Dealing with negative comments in social media

Ever since joining the Singapore Memory Project full-time in Nov 2011, I've been taking a closer look at social media strategies.

Being a social media practitioner, as I had for the past seven years, does not necessarily make me a good "social media strategist". It definitely helped that I was "part of the scene" but that did not automatically mean I could instantly formalise plans and approaches to fit a broader perspective.

It took me a few weeks of thinking, reading, and bouncing ideas with the team. I've paid closer attention to articles and posts relating to social media plans, strategies and so on. I intend to share more about my thoughts of the social media plan for the Singapore Memory Project. But that'll be for later posts.

Today, I came across this post today (hat-tip to @criagthomler), which led me to this diagram on the "8 responses to criticisms in online communities", by Laurel Papworth.


NegativeComments in Social Media. CC-CY-NC-ND. Originally uploaded by Laurel Papworth.

I thought the diagram summed up the various scenarios beautifully. A fuller explanation is at her post.

Here's the eight approaches to negative online comments, according to Laurel's (I've paraphrased them somewhat):

1. Ignoring the negative commenter
2. Taking legal measures
3. Attempt to deflect the negative comment to a positive one
4. Remove and/ or ban the commenter
5. Attempt to educate the commenter
6. Adopt a confessionary/ apologetic tone
7. Defend the organisation's position
8. Use humour; adopt a self-depreciative stand

FORMAL VS INFORMAL
Approach one through five involves more of the formal organisational tone, while six to eight shifts the tone towards a more personable one. That's according to the diagram. Which made sense, though I think in practice, the "Formal Organisational Tone" and "Personal Tone" could be flexibly used, depending on the situation.

But come to think of it, I think "Personal Tone" probably starts at three and would not be effective if attempting to convince the other party that you're serious about taking legal measures. In the same regards, it would be very difficult -- and weird -- if one employes a formal organisational tone while attempting at humour. Well, unless you want to brand your organisation that way.

The diagram makes a lot of sense. It acknowledges that sometimes, perhaps on rare occasions, a formal tone has to be adopted. The crux is in how the organisation recognises and decides when would be appropriate to switch between formality and informality.

Most would agree a credible social media plan should have a "Response Strategy". Critically, an organisation need to be able to ascertain whether it should choose to respond or not, in addition to knowing how to formulate appropriate responses. Especially for 'crisis communications' or negative sentiments. Plenty of case studies out there, detailing how organisations were seen to be caught with their pants down, with regards to "social media crisis management".

OWNERSHIP
I've realised even more that an orgainsation's social media department should have a full-time staff heading it. This may sound like a self-reinforcing statement, given that I'm tasked to head the Singapore Memory Project's social media functions. Heh. It's just that taking on this role has convinced me of this.

An organisation's social media team could have a large part of its function outsourced. But decisions on communications should flow back to a staff with the appropriate level of accountability and discretionary authority.

I suppose it's possible that certain level of authority could be conferred to the outsourced staff. But if communications is key, is it then a good call to outsource a key function? Probably not.

It's not so much that one has to be a "full time staff". The closer truth is that the staffers in charge -- whether the one fronting the Twitter feed, or the department head -- have to take ownership of being the social media voice for the project/ organisation. With it comes the risk and responsibilities too.

Staffers need to have the confidence and gumption (i.e. guts and balls) in communicating with the online public.

LICENSE TO SOCIALISE
Staff competencies come with training and staff development, in addition to the innate abilities of the staffers. Then there has to be empowerment, either through the appropriate staff appointments. Or the organisation's policy on social media engagement (which is often related to its corporate communications policy).

You can't be an effective social media staffer if you feel the need to check with your supervisor on how to respond. It's equally true that you can't do your job effectively if your supervisor requires you to clear every response before it is posted.

One of the competencies would be the ability to read correctly the sentiments expressed by the online community. And then being able to decide on the appropriate response. Or perhaps a conscious decision not to respond at all.

Simply put, the social media team has to be empowered to speak for the organisation, to varying degrees.

The speed of the organisation's response has proved to be critical factor in how the online community perceives its "social media street creds". The perceived lack of response, often just a lag of a day or two, may do equal damage to the organisation compared to saying something that the community does not agree with.

Remixes, Attribution, Creative Alchemies: The Long Tail in Acts of Kindness (part 2)

Continued from Part 1:

THE 'WHY' QUESTION
I get a kick out of the creative process.

I've come to realise that's the basis of why I create. Of having seemingly created something out of nothing; moulding ideas into something that can be seen/ heard/ experienced.

But beyond the initial post-creative euphoria, I will wonder if all my time and effort was worth it. The inevitable “What’s the point” rhetoric.

Luckily, once in a while, something like this comes along. Reminding me that it's worth it.



It's not new to have a video using my CC-licensed music as the soundtrack.

But what's new to me was the user being a company rather than an individual hobbyist.

Red Maps seem like a start-up firm. At least, not a huge conglomerate with a global household brand name (I do hope they become one though).

Still, to have a for-profit company using my work meant that my work had to be of a certain quality. No company worth their salt would want to be associated with low-quality music in their video. For a for-profit outfit to use my work, I consider that as affirmation of something.


REDEFINING WHAT IS 'BEING PAID'
When I started posting my work online, I haboured hopes that my talents might be discovered. And that I'd earn big bucks.

But the idea of "being paid" has become, to me, less about money. It is more about affirmation from others, which serves as a yardstick for my journey of self-expression.

The skeptic in me would say that all that is merely an exercise in self-massaging the ego. Nonetheless, we all have our own reasons for sharing and giving. And expectations as well.

I can't speak for everyone else who share their works under Creative Commons licenses. My primary motivation, if you can call it that, can be summed up as follows:

• I create, as part of my journey towards self-actualisation.
• Since the work already here, I might as well let others benefit.

Creative Commons provided that framework for sharing. A framework that I understood and was comfortable with.


LONG TAIL TO ACTS OF KINDNESS
I believe there might be a Long Tail to acts of kindness.

"An example of a power law graph showing popularity ranking. To the right is the long tail; to the left are the few that dominate. Notice that the areas of both regions match."

Can we really apply the true statistical definition of the Long Tail to "an act of kindness"?

What if the X-axis was Time and the Y-axis (vertical) was "the number of people who benefited from that one single act of kindness"? That "act of kindness" could be that one piece of work, which you and I release online (this might be interesting conversational fodder with David).

Whimsical, perhaps.

But I've come to believe that sharing my work online -- and allowing others to use -- is one of the simplest act of kindness I can do.

There's opportunity costs but it's of a very low probability. Sure, I could have been paid for my work. But I'm not likely nor willing to invest that sort of time and energy, to perfect my craft to the level of being able to make serious money on a regular basis. Such opportunity costs are low.


GENEROSITY ON A SPECTRUM
The extreme end of generosity would be to share the work as 'Public Domain'. You need not seek permission at all, nor are credits needed; absolutely no strings attached.

At the other end would be for people to pay money if they want to use my creations.

In-between, I think, are differing levels of generosity:

• Creative Commons, where the owner has already given the world permission to use the work. One need not seek explicit permission, though attribution is required. Receiving monetary payment is often not the main intent of the owner.
• 'All Rights Reserved' Copyright, where explicit permission is needed from the creator. The creator may agree to your request without any form of payment (if payment is required, it's not really sharing).

HELPING MYSELF
I've also come to realise that when I share, I hope to be entertained and learn from other people's self-expressions. I'm definitely a beneficiary, when people use my work and transform it into something that I cannot do for myself.

Sometimes, what is transformed fits exactly the vision I had.

I discovered two videos (here, and here) that seem to be part of a class assignment.

The second one is my absolute favorite, to date (thanks, LukeD):


KIB 105 Animation and Motion Graphics Assessment 3 - Luke Daly from Luke D on Vimeo.

LukeD's creative interpretation matched the sort of mental imagery I had, when I posted those words. Honestly, I would not have spent time making such a video. Nor would I have been able to produce an illustration-based work.

The best part is that my spoken poetry, that LukeD used, weren't even mine. The creator was kind enough to let me post them as a spoken piece.

The Long Tail of kindness indeed.

Source: creativecommons.org.au/content/attributingccmaterials.pdf. CC-BY. Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Creative Industries and Innovation (www.cci.edu.au) in partnership with Creative Commons Australia(creativecommons.org.au).

Singapore Memory Project: Focus group session with Memory Corp volunteers

My Digital Engagement team mates and I conducted a series of focus group sessions today. For the upcoming Singapore Memory website.

Here's one with volunteers from the Memory Corp: Tuck Chong (third from the left), James (first from the right), and Philip (not in the picture).



We'll be posting more behind-the-scenes updates regularly. At the official blog, that is (which is also scheduled for a facelift in a few weeks).

Busy busy busy.

Remixes, Attribution, Creative Alchemies: The Long Tail in Acts of Kindness (part 1)

Here's a few recent videos that used my songs from my ccMixter.org uploads.


Remixed with: Beyond Jupiter III


Remixed with: Dreaming of the Ocean


Remixed with: Island Journey Reprise

Typically, my songs are used in "hobbyist videos". Not surprising, as the need and demand for royalty-free works generally come from hobbyists. I think it's also the increasingly popularity of ccMixter.org as the source for CC-licensed music.

ATTRIBUTION
I love how people are crediting my music, in full, in their video descriptions. By "full", I mean describing the title, indicating my name, and including the relevant URL to link back to the source.

This wasn't necessarily the case a few years back, at least for those remixes that use my music. My impression, at least. I don't have hard evidence to prove that the level of attribution has improved. Unless I trace back all the remixes and compile the way they have been cited (... hmm).

Anyway, about two years ago, most remixes tend to unwittingly omitted the credits entirely. People email me to thank me for sharing the music, and to let me know how they have used my music. For those cases where I find that credits were not made, I ask nicely that they include my name and the relevant URL. If they have already uploaded a video, I ask that the credit is included in the description, which was easily done rather than asking them to include in the video and re-upload again.

I would add that the attribution requirement was the stated condition for using the work:

"For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the licence terms of this work"

I didn't want them to think I was asking for something extra. In all cases, they happily made the change. Some went the extra step of amending their video and re-uploading it. Which was very gracious on their part.

How do I properly attribute a work offered under a Creative Commons license?
All CC licenses require users to attribute the original creator(s) of a work, unless the creator has waived that requirement or asked that her name be removed from an adaptation or collection.

CC licenses have a sophisticated and flexible attribution requirement, so there is not necessarily one correct way to provide attribution. The proper method for giving credit will depend on the medium and means you are using, and may be implemented in any reasonable manner, although in the case of an adaptation or collection the credit needs to be as prominent as credits for other contributors.

The CC website offers some best practices to help you attribute works, and the CC Australia team has developed a helpful guide to attributing works in different formats.
Source: Creative Commons FAQ

Rather than say that Creative Commons "does not provide clarity on the proper way to cite", it's more accurate to say that Creative Commons allows flexibility in how attribution can be presented. The manner of attribution depends on the medium. For instance, a "live" hyperlink is only possible for an online media, whereas for a print media the URL is obviously not "live".

It's more important that people -- users and creators -- understand the spirit and philosophy of Creative Commons. But that's not to say there cannot be clarity in how to attribute properly when making use of Creative Commons licensed materials.


HOW TO CITE EQUITABLY
I highly recommend this PDF guide to attributing works by CC Australia. It's both comprehensive and concise:

What to include when attributingAll Creative Commons (CC) licences require that users of the work attribute the creator... ...The same principles apply to providing attribution across all CC licences. You should:

• credit the creator;
• provide the title of the work;
• provide the URL where the work is hosted;
• indicate the type of licence it is available under and provide a link to the licence (so others can find out the licence terms); and
• keep intact any copyright notice associated with the work

It's not so much about "proper citation" but more of crediting the source adequately and equitably. If I'm using a CC-licensed work, I try to put myself in the other person's shoes and ask how I would want to be credited. Also, I believe that "payment" can be the form of reciprocity. Any one who uses my work, and provides equitable attribution, is my publicist.

In the digital economy, a "live" hyperlink is currency.

Admittedly, I don't always follow the last two points, i.e. indicating the CC license type and copyright notice. But I always state the creator's name and provide a "live" link back to the CC-licensed works. I try to adhere to this when listing the credits in my videos, but if it's not possible to do so fully, the "live" links are definitely in the description section.

That said, if the creator indicates very clearly how they would like to be attributed, I will always adhere to it. It helps if creators state their preferences upfront and/ or in an obvious location next to the work.

My own practice, in licensing my own work, is to state how I would like to be credited. I state this near or just below the download link. Basically in a way that others won't miss it.


I didn't always do that in the beginning. I used to assume others knew how to properly cite my work.

As creators, we can help others help us, by providing clear, simple/ hassle-free instructions and requirements. Most people will respect and adhere to that.


To be continued: Part 2.

My 2011 read list

The start of 2012 seems, for me, just as busy as 2011. Might as well just start with the annual read list.

Total items read since 2004:

• 2011 = 70 items (25 items were eBooks)
• 2010 = 93 items
• 2009 = 79
• 2008 = 72
• 2007 = 104 items
• 2006 = 67 items
• 2005 = 91 items
• 2004 = 100 items

Will do a more detailed breakdown, if I get the chance (ha!)

What's obvious is that my 2011 reading volume has decreased, reversing the increasing trend for the last two years.

2011 was a particularly busy and hectic year for me. I'm still having flashbacks of bringing work home, after office hours -- on a regular basis from January 2011 all the way to maybe July. *shudder*

But I believe I read far more graphic novels in 2010 compared to 2011. So in terms of reading depth, 2011 might be better. Maybe (I might be wrong).

The purchase of an iPad, and seriously using the NLB's Overdrive collection on a regular basis, has given me more reading options. I think my reading volume might have hit 40 or 50 items only, if not for the iPad. And those 40 to 50 items might comprise of mostly graphic novels.

A snapshot of my reading genre tag-cloud so far (wished I'd done a snapshot each year... ah well)

My overall perception was that I was reading more non-fiction (not graphic novels) compared with previous years. In anycase, I'm rather intrigued to discover any particular shifts in reading patterns, beyond volume read. We shall see.

Will leave you with a re-post of my 2011 list (first posted at RoughNotes)

1. Aftermath: Prepare for and survive apocalypse 2012/ Lawrence E. Joseph
2. Aliens: Female war/ Mark Verheiden
3. Asimov’s Science Fiction/ March 2011 
4. Battlestar Galactica: Complete Omnibus V1 
5. Battlestar Galactica: Ghosts 
6. Between water and song: New poets for the twenty-first century/ edited by Norman Minnick
7. Bicycles: Love poems 
8. Bloomberg Businessweek/ June 27 – July 3, 2011
9. Blue Beetle: Black and blue/ Matthew Sturges & Mike Norton
10. Brevity 2: Another collection of comics by Guy & Rodd/ Guy Endore-Kaiser & Rodd Perry
11. Buy me: new ways to get customers to choose your products and ignore the rest/ Marshall Cohen
12. Buying time: trading your retirement income for income and lifestyle in your retirement years/ Daryl Diamond
13. Coach Wooden: The seven principles that changed his life and will change yours/ Pat Williams
14. Core strength for dummies, pocketbook edition/ LaReine Chabut
15. Digital animation 
16. Dog fancy/ natural dog (2 issues in 1)/ Aug 2011
17. Freakonomics 
18. Fundsupermart/ 4Q 2009
19. Futurama: The time bender trilogy/ created by Matt Groening; story by Ian Boothby
20. Gone case/ Dave Chua
21. Happiness at the end of the world/ Happy smiley and friends
22. Heroes vol 1 
23. How an economy works and why it crashes/ Peter D. Schiff
24. Jack Doe: Anonymous/ Shawn Yap, Gabriel Chua, Xander Lee
25. James Robinson’s complete WildCATS 
26. Jia: a story of North Korea/ Hyejin Kim
27. Kato vol 1: Not my father’s daughter/ Ande Parks
28. Liquid thinking: Inspirational thinking from the world’s greatest achievers/ Damian Hughes
29. Lost Squad/ written by Chris Kirby; art by Alan Robinson; lettered by Kel Nuttall
30. Love is the best medicine: what two dogs taught a veterinarian about hope, humility, and everyday miracles/ Dr. Nick Trout
31. Mac Life/ May 2010
32. Macworld/ April 2011
33. Macworld/ May 2011
34. Mental floss: genius instruction manual 
35. Myspace Darkhorse Presents (MDHP) vol 4.
36. Northlanders. Book one: Sven the returned/ Brian Wood
37. Northlanders. Book two: The cross and the hammer/ Brain Wood
38. Relational intelligence: how leaders can expand their influence through a new way of being smart/ Steve Saccone
39. Return on engagement: content, strategy, and design techniques for digital marketing/ Tim Frick – Standard
40. Six degrees of expatriation/ Maida Pineda
41. Small message, big impact: how to put the power of the elevator speech effect to work for you/ Terri L. Sjodin
42. Social media metrics/ Jim Sterne
43. StarCraft: Frontline. Volume 1.
44. Story structure architect: A writer’s guide to building dramatic situations & compelling characters/ Victoria Lynn Schmidt
45. Stranded vol 1/ Mike Carey & Siddharth Kotian
46. Strategic thinking: a nine step approach to tragedy for marketeers and managers/ Simon Wootten & Terry Horne
47. Strength for life: the fitness plan for the rest of your life/ Shawn Philips
48. Teenage as a second language 
49. Terminator: revolution 
50. The agile enterprise 
51. The appeal/ John Grisham
52. The brain fitness workout: brain training puzzles to improve your memory, concentration, decision-making skills, and mental flexibility/ Philip Carter
53. The collected stories of Arthur C. Clarke. Short stories/ Arthur C. Clarke
54. The crown and other stories/ Rabindranath Tagore; translated by Ranjita Basu
55. The digital handshake: seven proven strategies to grow your business using social media/ Paul Chaney
56. The genius machine: the eleven steps that turns raw ideas into brilliance/ Gary Sindell
57. The home and the world 
58. The immortal iron fist 
59. The past and the punishments 
60. The Question: The five books of blood/ Greg Rucka et al.
61. The right decision 
62. The tarnished angel 
63. The unwritten: Inside man/ Mike Carey & Peter Gross
64. The war that time forgot: Vol 1 
65. Twitterville: how businesses can thrive in the new global neighborhoods/ shel israel
66. What should I do with the rest of my life? True stories of finding success, passion and new meaning in the second half of life/ Bruce Frankel – Standard
67. What the dog saw, and other adventures/ Malcolm Gladwell
68. Why we run: a natural history/ Bernd Heinrich
69. Work’s intimacy/ Melissa Greg
70. Yes! 50 secrets from the science of persuasion/ Noah Goldstein, Steve J. Martin, Robert B. Caildini

When Nations Remember II - 28 Nov 2011

Here's my very belated take on the "When Nations Remember II" event, held on 28 Nov 2011. The event was part of the Singapore Memory Project (mentioned in this 2011 MICA speech; also mentioned in PM Lee's 2011 National Day Rally speech), to thank partners and give various partners and stakeholders a sense of the goodwill and buzz that has been built up in the past months. Also, it was to pay tribute to about 100 volunteer "Memory Corps" members for their support and contribution to this national project.

I took a few notes that day, but got caught up with stuff, i.e. more procrastination. Add a dose of laziness. This largely photo "essay" is the result.

Luckily, there are published perspectives of some people who attended the event. Here's Dexterine, Lizzy and James (see here, here and here). Chun See also blogged about it (he wasn't a Memory Corps volunteer at the time of the event, but glad to say he has subsequently volunteered to be part of the movement).

Of the presenters that day (several interesting ones), the person who stood out was the young lady, Lizzy. I thought she gave a fantastic presentation that morning. Your passion and enthusiasm was very real. I remember thinking to myself, "Listening to a young person like that makes me proud to be Singaporean". Would have wanted to tell her and her friends all what an awesome thing they did with their Unseen/Unsaid series.

Alright then.

My version of a post-event blog post.

Monday morning. Asian Civilisation Museum (how apt!) Colleagues reported at 7am. Quite a few were involved on the rehearsal on Sunday.


Preparations at the registration table.


Another dry-run before the actual stuff.


At the back of the hall was a wall, inviting people to share their memories.




Participants were invited to write their stories on a card and clip it to a clothes line strung across the wall.


Here's mine (fuzzy image from my camera phone). Essentially, I shared what came to mind first. Oddly enough it was about a memory when I was about 10 years old. I remember waking up at 5.30am and walking to school. Staring up at the dark dawn sky, I wondered to myself (I'm not making this up) just how many more years of this routine I've to go through at such unearthly hours. Heh.


At about 9am, guests started streaming in.


Dr. Yaacob Ibrahim, Minister MICA, spicing his speech with some of his personal memories.


There was a screening of this video, about the handover of the Gunong Pulai waterworks (see this CNA article). The video featured some of the Memory Corps volunteers like Mr TC Lai (he has some really interesting stories/ personal memories, here and here).


He was given this token of appreciation: a framed poster from Singapore's first ever water campaign. A very apt token, for he was the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (2004 - 2011).


A shot of my colleagues from the 'Engage' division, National Library. They were the division responsible for organising this event.


At the conclusion of the morning's segment, the Memory Corps volunteers were invited to take a group photo. Essentially, the Memory Corps are people who volunteer their time and effort to write memories for the Singapore Memory Project (you can read some of their stories at iRemember.SG). Or they may interview other people for their stories.


A buffet lunch awaits.


Before the start of the afternoon session, I had the pleasure of speaking to Mr Hillary Francis ("call me Francis"). A very nice gentleman, who can be said to be one of the pioneers of the Singapore music scene. BTW, check out his LinkedIn profile.


The afternoon session featured some pretty interesting presentations. One was on the architectural designs of Malay houses in colonial times Singapore, plus dispelling the myths about what a 'Malay Village' should look like. Darn it, where are the YouTube videos?


I had to leave the event earlier, for another work appointment. Managed to snap a few (unfortunately rather badly focused) images of the memories-on-cards that some participants shared on the wall.






The event also saw the launch of the PictureSG web service, pictures.nl.sg (see this CNA article also).

Incidentally, I've recently transferred to the National Library, after a good 12 years in the public libraries. Have joined the Singapore Memory Project and heading the Online Engagement department. Will blog more about the project, and about my new work scope, in the months to come.

The persistent social media notice board (or "Singapore Police Force's first 'Facebook Arrest'")

In my view, the Singapore Police Force's (SPF) Facebook page is a very successful social media initiative by a government agency, in terms of public awareness, receptivity and amount of consistent "chatter" (i.e. comments).

I've not done any recent environment scan, let alone a comprehensive survey. But looking at the comments and number of congratulatory Likes for its recent "win", it's easy to conclude that the SPF Facebook page is certainly a popular one:


The "win" was this, as reported by ChannelNewsAsia, 25 Nov 2011 (emphasis are mine):

SINGAPORE: Police have arrested two loanshark suspects based on a lead that came from a photo that was posted on the police Facebook page in July 2009.

A netizen called the 999 number on November 11 after seeing the photo, saying he could identify the suspect.

Fuller details over at the SPF press release, "Singapore Police Makes Its First “Facebook Arrest", 25 Nov 2011:

This significant development came about on 11 Nov 2011 when a public-spirited person called 999 and informed that he could identify a loanshark suspect from a photo posted on the Police Facebook Page since July 2009. This has led to the arrest of the suspect and another suspect, both 19 years old, for suspected involvement in loanshark harassment activities in the Bukit Merah area. Investigations are ongoing.

THE PERSISTENT NOTICE BOARD
At first I missed the part about the initial public appeal for information posted in July 2009 (ASIDE: for a skimmer like me, maybe the post could have said something like "Facebook breakthrough for a two-year old unsolved crime..." or something to that effect).

Anyway, I understood why the SPF considered it a significant "operational breakthrough". The inference was that traditional channels (newspapers or TV) tend to have a limited duration before information fades from public awareness. Even if people remember something, verifying it via the source would be hard beyond a few weeks.

I'm reminded of the "Think Before You Post" advisory video, warning young people about the persistent nature of the Internet. For fighting crime, that quality is a good thing.


VIRAL EFFECT (?)
I also noted that the SPF Press Release stated that one of their aims, for starting their Facebook Page in 2009, was to "(take) advantage of the viral nature of social media".

I'm not entirely clear how much of the cascading effect took place. Reading the press release, I understood the sequence of events to be:

1. SPF posts the information on the suspects on Facebook in 2009.
2. Fast-forward to 2011, a member of the public recognised the suspect and contacted the SPF.

I wonder how that member spotted the FB photos of the suspects. Scrolled all the way to earlier posts? Heard about it through a friend, who heard it from a friend? Maybe even a fall-out among gang members and using the FB post to disguise the fact that the caller already knew the suspects?

But the above is moot (and probably suggests I've too active an imagination).

What's important is that the case was resolved, with the help of the public. This "Facebook Arrest" is also likely to send a strong signal to would-be-criminals about the even longer arm of the law.


THE RISK OF SOCIAL MEDIA WITCH HUNTS
Of course the downside of a "social media cascading effect" would be called a social media witch-hunt, or Internet Vigilantism. The viral nature of social media works both ways.

Having said that, I don't recall a case of a social media witch-hunt in Singapore. Which may suggest that for something as serious as identifying suspects to the police, Singaporeans are a calm and rational lot on the whole.

Which also suggests to me that the public has a very high level of trust in the SPF's thoroughness and professionalism.

I certainly have.


SOCIAL MEDIA AMPLIFIES TRUST. OR DISTRUST
The SPF would not receive any public tip-offs at all, never mind through a social media channel, if it did not have the trust of the populace.

I think that's one reason for it being a successful on Facebook.

When the SPF identifies someone as a suspect, intuitively I do not question that. I would have assumed the SPF has enough evidence to make that charge (it's not a small thing to be publicly announced as a suspect in a police investigation, even if subsequently proven to be innocent).

That sort of trust is like Internet reputations: Slow to earn, fast to destroy.

Gladly, the SPF has maintained that social trust for as long as I can remember. Its efforts in maintaining its Facebook page does a good job of reinforcing that, and probably enhancing it. I've always admired was the consistent level of chatter over at their Facebook page. I don't get a sense of it being an echo chamber effect.

It's not just my view about the SPF being successful on social media:

On the topic of strategies, and agencies needing to know what they want to use social media for, the Singapore Police Force was brought up as a role model that knew exactly what they wanted to use the social platforms for—information sharing and recruitment—and used it well.

Via www.FutureGov.asia

I was told the above was an unsolicited comment about the SPF. Yet another win.


SPF DOES NOT NEED TO BLOG (OR DOES IT?)
Back in May 2008, I wrote a three-parter on whether the SPF should have a blog (part 1, part 2, part 3).

They started their Facebook page in July 2009. Some people feel Facebook makes blogs redundant, but I've a different opinion -- perhaps for another post.

I wonder if SPF is planning for "the next step" wrt social media engagement. In my view, they are doing a darn good job already. I don't forsee the SPF embarking on the level of engagement like this last case study I blogged about, here and here).

But then again, maybe the SPF will lead the way. Again :)

UPDATE: Walter blogs about it, here.