Blast from the Past: My presentation on "Web 2.0 & library services to young adults: An introduction"

Yikes. This is a really late post. Back in June 2011, I gave a presentation at the 5th National Library for Children & Young Adults Symposium, 2011, South Korea. The symposium was held at Duksan Resom Resort, South Korea.

OK, so this is a "blast from the past" post then.

Here's my presentation, which was an update and also an extension of this 2009 IFLA document of the same title. The organisers found that document and wanted me to present a condensed version.

Web 2.0 & library services to young adults: An introduction

View more presentations from Ivan Chew.

It might have sounded easy. Just reduce the original 78-pages to 30mins and deliver what's in the paper, right?

Umm, that would bore the heck out of me if I were the audience. So while in the plane to Seoul, I was still thinking about how to deliver the 30min talk. I wanted to be able to "tell a story" in a practical way. So I delivered what one of the delegate described later as a "workshop-style" talk.

The essence of my talk was how a Web 2.0. approach and mindset could be applied to librarians serving teens. But the presentations I enjoy are those that "told a story". And in the end, after brainstorming with a colleague, I did just that. I shared what I thought was a possible "day in the life of" a Teens Services librarian, straddling between online and offline engagement efforts.

My ego received a little boost when I was told it was like a TED talk. Heh.

It was also the first time I presented using an iPad. It was a calculated risk, as I've not delivered a talk using the iPad. I'd seen it used as a presentation tool but never actually used it. I rehearsed in the iPad, mentally went through backup plans. Arranged to test the iPad connection with their presentation equipment the day before my speaking slot. Phew, it worked beautifully.

So much so that I was confident enough, by then, to even take a "live" picture of the attendees. I directed my iPad camera towards them as the iPad was hooked up to the projector. The audience saw their "live" video capture on screen. Neat (it worked to start the 'show', as I could see the attendees smiling and being amazed -- and South Koreans were pretty IT-savvy folks!)



What was new for me as a presenter was having a simultaneous translation (in Korean) of my talk. Luckily, I chatted with the translators the day before. They advised me that I should just deliver my talk normally, as in I should not try to wait for them to catch up between words. It was easier for them if my pace of speaking was consistent (not too fast nor too slow). I did what they advised and it worked well. Trust the experts, I say!

In preparing for my talk, I had excellent help from Daryl Tay, who pointed to this excellent source of information on Digital Media stats in South Korea (I understand it was initiated by Prof Netzley).

I also got in touch with Creative Commons contacts in South Korea, who gave me a concise background on the social media and IP scene in South Korea. Not directly applicable in my talk in the end, but gave me that additional layer of verification and background information.

My Facebook post also drew several good suggestions from friends (rats, I can't seem to find that Facebook thread).

Here's a very nice quote from Shel, that I didn't get to use at the presentation:


I had a fantastic time. The South Korean organisers were (famously) excellent hosts and the programme was also one of the better ones I've attended.



Related post:
Your ideas on "Using social media as part of library services for Children or Teens", 1 June 2011.

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.

Social media Twitter interview: Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan

The level of competency and the manner of response, shown by the organisation's social media manager/ staff, says something about the overall competency of the organisation.

This recap, of what happened two weeks ago, illustrated that to me.



Minutes after I blogged and tweeted about this post, I received a twitter reply from @ShannonPaul, Social Media Manager of Blue Cross Blue Shield Michigan. With an offer to answer questions.

Got to admit, the speed of response was impressive. But even more so, it was the unsolicited offer to answer questions.

I replied that I'll think of good questions to ask. But before that I corrected my mistake on the blog post. Sorry, Shannon, I really thought "Shannon" was a guy's name. Forgive this librarian's ignorance.

Before asking my questions, I decided to do some homework. Read up Shannon's blog (was humbled by her About Page, subscribed!) plus her current work at A Healthier Michigan.

Decided on my five questions, tweeted to Shannon, to which she replied almost immediately as well.

Here it is (in actuality, I tweeted all five questions in a continuous thread, and perfectly happy if Shannon only answered some of them. But she graciously answered all; in between she was also responding to other tweets):

Me: Q1: how did you discover my post about BCBSM? I tweeted it but neither the tweet nor url mentioned BCBSM directly.

Shannon: We use @Radian6 to monitor brand mentions. They're usually really fast, especially at picking up tweets :)

Me: Q2: how did that YouTube comment episode turn out? Happy customer? Satisfied? Still cheesed? both parties met objectives?

Shannon: I don't believe that person ever followed up with me, but I can't be 100% sure in this case.

Me: Q3: what's the top 3 goals for @bcbsm's social media forays/ strategy?

Shannon: Top 3, eh? Build/strengthen relationships with consumers and business customers, gather feedback, provide quality health info

(Shannon managed to answer coherently within 140 characters. Fwah! Talk about being concise.)

Me: Q4: apart from an overall social media plan, does @bcbsm social media team have specific goals for the week/ month?

Shannon: Q4: Of course, but they're a bit granular and vary from week to week :)

Me: Q5: what would ur employer consider as 'success' for @bcbsm and @HealthierMI?

Shannon: Q5: Goals vary by business area. For @HealthierMI 2011 is about building an audience, 2012 will be about loyalty/engagement.

That's the five. I honestly felt like asking 50! Found the responses very useful. It corroborated with some ideas I had in mind for my new work scope (updates in another post).

Thanks again, Shannon.

Here's the other thing: Shannon's responses were also examples where the Social Media Manager/ staff can respond off the cuff and still keep their jobs!

Obviously she did not have to obtain clearance from Blue Shield Michigan's official corp comms department for some of the responses (for instance, the one about their success criteria). Unless, their corp comms staff was sitting right next to her. I doubt that.

To recap what I mentioned at the start of the post:

Perhaps the more subtle part was this -- the level of competency and the manner of response, shown by the organisation's social media manager/ staff, says something about the overall competency of the organisation.

To me, it says a heck of a lot about the organisation's understanding and approach to online engagement. Particularly their intent and the service potential.

How NOT to woo webloggers: Seattle Meetup example

This might be of interest to PR folks or Mass Comm students:

Here's an example (Apr 05) of how not to woo customers who are webloggers. Apparently, a Meetup.com employee was deemed to have insulted the Seattle Webloggers Meetup group by saying they were "belly aching", i.e. complaining about the fees.

Then someone discovered who that person was. So another meetup.com employee stepped in and managed to sooth things by participating in the conversation. The post ends with this quip, on what Meetup.com can learn from the experience:

Be open with your customers about what's going on. Speak with one voice. And never, ever insult your customers if they're webloggers.

The comments that follows the post are even more interesting. They are worth the time to read.


Rambling: In an earlier post I was grumbling about how Meetup.com was asking the group organiser to collect a fee or pay for it. Deadline was 15 May '05 for the payment.

The deadline came and went. The SG Bookcrossing meetup group is still there, except that the role of meetup organiser is defaulted to nobody. Now the message says:"This group is closed until someone steps up to be the Organizer."

The next person who wants to sign up as Organiser will have to pay a fee. Other than the Organiser, no one else can send out mass email alerts.

I don't know who will fork out USD $19 per month (SGD$31 per month) to sustain a bookgroup in Singapore, when there are free tools like Yahoogroups that offers similar features.

Bookgroups aren't really that hot in Singapore, unless maybe bloggers like mrBrown and XiaXue are organisers. Or maybe I would be proven wrong, that bookgroups are sustainable (I hope so). If you know of any, let me know.

I wonder how many meetup.com organisers pay the fee. Will Meetup.com still be around? In a situation where there's a good substitute for the "product", meetup.com pricing policy will only drive a large portion of its users to another competitor. This is a real-life case study in economics, business strategy, and Public Relations in an online environment.


Tag: bookcrossing, meetup.com