Ian M Rountree

Copywriter, Project Manager, Digital Marketing

  • Copywriting
    • Content Marketing
    • SEO
  • About
  • Contact

Deconstructing Social Media: The Nuclear Option

January 25, 2010 by Ian 11 Comments

Sunset flames on FlickrAs I’m writing this I have 323 followers on Twitter. Last night I had less than 300. This morning I had more than 350 – and then, one by one, the difference disappeared as I deleted used-nonce and pure noise followers. Obviously, Twitter’s request to some services to stop using auto-unfollow has not kicked in properly.

This isn’t a bad thing. Not one bit.

Get this straight. I don’t really care if you follow me on Twitter.My numbers don’t mean a thing – now. I’m just a dude who writes. I’m not a pundit or journalist like Jeff Jarvis, a massive tech god like Robert Scoble, or a marketing whiz like, well, at this point half of Twitter. I’m a participant, not a trend-setter. That’s what I’m about, that’s what I do. So I don’t really care if you follow me. But you’d better damn well bet I’ll be impressed with YOU if you respond to something I’ve said, the way Jarvis, Scoble and a few others have.

I don’t care about follower numbers because until Twitter and blogging and other things of the sort become a career instead of a hobby, I’m always going to win the engagement war against bigger stars in the social media arena. How, do you figure, that is? For the same reason that Liz Strauss and I agree Conan O’Brien won out; he didn’t forget his core audience. There’s no value in the followers metric, at all, any more. If there ever was. I care about conversation.

I can account for eight of my twenty subscribers. I speak to these eight people fairly regularly – half of them are on Twitter, and about the same number reliably hit my blog from the links I post there. Of these, two or three comment regularly. Of all of the numbers, this is what matters to me the most, because I value contribution, even when it’s small. Lots of bloggers say they live in the comments – I dream of one day having a comments section to call home.

Robert Scoble just dropped a bomb about the differing benefits of creating content versus curating content produced by others. It’s one of the best he’s done in a while, taking apart the work of going to a big event, and why following it in broader scope is an important job too. I agree – but doing this work does not help Scobleizer’s engagement. He sits at his screenbank, aggregates, and curates. A necessary job, yes, but it places him even more in the ivory tower others have built for him – it’s entirely his personality. But it makes the idea of engaging him, of insinuating oneself into his circle nearly unimaginable.

Having a massive following is great – hell, if I hadn’t engaged on Twitter, I wouldn’t ever have interviewed Mark Dykeman, Liz Strauss wouldn’t know who I was, and Steven Hodson wouldn’t be putting out perspective on my writing. It’s awesome, all of these people rock.These people are why I win.

Participation is something we can’t lose. Participants are like me, engaged, interested, involved. Meta-curators, the human aggregators, are more like Scoble. They can be very interesting people, but they’re spending so much time outside themselves, in their lists, being the activity more than the action, that the focus of what they do moves beyond participation to something bordering on obsession.

Something to think about. I’m participating – and winning, but that’s me, and my role. Some might be better served by meta-curating, as Scoble is.

Have you given any consideration to what you’re doing with your in-public presence online?

Photo by Brian Auer.

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: Facebook, jeff jarvis, liz strauss, luvvie alert, robert scoble, social media, twitter

Has Blogging Left Its Own Sub-Culture?

January 19, 2010 by Ian 5 Comments

chameleon on FlickrThere’s a shift going on in the media, a swinging pendulum action towards new formats, new mediums and new procedures. In many ways, this change toward Say Anything, Publish Cheap behaviour is a good thing – but what is it doing to the community that started out here, back in the day? Are bloggers – those once-prolific mavericks who paved the way for the current layer of professionals – being abandoned because of their own success?

When I started on LiveJournal in 1999 as a lark, blogging was considered a downer idea, even among the group of supergeeks I hung out with at the time.

The entire idea behind the LJ – for me, for us – began as a way to gather up all of the work we were doing in collaborative fiction and drop it semantically into a self-organizing, self-publishing venue. There had already been, for nearly four years, a newsletter going out weekly (or sometimes monthly) with updates, but the sudden power to have everything in one place, not just the stuff that was big enough to make the Alamak News, as it were, was a trip all on its own.

But then blogging caught on. The power base shifted from the small group of very experienced players to everyone who the moderators let join the group. And once that happened, the players in some cases even forwent the group blog and published on their own journals, in some cases very elaborate parallelisms to the major game.

We all thought that was a problem.

Then, it got worse.

The trouble was, originally, that Alamak was very hostile towards role-players acting in public. Being that the site was a dominant online chat at the time, and supported nearly eight hundred people during peak hours (bear in mind this is 1999) many of whom were monetarily supporting the chat through subscription-based, privileged accounts, it was a big deal that this small group of less than fifty people were trying to change the way the chat ran, in certain areas. Those of us with Mod accounts (subscription accounts) in some cases ended upĀ  under scrutiny for being players. It was frowned on. We were keeping the lights on, and being discriminated against.

So what happened? A small splinter of the players actually went and began their own chat, called Winds of Change. You’d think this was a good thing, but it wasn’t. The break actually caused a schism between a number of the veteran players, because the rules at WoC were so very communist in the Stalinist sense, that some newer players never had a chance of acceptance. WoC meant no harassment for those of us serious enough to play – but it also killed community growth, because the only way in was referral, and if you didn’t have the chops to be a good player from the get go, you were effectively shunned, or worse, humiliated.

WoC died. It became a nepotistic echo chamber with very little innovation. Add to that issues with the admins, the developers who closed the site down eventually – the whole thing became such a crapshoot that those of us who weren’t invested in it left with little protest. When those who remained until the final days tried to reintegrate themselves, the entire community seemed to jump the shark as a whole.

Fast forward.

Some of us still entranced by collaborative fiction have done some things with it. One of my fellow players and I are launching a blog-book in February called The Dowager Shadow. I still roleplay, when I get a chance – I’m hoping to organize a reunion game for the old Alamak crowd sometime this year – but I’m a little distressed by what I see when I go into any of the now many roleplayer-centric chat sites there are on the net. I see a lot of the behavior that caused WoC to fail, only on a much bigger scale; what used to be five uppity vets bashing twenty uppity newbs is now a few dozen uppity vets bashing a few hundred uppity newbs. It’s not just ten to one scale, here either. It’s happening on every site out there. It’s fifty, a hundred, a thousand to one the level and volume of pride, wickedness and cruelty that was present eleven years ago in the original games.

The same thing might happen to personal publishing!

If you watch the trends, the schism began a long time ago, but there’s no cultural commentary on it yet because the culture hasn’t caught up to itself. Speaking in the analogy, the blogging equivalent of WoC doesn’t even exist yet. But the trend is there, the behaviors that those of us who watched saw in the small group of vets is beginning to show up again in the blogging culture.

Make Us Better, We’ll Pay For It!

First, there were the bloggers – the unshaven basement rats, eviscerating people who wronged them in the darkness of their parents’ basements. Then there were the journalists and the analysts, the Clay Shirky’s of the world who saw the trend for what it was and got in on the ground floor. Fast forward a few years, and now we’re seeing tutors, gurus, veterans of all kinds popping up and using whatever tools are at their disposal to help or hinder everyone they can lay their hooks into. Just like what happened with Winds of Change, the business has begun to underscore the culture, and if we’re not careful, the business will eventually tire of us, and move elsewhere. And where will that leave those vets who changed with the winds, who followed the money and did nothing but the new, shiny thing?

Before the Business Leaves You, Leave the Business!

There’s an opportunity for us to learn from past mistakes and adjust the model as we’re going, rather than abandoning the pleasure yacht and moving on to the Titanic. As Liz Strauss recently said in an interview with Mitch Joel for the Six Pixels Podcast, the major difference between hiring a fresh, fast-texting digital native and a dyed in the wool expert isn’t scale of skill, it’s the ability to make decisions because of a habit of success and appropriate self-scrutiny that can’t be bought in college, and must be earned through real world trauma and experience. (I may be paraphrasing you there, Liz, but there we are, that’s what I heard.)

Many of the bloggers I know are intensely dedicated professionals. Not necessarily as bloggers, but I’ve seen an approach to technology and its impacts on our culture that visibly, palpably feels like dyed in the wool decision making experts. So I’ll put it to you this way, any of you who are getting in at the beginning of the business:

Are you going to ride out the storm without preparing for the wind to leave your sails?

Or are we going to effect some change and kill the buzz, replacing it with something appropriate, useful, and over all, enduring?

Photo by tibchris.

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: 1999, alamak, blogging, clay shirky, community, dowager shadow, history lessons, jump that shark, livejournal, liz strauss, mitch joel, subculture, winds of change

Choosing Your Audiences

January 4, 2010 by Ian 6 Comments

As willing as we are to be transparent (those of us who put our lives out online, anyway), we do need to be careful about choosing where we share, and the voice we use to do so. This isn’t just about context, though it could well be – Jon Udell has a concise way of summing up the need for context – but tone, manner. Digital body language at its best.

You don’t develop any social language overnight, and most of it’s impossible to predetermine. As Liz Strauss said on a recent interview with Mitch Joel for the Six Pixels of Separation podcast, there’s a big gap between the actions of an out-of-college enthusiast and a dyed in the wool professional. It’s all well and good to be a digital native who can carry on a phone conversation while texting at five tweets a minute and using acronyms like RSS, CSS, PHP and Social Media. Wait, the last one was a buzzword. Sometimes it’s hard to tell the difference.

This applies to more than just business, it applies to any conversation, venue, network or clique we manage to get ourselves involved in. Sometimes you can recognize when you’re acting differently, or when others are. What’s more difficult is figuring out what informed these people with visibly “better” manners to behave this way in the first place.

Over the next few months, I’m going to try and figure out what habits work best, make sure you piss off the least number of people, and make communicating in some of these channels more effective, efficient and enriching. As much as we’d love to believe “Just Act Human” is a great call to action, it’s just not that simple. I’ve had trouble; I’m betting you have too.

So let’s figure this out together, ok?

Photo by kevindooley

Filed Under: Blog Tagged With: buzzwords, digital body language, digital etiquette, digital-manners, liz strauss, mitch joel, nevermind the buzzwords, six pixels

Categories

  • Announcements
    • Event Notices
  • Blog
  • Communication
  • Content Strategy
  • Marketing Strategy
  • Personal
  • Reviews
  • Social Media
  • Technology

Archive

  • January 2016
  • June 2015
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • July 2008
  • February 2004
  • Copywriting
  • Blog
  • Reading Lists
  • Colophon

© Copyright 2023 Ian M Rountree · All Rights Reserved