The day will bring together people from local authorities across Scotland who are using social media (or at least thinking about it) to offer better customer choice and engagement, improve access to services, and reduce costs.

Being an unconference, delegates are expected to bring their own suggestions for topics to shape the agenda on the day. People then vote with their feet and gravitate towards the discussions that interest them most. The emphasis is on collaboration – everyone will have the chance to contribute and share.

A starter for ten

I’m sure everyone will be bursting with ideas, but I thought I’d get some of my own thoughts down here, as a bit of a starter for ten.

Social Media and exclusion

How do we ensure that our use of social media doesn’t exclude anyone? The most obvious risk is around accessibility – i.e. potential barriers to accessing online content encountered by certain users due to various factors such as vision impairment. I’ve blogged about this before, but still have more questions than answers.

Also, what about those who are unable to (or choose not to) access these channels? How do we ensure that the opportunities afforded by social media are still available to all?

Keeping safe

In my organisation, we conduct risk assessments for any new social media proposal. This allows us to take a step back and look at it from every angle, often spotting risks that weren’t immediately obvious. Some may call it dull, but it’s actually crucial to protect both our staff and the public.

One issue, though, is that the rules are constantly changing. Facebook seems to be forever tweaking their Privacy settings, for example, and this means we need to constantly re-assess whether what we’re doing is still safe.

Measuring success

One of the hardest questions to answer about social media seems to be “what does success look like?”. It’s also pretty fundamental – without knowing if we’re being successful, how can we improve what we’re doing (or know when we should maybe stop and try something else)?

We’ve already had some great success stories. Our Scottish Youth Parliament campaign has won several awards and the figures speak for themselves. But it’s not always that easy to say when something has been a success.

This is especially important because social media, despite what many people think, is not free. There may be no cost to set up an account, but the effort required to make it a success can easily mount up. It’s therefore easy to see why some managers might expect to see evidence of a return on that investment of time.

Staff 2.0

As we increase our use of (and by logical extension, our dependence on) social media, how do we ensure that our staff have the relevant skills and enthusiasm to do this kind of work properly. It’s probably not in anyone’s job description, and there’s very little formal training available. The challenge, then, is to find practical and sustainable ways of upskilling our workforce so that we are not relying on the limited few for whom this is all second nature.

Part of this might also mean increasingly bringing social media into our own working practices. Internal blogs are a good example of introducing people to Web 2.0 gently – offering the ability for staff to comment but not making contribution essential. I know that some organisations have really embraced internal social media, and the benefits are compelling, with reports of better collaboration, avoided duplication and the most wonderful serendipities.

Get involved

I look forward to discussing these and many more issues, and hopefully coming away with lots of ideas to take back to my organisation. If you’re going, I’ll see you there. If not, feel free to submit your thoughts or suggestions via a comment below or on Twitter. The hashtag for the event is #smuncon – I plan to live-tweet if at all possible.

Organised by multimedia journalist Tom Allan and Greener Leith’s Alistair Tibbitt, Edinbuzz is asking for experts to volunteer as ‘surgeons’, offering one-to-one coaching on the use of social media.

The aim of the surgeries is to take social media tools to community groups.

Blogging, Twitter and Facebook are all great tools, which can be used to campaign, debate and raise issues with local politicians and decision-makers.

Tom Allan quoted in the Edinburgh Evening News

I plan to volunteer my time to support this worthwhile cause, and look forward to seeing what sort of appetite there is when the events kick off in the new year. Any other locals wanting to get involved can check out www.edinbuzz.net to find out more, or pop along to Joseph Pearce’s Bar on Elm Row tonight (7th Dec) from 18:30.

Twitter Election Map

Over the past year or two there has been a palpable surge of interest in using Web 2.0 in the public sector, and in most cases that’s a very positive thing. The added value that such platforms can bring to the services we deliver is obvious, opening new channels of outreach and improving engagement and involvement.

During last night’s election count, the City of Edinburgh Council were putting Web 2.0 to marvellous use by keeping citizens bang up to date with progress of the count taking place over at Meadowbank Stadium.

The following is a summary of what the council did on the night.

Disclaimer: I had no direct involvement in this – on the night I followed these channels as a local resident and any comments are my own personal views.

Twitter map

Perhaps the most visually impressive part of the coverage was the Twitter map, a Google Maps mash-up which displayed the latest geo-tagged tweet for each of the 5 constituencies. A relatively simple effect, but one which gave a very relevant, localised slant to the proceedings.

Edinburgh's Election Twitter Map

Twitter updates

Powering this was, of course, the Council’s own Twitter account (@Edinburgh_CC) which was used throughout the evening to tweet both localised, geo-tagged updates, as well as more general information and links to the blog referred to below.

For me, the people behind this did two things particularly well when using Twitter. Firstly, they managed expectations by posting the following statement on the website:

We’re sorry that we can’t enter into any real-time discussions about what we’re doing, but we will be keeping an eye on the feedback on Twitter to see what people think and what we can learn from the experience.

City of Edinburgh Council Elections page

This was a really important, preemptive move which meant that hopefully not too many people were trying to start a conversation with the team and ending up being disappointed.

However, early on in the evening they did respond to one tweet, relating to the use of geo-tags, so I thought I’d send them a quick question too:

@Edinburgh_CC Is it just the two counts?

@prettysimple

To which, sure enough, they replied:

@prettysimple two counts; five constituencies – blog post on the count process coming soon

@Edinburgh_CC

This is a great demonstration of the power of Web 2.0 – the immediacy of response married with high availability and reach make Twitter and its ilk potentially ideal platforms for speaking to your customers and citizens, and can deliver a positive experience not only to the individual concerned, but also to anyone else who happens to be watching (I intentionally asked a question that I thought others may be wondering too).

Blog

The Council’s emergency and news blog was used to great effect to post updates throughout the evening, not just on the results, but also on the process itself, including:

• A nice collection of stats, including the number of registered voters, polling places and postal votes. These were posted at a time when the updates had ran a little dry, thus keeping the interest of those following the progress
• A step by step guide to the count process, giving details of how each stage works, from the first and second count and the adjudication of doubtful papers, through to the final declaration
• A useful who’s who, listing the roles of the key players on the night
• A statement on the timing of the results from the Returning Officer

Flickr

An official snap from the count (copyright City of Edinburgh Council)

Finally, a handful of images were also uploaded to the Council’s Flickr photostream, providing citizens with a glimpse of the controlled chaos.

This added a wonderfully human touch to the process, and I’d have liked to have seen more photos (in the end there were only about 20). But it again shows great potential. One of the more appealing elements of count night is the very British scene of people pitching in and working together, often against the odds, and this kind of coverage does a great job of capturing that.

All in all, a triumph for Web 2.0 advocates and hopefully a continuation of what we’re seeing across the UK – a long-lasting, relevant and fruitful use of social media tools to engage and involve citizens and position them at the heart of everything we’re doing.

A big year for Twitter

BBC News has a nice summary of the year on Twitter, looking at the news stories which were big on the micro-blogging platform. Twitter proved its worth by being at the heart of key events such as the Iranian election, allowing citizens to report from the scenes of protest even after other channels of communication had been cut.

Social Networking in general had a good year, with an ever-increasing expectation that companies should be using such platforms to talk to their customers. CNET has a brief look at the highs and lows for various Social Networks, focusing on how current front-runners Twitter and Facebook are evolving to stay ahead of the game.

Meanwhile, Mashable‘s Jennifer Van Grove has a look at Google’s 2009, reflecting on the search giant’s big releases and major accomplishments. It was undoubtedly a big year for the company, with the likes of Google Wave attempting to revolutionise the way we communicate and collaborate.

Back at the BBC, the technology team talk about the technology they loved in 2009, discussing many things you’ll have heard as well as a few you may not.

For those getting tired of reading, the Guardian’s Tech Weekly Team have a 40 minute podcast reviewing the year in tech, whilst Web Axe looks back at some of its best web accessibility podcasts from 2009.

The "Apple Glove"

Finally, the Register has a collection of quotes from the year as well as some of the best (of the worst) patent claims, including IBM’s bizarre noise-maker and Apple’s attempt to reinvent the glove.

Happy New Year!

Engineering Software for Accessibility

In the meantime, here’s some useful reading courtesy of Microsft Press – Engineering Software and Accessibility. This is a free 100-page download, covering three key questions:

• How do you plan for accessibility?
• How do you design your software for accessibility?
• How can you implement and test to your software to confirm it meets the accessible design?

Also worth a visit is IBM’s technical library, which has a new section on Accessibility in Web 2.0 technologies, introducing WAI-ARIA and looking at accessible Web 2.0 design principles.

Happy reading, and I hope to see some of you in London next week…

The National Library of Scotland - image courtesy of yellow book ltd*

I avoided today’s heatwave by sitting in the relatively cool setting of the National Library of Scotland in Edinburgh for an event put on by the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals in Scotland (CILIPS) – Enterprise, engagement and new communications: Web 2.0 in the Library.

I decided to live-tweet the event (or the morning session, at least, as my N95, which I was using as a modem, ran out of battery during the lunch break). Accordingly, here’s my coverage of the event. I used the hashtag #web2libraryevent so you can also see the Twitter results for that term.

Welcome and introductions – Graeme Forbes, National Libraries of Scotland

Graeme kicked the morning off with some thoughts on Web 2.0:

Welcome from Graeme Forbes from NLS. Giving a definition of Web 2.0 from Wikipedia – common denominator is participation.

Web 2.0 critics talk of digital narcissism, amateur commentaries, untruths and misunderstandings.

Harnessing collective intelligence – Liz McGettigan, Edinburgh City Libraries

First speaker is Liz McGettigan, head of Edinburgh City libraries, talking about Harnessing Collective Intelligence.

McGettigan: We are struggling to define libraries in a Web 2.0 World. People are finding new ways to share knowledge.

McGettigan: Public sector is slow to embrace Web 2.0. Early ‘toes in the water’ will pave way for significant changes.

McGettigan: 14 – 25 year olds, especially, expect to find us on Twitter, Flickr, Facebook etc. We must master these.

McGettigan showing examples of what Edinburgh Libraries are doing with Web 2.0. See www.netvibes.com/talesofonecity

McGettigan: people will prefer to go to library as a ‘trusted gate-keeper’ of Web 2.0 and community info (is this true?)

An interesting question was raised about this last point, and Liz pointed out that a degree of moderation and control must be kept to ensure we keep the trust of our citizens in providing accurate information. Case in point was Talis Engage, a community information portal which supports differing levels of permissions, allowing the authority to maintain control over the information.

Practical uses for Web 2.0 – Phil Bradley, Information Specialist

Next: Phil Bradley, info specialist. Practical uses for Web 2.0. What is Web 2.0? Not about tools, it’s about mindset

Bradley: Above all, people want information. Blogs not just an ‘introspective diary’. People want links, tags, archives.

Bradley: When you update a webpage, the old content is lost. With a blog, it is archived and can be viewed as history.

Bradley: A blog is a website in and of itself. Flood it with information and link to your images, podcasts, video etc.

Bradley: “email is old, outdated, for old people – stop using it” (making a point about sharing services such a Delicious)

Bradley: Youtube is the 2nd most searched search engine (in the West?) – insane that this is blocked in organisations

Bradley: How do you blend these channels? Everything should link to everything else. No longer about standalone websites.

Bradley: Web 2.0 can bring about a lack of control (or at least, a shift in control?). Many will be threatened by this.

Bradley: Weblogs – if used, need to be integral. Need to be ‘fed and watered’. Only a small number update regularly – why?

Bradley: Summary, it’s the activity, not the tool. Try it and see. Understand your goals. Combine and blend. Take control.

Bradley: Presentation is online now at slideshare.net/philbradley. You can also follow Phil on Twitter @philbradley

The Law surrounding Web 2.0 – Jason Miles-Campbell, JISC Legal

Next: Jason Miles-Campbell, @JasonJISCLegal, from JISC Legal about Staying Legal – the law surrounding Web 2.0 use.

Miles-Campbell: Important to think of potential legal problems before you get to them and make the right ‘risk decisions’.

Miles-Campbell: What’s a risk decision? Driving at 31mph is a risk decision. It’s technically illegal, but we all do it.

Miles-Campbell: Web 2.0 legal issues: Offering tools. Using others’ tools. Requiring use of tools. Staff use of tools.

Miles-Campbell: Laws to consider: intellectual property, accessibility and discrimination, liability, data protection.

Miles-Campbell: Intellectual property – does posting to the web imply that you are happy to share?

Miles-Campbell: Intellectual Property: What can people use? Make it clear. Some people want to keep control (e.g. BBC).

Miles-Campbell: Copyright in collaborations – how easy to identify the author? Web 2.0 makes this very hard.

Miles-Campbell: Is permission given, or implied? Creative Commons licence has made this clearer in some areas (eg Flickr).

Miles-Campbell: Accessibility – a legal requirement but also affects many others (for example, mobile device users)

Miles-Campbell: Accessibility: DDA and DED means you must be proactive in considering needs. Web 2.0 tools getting better

Miles-Campbell: If you adopt a technology that is not accessible you could be in trouble, so you need to be aware.

Miles-Campbell: Why are we using a particular tool and how can we give all users the same experience?

Miles-Campbell: Liability risks – negligence, IPR infringement, defamation, harassment, confidentiality, data security

Miles-Campbell: Liability – must take reasonable precautions against these issues. But ‘reasonable’ not clearly defined!

Miles-Campbell: Mitigate risks: develop staff and user policies. Ensure clear user guidance. Don’t assume user knowledge.

Miles-Campbell: Are we liable for what our staff do online? Quite probably – need clear rules and boundaries

Miles-Campbell: See the JISC Legal Web 2.0 section for more www.jisclegal.ac.uk/Web2/index.htm

Hand-outs from JISC included some Web 2.0 FAQs and legal advice for learning resource staff and information services. All can be found in the resources section of the JISC Legal Web 2.0 section.

Removing barriers; developing national guidelines for using Web 2.0 – Gillian Hanlon, SLIC

After a well-earned lunch break we reconvened to hear from Gillian at SLIC (Scottish Library & Information Council), the independent advisory body to the Scottish Government and Scottish ministers on library and information matters.

Gillian gave an overview of the benefits of Web 2.0 – for example, keeping pace with technologies, responding to user demand and expectation, promoting services and initiatives, interacting and engaging with citizens, devolved and easy publishing, low or no cost. There’s also huge potential for professional development opportunities – through professional networks and the sharing of good practice and advice, Web 2.0 can fuel creative thinking and innovation.

But we do need to be aware of the barriers that we must overcome:

• User protection – some Web 2.0 services may host inappropriate or offensive materials, so we have to think about how we protect our users from this.
• Staff management – is it time wasting? What about the time needed to engage in the various channels?
• Staff training – concerns about the limited technical expertise and time required to maintain Web 2 services.
• Traditional approaches – resistance to new processes in favour of traditional approaches to information delivery and community engagement.

This brings us to SLIC’s nascent guidelines for implementing Web 2.0 – designed to advocate (promote benefits and dispel myths), overcome barriers and support (offering tips and advice). With a printed booklet due in August/September 2009, followed by web content in September/October, the guidelines will be cross-sector (not just for libraries) and will come under the Creative Commons licence to enable sharing and repurposing. The printed materials will include promotional information to convince non-believers, whilst the web content will be dynamic to include information on best practice, case studies and relevant resources.

There is definitely a need for coordination of these kind of resources, so I look forward to seeing the launch of these guidelines later in the year. Head over to www.slainte.org.uk/Slic/slicindex.htm for more information, as well as some interesting examples of Web 2.0 use.

Library 2.0 – Dave Errington, TALIS

Finally, Dave presented a fascinating history of the web, showing how Web 2.0 is less about technology than it is about fashion and attitudes. And indeed, he claims, Web 2.0 is already going out of fashion. He suggests that technologies can disrupt society, and can even defeat governments (see the recent protests in Iran, and imagine if the Tiananmen Square ‘Tank Man’ had been in possession of a camera phone and access to Twitter during his iconic stand-off!).

Technology alone does not move things along, though. We are stakeholders in the status quo, abhorring change. A geek alone can not change this – other factors must play a part (economy, fashion). Dave refers to the technology adoption curve (AKA Rogers’ bell curve), where 2.5% are innovators, 13.5% early adopters. 34% early majority, 34% later majority (now in the minority) and 16% are laggards who hold out – they don’t want to change their habits, not because of the technology itself, although they often use that excuse (too difficult etc), but because they do not want to change their habits. In all walks of life, age seems to influence our attitude towards risk – is this why young people adopt new technologies faster?

Crucially, there is also a chasm between early adopters and the early majority. This describes why some technologies ‘make it’ whilst others don’t (see Crossing the Chasm by Geoffrey Moore for more). Many are killed off by economics (minidiscs, for example, were really expensive, so never took off). Also, sometimes things catch up and take over (LCD screens vs plasma screens, for example). We need to be aware that things may fall into the chasm or perhaps be overtaken by something else (could this happen to Twitter, for example?). To stay ahead of the curve there must be pioneers – although being a pioneer means you may often get arrows in your back! Sometimes things don’t work – that’s the definition of an experiment. But technology won’t wait – the train has left the station and our citizens are ahead of us. We need to embrace this and catch up. And really, it’s more about the journey than the destination, as the latter is constantly shifting.

Dave suggests two white papers for further reading: Do Libraries Matter: The Rise of Library 2.0 and Library 2.0 – The Challenge of Disruptive Innovation (both can be found in the Talis’ White Papers section).

Q&A session

Before we all headed out into the sticky humidity of central Edinburgh, a lively Q&A session with the entire panel of speakers produced some thought-provoking discussion. The following is my summary of some of the discussions, as I interpreted them. If you think I’ve missed the point of any of these, or left anything out, do leave a comment below!

Q: Does the web replace valuable human contact?

Panel: The feeling was that these technologies are not mandatory – people can chose whether to use them or not – and that sitting in front of a PC doesn’t mean you’re only talking to that PC – you’re actually communicating with real people, often from all over the planet, in ways that were never before possible. Many of us just need to learn how to communicate differently.

Q: There a loads of tools out there, fulfilling similar purpose, so how do we choose which to use?

Panel: It depends on what do you want to achieve… are we forced to use only the most prominent, popular tools of the day? Or should we be on all of them? Perhaps we should ‘graze’ and then move on, but it is important to look at the whole range. We also need to view the concept of ‘making mistakes’ in a new way. With Web 2.0 you can try things for cheap or free – you’ve learned something whether it works or not.

Q: How do we evaluate our use of Web 2.0 to know if we’ve been successful?

Panel: This is without doubt a tricky question to answer. Is it pointless setting targets? For example, which is more important – the number of followers you have on Twitter or the number of times people retweet or DM you (quantity vs quality)? By all means create goals and aim towards those, but we can’t be too prescriptive – on many of the newer platforms the ideal outcomes are unknown. It’s also perhaps important just to be seen to be innovating (I’m again reminded of Marshall McLuhan’s proposal that the medium is the message).

Q: Where next?

Panel: Whilst Web 1 and Web 2 are about documents, Web 3 will be about databases. There will be enormous potential with mashing data. It hasn’t fully arrived yet, but like a surfer waiting for that big wave, we must be ready! Privacy will have to be compromised to get the full use of the services on the future web. But people are already giving up info a lot more easily… just think of store loyalty cards. Also, search is currently very archaic – google is very basic and relatively crude. New search functions will take into account social information about you and your environment – a profound shift which is going to happen soon. Phil sums this all up nicely by stating that we’re in a fog – we can only see little way in advance. A scary thought for some, perhaps, but also rather exciting!

Final thoughts

The day was a really useful one, much less strictly focused on libraries than I’d expected, and offering plenty to think about.

• It was good to meet Phil Bradley (@philbradley) whom I hope will come and see us soon to help us evangelise the Web 2.0 message to some of our more sceptical colleagues.
• A useful quick chat with Jason Miles-Campbell (@JasonJISCLegal). Would be great to continue the discussion around the legal obligations of accessibility.
• Nice to meet Nicola Osborne (@suchprettyeyes) from Edina. Hope we can meet up to talk mash-ups and more!
• Great to see so many people from my own organisation, including Liz McGettigan with whom I hope to catch up soon to discuss some cross-departmental projects, and Alison Stoddart, who sounds as if she is facing many of the same challenges that I am!

*National Library of Scotland image courtesy of yellow book ltd.

Cybersquatting 1.0

Cybersquatting traditionally refers to the practice of:

registering, trafficking in, or using a domain name with bad faith intent to profit from the goodwill of a trademark belonging to someone else

Wikipedia article on Cybersquatting

This practice has been around for over a decade and many countries now have specific legislation against it. But with the increase of Social Media platforms, which allow you to choose a username which then dictates the URL of your account’s public profile (for example, www.twitter.com/prettysimple) the potential for a new kind of Cybersquatting is born.

Cybersquatting 2.0

In Ken Fischer’s sobering post on Gov 2.0 Spoofing, he suggests that there is a significant risk of individuals posing as officials:

…all it takes is one person believing one source is the voice of a government and acting on it to cause at the least embarassement (sic) and at the worse some harm.

Ken Fischer – Gov 2.0 Spoofing is here

Fischer recommends a simple technique to allow users to authenticate an account by following a reciprocal link to an official government and back again. But this could be considered onerous and it is likely that many users will not bother. As with most security issues, the onus has to be on the content owner.

The risks of Cybersquatting in a Web 2.0 world

Brand dilution

My own organisation has had cause for concern recently when an unofficial Twitter account surfaced. Luckily this appears to have been set up by a well-meaning employee, rather than a prankster or potential cybersquatter, and is now directing people to the official account. But this still presents the problem of watering down our message and causing confusion amongst citizens who wish to follow us. We now have an official one, in addition to the unofficial one.

Trust

Most Social Media relies heavily on building up trust with those who follow you. Any compromise of that trust through a proliferation of illegitimate accounts will stunt the success of genuine engagement and potentially damage the brand. If it becomes hard to prove authenticity without laborious methods, users may easily be scared off.

Hard to integrate

With traditional cybersquatting, once you’d taken control of a domain which was found to be illegally cybersquatting it was easy to integrate that domain into your estate (e.g. by setting up a re-direct). But with many of the Social Media platforms, this isn’t the case. Twitter, for example, does not allow you to merge accounts. So the unofficial account that I mentioned earlier will either continue to exist (and continue to dilute the brand) or cease to exist and lose the 50+ followers that it has already built up. Either way, the unofficial account got the better username (EdinburghCC, as opposed to Edinburgh_CC for the official one) and there’s no obvious way of rescuing that.

Criminal intent

Worse-case scenarios see situations where citizens think they are engaging with officials, and therefore surrender personal information which could be seriously misused.

Naming conventions

Looking at this list of Council Twitter accounts, I’m surprised by the lack of naming conventions. Most seem to have adopted the approach of councilname followed by CC or DC etc. But there’s no overriding consensus, and many have used far different names (for example, Sunderland (@Sunderland_UK), Southampton (@citycouncil09) and Croydon (@yourcroydon). There is therefore huge potential there for cybersquatters to set up shop, and we have very few options for closing the loopholes (unlike with standard web domains, where in the public sector registration of gov.uk Second Level Domains is restricted, or in the private sector where you would develop a brand protection strategy to mitigate against domain fraud by purchasing vulnerable domains).

Conclusion

Most heavy users of Social Media sites have probably come across instances of name-squatting – or at least cases of mistaken identity. There have been many high-profile stories involving people posing as celebrities, and even the great Tim Berners-Lee will find a shock in store if he ever wants to start Tweeting – someone has taken @timbernerslee and claims to be holding it for him (at what price, we wonder?).

It’s clear that organisations need to be aware of this issue, whether or not they are using the platforms themselves. It is their responsibility to protect their brand, as well as to protect their customers from fraudulent accounts. For public sector organisations this is perhaps even more crucial, and there is a clear need for stronger guidance and policy. Let’s just hope it doesn’t take a serious incident to get more people thinking about the issue.

Edit: Twitter have now introduced Account Verification.

Further reading

• Social Media Squatting – top sites to think about
• List of UK Council Twitter accounts
• How to handle Name-Squatting on Twitter et al
• …and the brilliantly titled Sydney Morning Herald article: All that Twitters is not gold: enter the squatters

I’ll continue to add to it as new stories come up so if you spot a good one, let me know!

It’s worth noting that I’m collecting these as useful ‘lessons learned’ – not to put people off using such platforms for their organisations, but to provide a clearer picture of some of the pitfalls.

McDonald’s #McDStories Twitter Campaign Fails – 24th January 2012

A Twitter campaign by McDonald’s aimed at spreading good news about the firm has backfired spectacularly – with people using the #McDStories to highlight their worst experiences of the fast food chain. (source: Huffington Post)

The only surprising thing about this story is that they didn’t see it coming.

Labour sacks candidate in Twitter row – 9th April 2010

The Labour party sacks one of its parliamentary candidates after details emerged of offensive comments he had published on Twitter (source: The Guardian).

Quite an astonishing one, this. The phrase “should have known better” has never been more applicable. I’ve written a brief post analysing the story.

Sunday Express makes a Twit of itself – 17th January 2010

The Sunday Express publishes a damning exposé of the BBC’s use of Twitter, claiming that they have no followers and are wasting their time. Unfortunately the writers have confused followers for following, and the accounts in question actually have thousands of followers (source: No Rock and Roll Fun).

The article has since been pulled, but is a reminder of how easy it is to criticise social media without fully understanding it, as Tory MP Anne Widdecombe will now be finding out, after giving the Express a quote based on their dubious findings.

Alpha Course online poll backfires – 23rd October 2009

The Christian Alpha Course’s multi-million pound advertising campaign has potentially backfired when an online poll, asking whether people believed in God, showed an abnormally high 98% saying ‘No’. (source: The Register). Suspicions of an online sting by atheists seem highly likely.

I’ve also written a post looking at the risks of online polls.

Staff at PC World and Currys mock customers’ ‘stupidity’ on Facebook – 6th September 2009

Comments describe customers as ‘really stupid’ and ‘ignorant’, with some suggesting that they should be punched or even cattle-prodded (source: Guardian). Parent company DSG plans to investigate and take ‘necessary action’.

Lloyds spams Tweeters going on their hols – 26th August 2009

Automatic tweets to anyone mentioning the word ‘holiday’, plugging the pharmacy’s Travel Health webpage, do not go down well in the Twittersphere (source : pezholio.co.uk). Attempts to contact the company, suggesting they change their tactics, are ignored.

MI6 boss in Facebook row – 5th July 2009

Personal details about the next head of MI6, Sir John Sawers, are removed from Facebook amid security concerns (source: BBC News). Foreign Secretary David Miliband denies that security had been compromised, saying: “You know he wears a Speedo swimsuit. That’s not a state secret.”

Habitat abuses Twitter hashtags – 20 June 2009

UK furniture store Habitat starts tweeting, but abuses the hashtag in a surprising spate of spammy behaviour (source: Social Media Today) which quickly attracts criticism amongst Twitter users. Misused hashtags include #iphone, #Apple and #MOUSAVI (in a pretty cynical attempt to cash in on the high profile Iranian elections).

Force disciplines police blogger – 16 June 2009

A serving detective, revealed as the author of a high-profile blog, has been disciplined by his force (source: BBC). The award-winning blog had included criticisms of government ministers and police bureaucracy.

Council freezes Twitter account after insult gaffe – 3 June 2009

A council-run newspaper accidentally Tweets a potentially insulting message (source: localgov.co.uk), apparently intended only as a Direct Message to one person. Twitter account promptly shut down.

Probe into teacher Twitter posts – 22 May 2009

Teacher caught Tweeting on her mobile phone during class time (source: BBC). Up to 38 comments a day, some discussing her pupils. An investigation is launched.

Facebook gaffe earns woman the sack – 27 April 2009

A Swiss Insurance worker is fired after using Facebook whilst off sick (source: PC Pro). She had claimed a condition which prevented her from using her computer, and insisted she had accessed Facebook via her phone whilst in bed.

Video prank damages Domino’s brand – 15 April 2009

Domino’s Pizza employees post a film of unsavoury kitchen activity on Youtube (source: NY Times). Within days, millions have viewed the footage, and outrage spreads across the internet.

Damage control - Dominos responds via Youtube

New Skittles Twitter homepage not so sweet – 2 March 2009

Skittles adds a homepage feed of Tweets about it’s product, only to be inundated with abusive, unmoderated comments (source: PC Pro). As one poster observes, Skittles have “opened up the brand so we can all deface it.”

Girl fired for comment on Facebook – 27 Feb 2009

Girls describes her office job as ‘boring’ on Facebook. Is subsequently fired (source: BBC). Employer says “her display of disrespect and dissatisfaction undermined the relationship and made it untenable”.

Ryanair and the ‘idiot bloggers’ – 25 Feb 2009

Ryanair employees leave abusive comments on a blog which had reported a flaw in their website (Source: Times Online). The official statement that comes afterwards does little to defuse the situation.

Further reading

• How Facebook can get you fired
• Social Media Pitfalls: 5 lessons learned
• Top Ten Branded Social Media Gaffes

The whole thing is brought together by a public page on Netvibes (a personalised web portal, similar to iGoogle). You can find it at www.netvibes.com/talesofonecity.

Tales of One City Netvibes page

The page has a customised theme (with an image of books as the header) and an embedded Google Search bar. It then serves up 12 widgets, pulling in information from various sources.

The widgets include:

Delicious

A feed from the brand’s Delicious bookmarks – mostly links to the various applications listed on the Netvibes page itself, but with a few other useful links (lots of room for development though).

Tales of One City blog

A blog, which has been running since February, by Library Service Manager Liz McGettigan.

We blog about lots of different things on Tales of One City; public libraries, community regeneration, impact studies, web 2.0, library 2.0…

Tales of One City Blog

There are also feeds from three other library-related blogs.

Social networking sites

Facebook, MySpace and Twitter accounts give the brand a strong social networking presence, although these are still seen as being in development.

Multimedia content

YouTube and Flickr provide the platforms for various multimedia content, including images of various libraries.

Potential and risks

The possibilities presented by this kind of approach are immense. Web 2.0 provides an exciting and relevant way of engaging with our citizens, targeting them in the places that they already frequent on the web (rather than relying on them coming to our corporate site to find out what we’re doing).

Accordingly I’m now looking at using a similar approach to promote other Council services, and I’ll blog more about these once we’re up and running. Of course, such an approach has to be managed, and there are many risks and issues to be aware of. For example:

Ownership

Most social applications are designed to be person-to-person, not organisation-to-person. Any presence on Facebook, Twitter et al should ideally appear to be from an individual, or at least a small group of individuals, rather than a ‘faceless corporation’. It’s vital to build up a personality online, and for that to work people must take ownership of the accounts. These people have to know what they’re doing, and also want to do it. Additionally, sustainability must be built in to mitigate against changing circumstances – if a person leaves the organisation, the accounts must not simply fall silent and die a death.

Accountability

Despite aiming for a ‘personal’ voice, it’s still vital that the person is accountable to the organisation for what they say. There have been countless horror stories of brands taking serious damage through social media mistakes, and as a public sector organisation we have a serious obligation to be accountable for what we are putting out there.

Exclusion

It is, of course, important to remember that not everyone has access to the internet, or even a computer, and also that many of the third-party applications discussed here have varying issues to do with web accessibility. For this reason, it is vital to ensure that the ‘digitial divide’ is not made greater by concentrating solely on these kinds of ventures and ignoring more traditional channels, as well as ensuring that content is made accessible or, at least, an alternative provided.

Negative feedback

This is a major concern for many of the people I talk to about Web 2.0. The fear is that if we enter into conversations with citizens, many will use the opportunity to publicly berate us, whether justified or not. Whilst this may be true, it’s also true that such conversations are already going on out there – it’s crucial that we join in with them and hopefully learn from them.

Misuse

Another major concern is the misuse of the channels that we create (for example, if we create a space on Bebo and people use it to solicit inappropriate contact with children). Most of these risks can be reasonably managed, though, depending on the platform, but it does highlight the need for constant monitoring of the channels, which must be built into someone’s regular workstreams.

Look out for a progress report soon.

Interesting links

• Simon Wakeman’s oft-cited piece on why council’s shouldn’t be on Facebook, actually featuring some good reasons why we should
• Dave Brigg’s summary of ‘bits and pieces’ relating to social media in local government
• Ingrid Koehler’s excellent 10 local government social media myths
• Anyone in local gov wanting to discuss these issues further should sign up for Communities of Practice, where there are some useful Web 2.0 and social media groups

The day was an interesting and varied one, mixing high-level summaries of web 2.0 technologies with plenty of real-world examples and discussions of the opportunities, and challenges, presented by this brave new(ish) world.

The presentations from the day can be found at http://nondev.com/web_seminar – below is just a brief summary…

Dr Jim Hamill – Web 2.0, an overview

The morning kicked off with an overview of the world of Web 2.0 by Jim Hamill. Jim describes Web 2.0 as a fundamental, revolutionary change. As with all revolutions, there are winners and losers, and the winners will only be those who engage with it.

It represents a shift from information ‘push’ to information ‘pull’ – where the user decides what they want to see and generates their own content. People are cynical about brands; the ‘about us’ website; and the traditional ‘push’ form of marketing. In Web 2.0, the brand becomes the customer’s experience of the brand – and the customer is in control.

Jim ends with a wonderfully appropriate quote from Bob Dylan, highlighting that the times are, indeed, a-changin’:

Come gather ’round people
Wherever you roam
And don’t criticise
What you can’t understand
Your sons and your daughters
Are beyond your command
Your old road is
Rapidly agin‘
Then you better start swimmin’
Or you’ll sink like a stone
For the times they are a-changin’

Nicola Webber – Web 2.0 in action

Next up, Nicola tells us that the way in which we use the web has changed, on both a micro and macro level. A look at the world’s top ten websites highlights the overwhelming popularity of Web 2.0.

Nicola points out that Web 2.0 is all about ‘you’, the user. The my.barackobama site, for example, puts the emphasis on the citizen and what they want to achieve.

Other examples of putting the customer at the heart of the story include Amazon (feedback), chicagocrime.org (reporting crime) and Nike Bootcamp (a personal training programme letting you compete with others).

Alan Stevenson – Tools and examples

Alan covers a wide array of examples – too many to list here – but some of the more interesting ones included:

• They Work For You – keep tabs on elected and unelected representatives
• What Do They Know – access information under FOI
• Fix My Street – report local problems
  
• Write To Them – contact your Councillors, MP, MEPs etc
• Patient Opinion – share experiences of health care

Pete Martin – Web 2.0 principles, issues and challenges

Finally, Pete goes over some of the more practical issues. He likens Web 2.0 to a treadmill – easy to get started, but hard to get off (and likely to keep accelerating!).

And he reminds us that success in Web 2.0 must be earned - it can’t just be bought.

Open discussion

Following lunch, where the conversations continued apace, the afternoon session opened up the discussion to the floor and there were many interesting points raised.

A colleague from Friends of the Earth raised her concerns about the risks of entering a dialogue with those who are against us and liable to post negative comments, although it was suggested that this is exactly the audience with whom we should be engaging. Also, it could be hoped that those in the ‘pro’ camp would speak up with just as much volume to provide a balanced argument.

Other discussions revolved around the varying quality of the discussions going on, and how to filter the ‘noise’ that comes along with that, as well as the difficulties in measuring the success of Web 2.0 initiatives and the need to rethink traditional Key Performance Indicators.

The day concluded with further presentations looking at strategic development and practical next steps – both are also available from the link given above.