See What’s Out There

This week I had the pleasure of attending the Feminism2.0 conference in Washington, D.C. It was a one-day event packed full of panels and breakout sessions with leaders from prominent women’s organizations such as Feminist Majority, NOW and NARAL as well as feminist bloggers, artists and activists.

What I liked most about the conference was the diversity of people that attended. It was a great mix of races, genders, ages and because the conference was focused on organizing women online and off, there were techy and non-techy people present.

A major theme that came out of the conference was bridging the gap between old and new activists and using technology to engage the younger audience. Jen Nedeau, my fellow Women’s Rights blogger at Change.org, moderated the panel, “At the Crossroads: Organizing the Next Generation of Feminists Online and Off”. She emphasized in her presentation that young activists need to be engaged where they live online with customizable options to participate.

Here’s a video that Nerdette from NotMyGal filmed of that panel (yup, that’s me listening in the background):

Jen mentioned to me after the panel that NARAL Pro-Choice America is a prime example of an organization that is getting Web 2.0 right with their FreeWillPower campaign.

It was great to hear because See3 created the FreeWillPower campaign specifically to appeal to a younger audience and give them ways to opt-in based on their own interests. For example, participants can watch videos, get ringtones for their phones, submit a design to a t-shirt contest, take a quiz about reproductive rights and find information on an interactive map, among other things.

I think Jen is correct in her observation that young people aren’t necessarily going to search out a nonprofit’s website themselves but will be receptive to participating with the tools and social networks they already use every day.

I think a challenge that the feminist and reproductive rights movements face today is how to provide ways for young people to make the cause their own. Luckily, the internet is a great place to connect with this new generation in fun and creative ways.

Last week we asked our friends on Twitter, “What do you have more of - Facebook friends, Twitter followers, or LinkedIn contacts?” Based on the responses we received, it looks like Facebook wins, followed closely by Twitter and LinkedIn.

It’s important to note that each social-networking platform has its own culture and use. Whereas you might connect with a business acquaintance on LinkedIn, you’re probably more likely to see photos of your friend’s new baby on Facebook or get in a heated discussion about a new website with another user on Twitter.

However, these cultures are not rigid. Facebook is rapidly transitioning from its college roots to a space for the professional world just as LinkedIn has added new applications like RSS feeds and SlideShare to make its user profiles more personal. And although many caution against joining too many social-networks at once, all three are worth looking into for both personal and business use.

Thanks to everyone who responded! Next week’s question: Do you have a secret for dealing with spam email? Just reply @See3 on Twitter.

See3 has been working for months with NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation to conceive, develop, and produce their latest youth-oriented initiative: free.will.power. This innovative video-based online initiative is designed to reach younger activists and recruit a new generation of young women and men into the pro-choice movement.

The result is www.MyFreeWillPower.com, centered around a series of three animated music videos, to be released over a 6-week period. Each video features a young, critically-acclaimed spoken-word artist – Shira Erlichman, Alvin Lau, and Deja Taylor – as well as renowned musician, DJ Spooky. We wrapped compelling words, visuals, and sound into a thought-provoking series, with each video riffing on a different word: “Free”, “Will”, and “Power”.

You can see the first video, “Free”, below:

On the website, there are interactive ways for new activists to get involved with NARAL Pro-Choice America’s work, including taking action on a choice-related issue, learning about state-by-state legislation, or entering (and later voting in) a $1,000 t-shirt design contest. (We even re-skinned their MySpace page to reflect the microsite creative!)

And the timing for this initiative couldn’t be better.

“In the 2008 presidential election, we witnessed how the power of technology and the enthusiasm of young voters revolutionized the political process,” says Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation. “This generation of youth is the most diverse and engaged generation in our country’s history. free.will.power represents one way to engage this new generation of activists and connect them with the pro-choice cause.”

We had this technology-centered, enthusiastic young audience in mind from the very beginning, always asking the question, “In this age of 24/7 information access, what will get their attention, connect with them, and really make them think?” You can see what some bloggers are already saying here, here, and here.

Last week we asked our friends on Twitter, “ What’s your favorite social-networking site?” Check out some of the responses below:

Next week’s question: How many times do you check your email per day? Just reply @See3 on Twitter.

There was a great article in this past week’s New York Times Magazine about social networks that every nonprofit and cause-focused person should read. It matters how people use the sites because you can see how awareness of your cause can then travel these same pathways.

What this article explains is why we want to share what we are doing and be connected to several (or several hundred) friends who are also telling us what they are doing. Who has time for this, many people ask.

What does it mean to have constant contact with all of your friends. The article explains:
“Social scientists have a name for this sort of incessant online contact. They call it “ambient awareness.” It is, they say, very much like being physically near someone and picking up on his mood through the little things he does — body language, sighs, stray comments — out of the corner of your eye.”

What the article says is that many people sign up for the services and then wonder why they are wasting their time. But then things change:

But as the days went by, something changed. Haley discovered that he was beginning to sense the rhythms of his friends’ lives in a way he never had before. When one friend got sick with a virulent fever, he could tell by her Twitter updates when she was getting worse and the instant she finally turned the corner. He could see when friends were heading into hellish days at work or when they’d scored a big success. Even the daily catalog of sandwiches became oddly mesmerizing, a sort of metronomic click that he grew accustomed to seeing pop up in the middle of each day.

This is the paradox of ambient awareness. Each little update — each individual bit of social information — is insignificant on its own, even supremely mundane. But taken together, over time, the little snippets coalesce into a surprisingly sophisticated portrait of your friends’ and family members’ lives, like thousands of dots making a pointillist painting. This was never before possible, because in the real world, no friend would bother to call you up and detail the sandwiches she was eating. The ambient information becomes like “a type of E.S.P.,” as Haley described it to me, an invisible dimension floating over everyday life.

“It’s like I can distantly read everyone’s mind,” Haley went on to say. “I love that. I feel like I’m getting to something raw about my friends. It’s like I’ve got this heads-up display for them.” It can also lead to more real-life contact, because when one member of Haley’s group decides to go out to a bar or see a band and Twitters about his plans, the others see it, and some decide to drop by — ad hoc, self-organizing socializing.

Read the whole story.

Link [New York Times]
Hat Tip [Jeremy Liew]

Even if your nonprofit is already involved in the world of social media, these 3 tips from David J. Neff of the American Cancer Society (which recently released the video platform sharinghope.tv) are helpful for expanding your online strategy:

1) Experiment - You should personally explore social networks before you make a profile for your nonprofit. That way you will understand the most effective way to publicize your organization and make meaningful connections on sites likes Facebook, Flickr and YouTube.

2) Buy a Video Camera - You should be making lots of video and some can be done in-house, easily and cheaply. While these videos will never replace professionally produced material, they can supplement your online content and be an effective way to engage people on social networks. You can buy a point-and-shoot camera like the Flip video for under $200. For a higher quality consumer camera, we recommend the Canon HV30.

3) Research - Don’t just look at what fellow organizations are doing, pay attention to what big corporations and creative agencies are turning out. You may not have the same budget but social media helps to level the playing field. For example, Michael highlighted Office Max’s One Penny Campaign in a previous post. Take a look and you’ll notice how little money or production quality you need when the idea is compelling.

If you are not donor prospecting online you need to start. This is an emerging area of internet fundraising. Sending email to people who are not already on your list is spam, so you have to be more creative with online prospecting.

This is becoming more urgent for you because DIRECT MAIL PROSPECTING WILL DIE! Yes, it will die. For a long time you will send mail to your donors and for a long time you will have donors who write checks and send them back in the mail. But prospecting — getting
new supporters via mail by purchasing mailing lists of likely donors — this will die.

One reason is that eventually we will have a Do Not Mail list like we have a Do Not Call list. And everyone will put their name on it. While junk mail isn’t quite as annoying as spam, the environmental concerns with massive amounts of wasted paper are leading people to pay attention. Forest Ethics launched DoNotMail.org as a way to promote this idea. They have a growing number of signers and coalition members and I think eventually this effort will succeed.

We are working on creative ways to solve this. We have launched a Member-Get-A-Member and a Donor-Get-A-Donor product that uses your existing list to identify new supporters. We are using social networking sites, YouTube and video-centric microsites to bring in new people. All of this is very very new, but if you rely on new donors via direct mail, you would be wise to be thinking and working on expanding your online programs now.

“Social Network Portability” is the new next thing. The idea is that you have a profile that you invest time in, say on Facebook. That profile can follow you to other interactions on other websites. So, for example, say I am writing a comment on Amazon. Why fill out a whole new profile, why not just carry my profile with me.

“Through Facebook Connect, members will be able to use their Facebook identities across the Web–profile photos, names, photos, friends, groups, events, and other information. Facebook profile content, for example, could appear on other social sites, and Facebook event listings could theoretically connect with external event and invitation services.”

CNET’s News.com has what details there are at this point.

Charities see potential in tapping young Web users to promote their causes online

By Wailin Wong

Tribune reporter

April 30, 2008

Online social networks used to be just gathering places for friends and long-lost acquaintances. Then the marketers arrived, followed by politicians and job recruiters, all looking to tap into a growing mass of young people who are spending much of their time on the Web. Now, non-profit organizations are testing ways to raise money through these networks, betting that the Internet’s viral nature will open fresh avenues for fundraising and marketing.

It’s a big change for non-profits as they shift from direct-mail campaigns and relying on the checkbooks of older givers to the unpredictable whims of Web popularity. Though the transition is nascent, charities see potential in recruiting young activists who already use online networks to broadcast their identities and make connections.

Actress Cynthia Osuji of New York is a case in point. She became interested in a women’s health non-profit when she received a mass e-mail about auditions for a Circle of Health International-sponsored benefit production of Eve Ensler’s “A Memory, A Monologue, A Rant and A Prayer.” The group also was seeking board members to plan the show.

After Osuji, 26, won a spot in the cast and joined the board, she added a copy of the show poster to her MySpace profile. Out-of-town friends who couldn’t attend the show ended up making donations and two “Facebook friends,” casual acquaintances who learned of the benefit through the site, came to the March performance.

Osuji said the show brought her back into community service, an activity she hadn’t pursued since high school. “Violence against women and women in conflict [areas] is something that’s very personal to me,” she said.

Circle of Health International has its own Facebook page, and 26-year-old Matt Bieber clicked on an application called Causes that allowed him to invite more than 100 of his 200-plus contacts to publicize the non-profit on their profile pages. His recruitment effort was akin to distributing virtual bumper stickers with the option to donate through the site. Eleven of his friends added the non-profit to their profiles.

Sean Parker, who helped create Causes, said, “If you can activate a group of people and get some of those people to replicate the process … you’ve got the basis for a movement.”

Outside of general communities like Facebook and MySpace, there are also social networking sites dedicated to philanthropy such as YourCause.com, HopeEquity .org and actor Kevin Bacon’s SixDegrees.org.

Now established institutions like the MacArthur Foundation and the Case Foundation want to know more about the tie between digital life and philanthropy. They are funding studies of online social networks, civic engagement in the Millennial Generation and philanthropy in virtual worlds like Second Life.

“We’re not claiming [online networks are] the panacea for philanthropies,” said Ben Binswanger, the Case Foundation’s chief operating officer. “[But] we think it’s way too early to dismiss it as an Internet fad. … We’re going to keep pushing down this path because we see enough spark here to make it interesting.”

Power to engage

For non-profits, the power of social networks is engagement, not necessarily sheer dollar numbers.

“If you send out a direct-mail piece, you never know if people open it up or not, unless they mail a check back to you,” said Steve Byers, director of development and communications at Kansas-City based WaterPartners International, which promotes safe drinking water. “With the online community, we know which pages they’re clicking on. … They want to provide feedback and interact with the organization in ways that are very exciting and challenging.”

WaterPartners created three fictional characters from Ethiopia, India and Honduras and placed them in a virtual village on Second Life to illustrate the challenges of accessing potable water. The avatars also have profiles on MySpace and Facebook, and shots of their Second Life village are posted on photo-sharing site Flickr. While the amount of money raised so far is tiny, Byers said he could see online marketing and fundraising slowly displacing direct mail.

“I’ve been in fundraising for over 20 years, so this is really kind of a brave new world for me,” he said. “I’ve really had to rethink my whole approach to fundraising through the Internet.”

Clearly, online fundraising is in its infancy. A survey by The Chronicle of Philanthropy showed that online giving for 187 large charities totaled $1.2 billion in 2006, up from $881 million in 2005. But of 147 organizations, 103 said online donations accounted for less than 1 percent of total contributions in 2006.

“There is no really large, significant fundraising happening on social networks, but there’s a sense in the non-profit community that that’s where the prospects come from,” said Michael Hoffman, chief executive of Chicago non-profit consulting firm See3 Communications.

Building relationships

Some non-profits that have a presence on social networking sites have discovered a new relationship with users.

Carie Lewis, the Humane Society’s Internet marketing manager, said she finds herself responding to lots of mundane questions on pet care as a result of maintaining a presence on Facebook, MySpace, YouTube and Flickr. More important, Lewis said she’s discovered supporters outside the organization’s traditional demographic of women in their 50s.

“It was a lot of work, but it really paid off for us,” Lewis said. The Humane Society has raised more than $33,000 on Facebook from users who have set up pages to protest everything from puppy mills to seal clubbing in Namibia. The amount of money raised is small, but convinced Lewis’ bosses that the online efforts have merit.

“Traditionally, I think non-profits focus on high-value donors, and what MySpace provides is an enormous network of people who are able to get involved through volunteering, offline events and donating in smaller amounts,” said Lee Brenner, who oversees activism-related content on MySpace.

Link [Chicago Tribune]

Copyright © 2008, Chicago Tribune

I went to several Web 2.0 sessions at NTEN, Nonprofit Technology Conference in New Orleans last week. It was amazing how many there were, sometimes even two at the same time. They were all very good, and all the same. My one criticism of all of them is addressed at the end of this post. Also at the end, I have embedded the presentations of several of those folks I mention.

The first session I attended was specifically about social networking and led by Brian Reich of Echo Ditto, author of Media Rules!

Brian’s big point was that there’s a lot of noise to cut through and to engage people you must deploy quality, focused, niche communications. Volume and frequency are not primary considerations. Most importantly, participate with authenticity. This is something anyone studying the space knows. You must be a credible member of the community sharing useful information and thoughtful comments before anyone will respond to your asks.

A good tip Brian mentioned was to deputize people to grow your network for you. This is something we have been working on at See3 – methods to build a network of influencers in the social networks who will carry your torch. Giving people certain authority to speak on your behalf, and rewarding them with praise or titles or special invitations to events, etc. In other words, to formalize that relationship is a great idea. Another point Brian made was that perhaps Facebook and Myspace are not for your organization. You may find better success participating in a niche social network like Changents or Gather. I suggest another one to explore, Rethos.

Brian provided an overview of many of the social networks out there. He talked about LinkedIn, but he did not address LinkedIn for Good. I asked him afterwards if he knew of any case studies or saw any potential for using LinkedIn for Good, which launched last year with much buzz but seems like nothing but tumbleweeds rolling by since. His thoughtful response: “I know a bunch of people have tried (and there has actually been some discussion within the NTEN blogs and community about it) to use LinkedIn as a fundraising platform. The LinkedIn platform isn’t structured exactly to support direct fundraising, and I think people don’t necessarily appreciate when you don’t respect the medium. But I have seen groups use LinkedIn to form committees that do fundraising, to have people volunteer time from an in-kind standpoint, etc. So, if you use the right tools through LinkedIn, you can get that much closer to a donation–so I’d say that is a better path. All experiments still, but there is clearly potential.”

Brian emphasized that social networking is not for every organization, and that you must consider your goals, strategies, tactics, and resources, not assuming the use of any particular tool. This notion was echoed by the other presenters on this topic that I saw, but Brian said it the best and with the most authority: “If you leave this conference, go back to your team and say, ‘We need a Facebook strategy’ then I have failed…”

Beth Kanter led a mere four sessions. I attended two of them. The first was about ROI. Coming from a background in SEM and lead generation, I was so glad to see “Web 2.0 ROI” as the title of a session. Beth pointed out a great study on blogging ROI from Forrester. She asked the audience how many people use formal ROI evaluations with regard to social media efforts. I was glad my hand was up but sad it was one of only two.

The first panelist was Eve Smith from Easter Seals. They tried the Causes challenge – seeking donors on Facebook - and her biggest takeaway was that influencers are more valuable than donors. I assume what she means is that if you find the influencers, they will bring you more donors than you could find on your own. Makes sense.

Wendy Harman from the Red Cross gave her case study on Project Listen. She does an amazing job at communicating with and monitoring the blogosphere and reporting on coverage of her organization. Her take-aways from that activity are that internally, people love the feedback from bloggers, and externally, people love to know that you care.

Danielle Brigida from NWF presented a case study on Digg and StumbleUpon. It took her 7 months to establish relationships in the Digg community sufficiently to get good results (ie, popular stories). Just like anywhere else, you have to be a credible, authentic participant and contribute valuable information in order for others to reciprocate. In StumbleUpon, she saw results from being the source of quality, relevant info. I have embedded Danielle’s PowerPoint below.

Carie Lewis, who does tremendous things on Myspace and in other social media channels, gave a case study on HSUS’s video contest after the Michael Vick dogfighting incident. HSUS only got 22 entries but from a marketing perspective it was a success in part because Hulk Hogan did the promo video for the contest. She learned from the experience to require email in the voting tool, target people likely to submit videos, and do more blogger outreach. See3 has run many successful video contests (a few examples here, here and here). Video contests can be a great way to give your community something tangible to do and create great content for your organization in the process.

Justin Perkins from Care2 presented his famous social media ROI calculator. The big take-away here is that if you assume one full-time staff member getting paid $52k/yr dedicated to social media can yield even 10,000 new email addresses for your organization in a year (which I agree would be a lot), then your CPA is $5.20/name. Justin says “there are cheaper ways to acquire email addresses.” He respectfully refrained from plugging Care2, which uses a brilliant petition process to find supporters for your cause among their network of 7 million activists at the cost of between $2-3/name.

My understanding of Care2, based on comments from Care2 clients, is that the lists perform well, however the demographic is clearly progressive, and somewhat skewed to middle-aged women. So how much any organization should rely on Care2 for list-growth really depends on your mission, objectives, and your own community. There is a lot more to this discussion, such as all of the potential benefits to social media marketing beyond strictly list-growth, such as branding, fostering community, creating discussion, distributing media materials, participating in existing communities, and many other results more difficult to fit in a spreadsheet. Again, what are your goals.

Another Web 2.0 related session I attended was See3’s Michael Hoffman about online video, which he already summarized. My take-aways from his session: “viral to what end?” Michael made the point very well that everyone wants their video to go viral, but that is not a legitimate goal in itself. Views do not necessarily lead to donations and email addresses. You need a strategy for your video and your call to action. This relates to Michael’s other session on using microsites to convert views to action. He said it’s important to start with stories and to have a strong call to action. Now here’s the part where I criticize my boss. He showed this as an example of a direct response piece, which is a great video and performed well in the email appeal for which it was created, but not nearly as well as this one, which has a much stronger call to action and is the better example.

The last session on Web 2.0 I attended was called “The Next Latest Thing: The Future of Technology in Nonprofits” led by John Kenyon with Beth. I have to say, the title of this session was misleading. Upon reflection, “the next latest thing” seems cheeky, but “the future of technology in nonprofits” seemed like a fun exploration into the unknown rather than a run-down of the most contemporary tools everyone else was talking about. Nevertheless, what I liked about this session was that John did a great job of getting comments from the crowd after each point, creating some discussion and incorporating feedback into his presentation. What I also liked about this session is that John echoed many things we advocate at See3: tell stories, get user-generated content as a great way to efficiently acquire marketing material and ignite your audience, use media to engage people.

Now here is my criticism of all Web 2.0 sessions, as promised at the beginning of this post: most, if not all, of the case studies are from large organizations with communications teams and resources that allow them to try things like video and daily engagement in social networks. But what about the small organizations that have one person responsible for marketing & communications, and that person is also the network administrator, web manager, and events coordinator? What can they do? We cannot solve their problem of limited resources, but we can find their successful case studies and present them to inspire other organizations like them, which is a majority of nonprofits. I’d be happy to moderate that panel next year in San Francisco.

| View | Upload your own

| View | Upload your own

| View | Upload your own

| View | Upload your own