obama's New Media team established a permanent platform through which people could identify with (they were already “adapted” users) and use themselves as “activists.” In a rudimentary way, citizens were now part of the campaign, or so they thought. The goal was to quickly activate citizens in the following ways:
1. Ensure that all people would be accessible via a "Mobile" interface and therefore, in touch, at all times, anywhere.
2. Allow and enable for the creation of "Niche Campaigning" via use generated posting of Web Campaign based Videos.
3. Establish Microtargeting scenerios and deliver "themes" and "candidate produced" video and txt interaction directly to people who want it 24/7.
4. Utilize an already existing "Smart" user base generated on Social Networks and the skills they (users / Citizens) have acquired.
5. Buy time on networks that include (niche programming) Cable shows via country wide local programming and reinforce via txt and local “meetup” style home “events.”.
6. Openly engage the Blogosphere instead of shunning them (and in turn establishing counter control problems that could go viral) and interacting as a partner, contrary to your opponents, while offering a “possible” voice in policy and –e-government.
7. Purchase and produce Rich Media Online Ads in content rich niche markets to as to stay “interactive” with Citizen users.
8. Speak directly to niche audiences in the manner in which they are accustomed (language and content style are customized based on hyper market analysis).
9. Provide a central repository (portal) to all that is Barack Obama with http://barackobama.com that enables citizen / users to:
1. Find and take part in “local” events and groups
2. Be enabled to contact undecided voters within your demographic
3. Be heard.
So with the above, we now have a tightly controlled but an apparently loosely based, group strategy to engage and enable the Digital (2.0) Citizen .
So when the citizen / user signed up and provided the Obama campaign their personal information, did they believe that they were providing the Campaign or the DNC such personal information? We think, clearly, people volunteered their information because they believed that it would be used by the Obama campaign, not the DNC or any other entity (there was no disclaimer to state this would be the case – or was there?) Where will this information go and will citizens who signed up be asked if their information can be used for "party" happenings?
Tactics to generate such information were personal and widespread. For example, “… as the primaries and caucuses neared, what [Steve] Goodstein calls "a big experiment" started paying off. One Sunday afternoon in early December, minutes before Oprah Winfrey and Obama addressed about 29,000 people at a rally in Columbia, S.C., Jeremy Bird, Obama's state field director, asked the crowd to take out their cellphones and text "SC" to 62262, Obama's short code. The code spells "Obama" on phones.” This was done repeatedly through out the campaign generating “millions” of phone numbers and other personal info.
So, who owns the data?
Well, since it is now housed at the DNC, clearly the DNC.
Ref:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29069515/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/19/AR2008081903186_pf.html/
http://www.newpolitics.nethttp://wizbangblue.com/2008/04/29/obamas-database-a-treasure-trove-of-riches.php
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Creating new life forms - Last post in 2008.
We were just discussing the article by Live Science Editorial Director,
Robert Roy Britt, entitled Fear: Hobbyists Will Create New Life Forms.
We have been thinking about this for some time and have wondered when this dicussion would go mainsteam. With the mushrooming of nanotechnology and biotechnology, it can only be alluring to the garage set (people who like to experiment off the radar)to try new things ala Brave New World. Now we have a name for this: Biohacking.
Here's alink to the article,
http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/081228-create-life.html
Thanks to Robert Roy Britt.
See you in 09... We have lots planned.
- TechHeadz '08
Robert Roy Britt, entitled Fear: Hobbyists Will Create New Life Forms.
We have been thinking about this for some time and have wondered when this dicussion would go mainsteam. With the mushrooming of nanotechnology and biotechnology, it can only be alluring to the garage set (people who like to experiment off the radar)to try new things ala Brave New World. Now we have a name for this: Biohacking.
Here's alink to the article,
http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/081228-create-life.html
Thanks to Robert Roy Britt.
See you in 09... We have lots planned.
- TechHeadz '08
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)