Share This! How You Will Change the World with Social Networking

You know when you read something that is so great you want to just run down the street and tell everyone that they need to read it, like right now? Yeah, well that’s happened to me this weekend when I started (and finished) reading Share This!: How You Will Change the World with Social Networking, by Deanna Zandt.

Zandt is a media technologist as well as a consultant to key progressive media organizations including AlterNet and Jim Hightower's Hightower Lowdown, and hosts TechGrrl Tips on GRITtv with Laura Flanders. She specializes in social media, and is a leading expert in women and technology, which clearly gives her a unique background to write this book.

Some of the key ideas that Zandt explores in the book is looking at how social networks are places where we share stories and connect with others. I love that she recognizes that these are not necessarily new phenomena, but that she takes the time to help readers understand how the technology changes the spaces in which we do this as a society. She does this by discussing in depth the issues of trust, authenticity and privacy. At the heart of the book is examining how building empathetic relations really can change the world and she provides clear-cut examples of how this is possible.

This book is funny, engaging, and true to life. You’ll find yourself agreeing with Zandt at so many turns and understanding yourself in relationship to social media infinitely better after reading the book. And no matter what you background level in social media is I guarantee that you will find this book entertaining and useful. Also, I rarely ever read the “Resources” section of a book, but I think that this section may be one of the book’s greatest strengths. It answers the “so what do I do know” questions you may have, and has really great questions/answers related to some of the key themes, tips for individuals, and insights on how to manage information overload.

I really encourage other foundations as well as non-profit organizations to pick this book up, you'll benefit from Zandt's insight both personally and professionally, as you try to navigate the world of social media. After having finished the book, I’m even more excited to have the chance to hear Zandt speak at next week’s Personal Democracy Forum Conference. The theme of this year’s conference is the question, “Can the Internet Fix Politics” and I can’t wait to hear what she has to say about it.

Next up on my reading list will be The Networked Nonprofit: Connecting with Social Media to Drive Change, by Allison Fine and Beth Kanter. I was lucky enough to get a sneak preview of the book at the 2010 Nonprofit Technology Conference in Atlanta this past April. I’ll be sure to post my review of it once I get the actual book in my hands!

Public Poilcy Communicators of NYC

*note: This is a duplicate post. It was originally featured on the Knight Foundation blog last week. It is about an event attended on Wednesday, May 12th, 2010 at the Ford Foundation.

Yesterday I attended the most recent of a lunch series organized by the Public Policy Communicators of NYC (PPC-NYC). The luncheon was focused on “Navigating the Shifting Media Landscape” and its aim was to discuss several major recent developments that are contributing to the fractured media landscape and how media policy affects these issues. The group of approximately 30 or so experts discussed several topics including the importance of preserving network neutrality, how major media corporations are attempting to dominate public discourse, and how to best focus the efforts of all our organizations in light of current and future media policy.

The discussion started off with Knight Foundation consultant Vince Stehle highlighting some of the key elements from the Knight Commission report “Informing Communities: Sustaining Democracy in the Digital Age.” He talked briefly about the specific recommendations to maximize the availability of relevant and credible information to all Americans and their communities, the importance of strengthening the capacity of individuals to engage with information, and the necessity to promote individual engagement with information and the public life of the community.

Because PPC-NYC’s members consist primarily of foundation communication professionals and leaders from progressive non-profit organizations, there is an inherent understanding about the importance of having free and open information in a society. And as Knight Foundation President Alberto Ibargüen remarked earlier this week to a group at the 2010 Free Press Summit in Washington DC, "Information is at the heart of democracy."

Because of that inherent understanding, it was hardly surprising that the recommendations of the Knight Commission seemed to strongly resonate with the goals and efforts of this group. In fact, the group proved to be natural audience for this kind of thinking. Furthermore, there was also understanding and appreciation that without sound media policies that speak to the need for a clear and open flow of information, the basic tenets of not just the Internet are at risk, but so are the tenets of a democracy.

What I found most encouraging is that there seemed to be an agreement that no matter what area foundations and non-profit organizations are engaged in, whether it is health, environment, or other social justice issues, that the importance of sound media policy resonates with everyone. Without access to a free and open Internet, there are invariable restrictions on the capacity of individuals to engage with information. Without an open Internet, the ability to promote individual engagement with information becomes limited, threatening the work that is the heart of all of what we do. The need for an open Internet and access to technology is an issue that people can engage with, coalesce around and begin to integrate it into their everyday thinking and work. The importance of having information and strengthening the capacity of people to engage with information cuts across sectors.

We know the challenges we face, the digital divide, a lack of media literacy in certain communities, and an uphill battle against corporate interests. But more importantly we know what is as stake. Together we can figure out how to best implement the recommendations of the Knight Commission. It is up to each of us to do what we can in our own ways to make these tenets a reality.

Free Press Summit: Ideas to Action

Yesterday I attended the 2010 Free Press Summit: Ideas to Action in Washington DC. The purpose of the event was to try to answer some tough questions about the future of journalism, public media and the Internet. It brought together about 400 people and combined speeches from Washington’s top media policymakers, insight from community leaders, journalists and innovators as well as interactive breakout sessions.

The day started off with a welcome and kick off from Alberto Ibargüen, President of the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation as well as a keynote speech from Mignon Clyburn, Commissioner, Federal Communications Commission in which she talked about the importance of network neutrality and closing the digital divide. You can read her entire speech here.

Following Clyburn, the morning panel included titled “Social Media, Social Justice and the Future of the Internet” featured Jose Antonio Vargas, Huffington Post; James Rucker from ColorofChange.org; Andrew Noyes of Facebook, and author Deanna Zandt to talk about everything from what social media really means in the digital age, to privacy rights and how media policy affects these issues.

In the afternoon I attended a breakout session titled “Measuring Informed Communities” which was lead by Josh Stearns, Program Manager of Free Press. The session recognized that communities (however they be defined) are facing a growing information divide, and that if we are going to develop concrete strategies, solutions and policies to meet this challenge, we must first know what the unmet needs are. Of course, not every community is the same, and it’s up to each of us to understand and explore how we even measure whether a community is “informed.” The two other breakout sessions which I didn’t get a chance to attend focused on creating public interest policies around the future of media and journalism, and mobilizing communities for better media.

Lastly, the day finished off with a closing session, including a talk by Jehmu Greene, President of the Women’s Media Center.

If you missed the event but are interested in checking out any of the sessions, video recordings of the event will be posted shortly here. They will also be posting transcripts of the talks when they become available. You can also check out the great speakers and their bios. A special thanks to the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation who sponsored the event, and the hardworking staff of Free Press who made it all possible.

Also at the event yesterday, Free Press also released a new paper at the summit, titled “New Public Media: A Plan for Action” authored by Josh Silver, Candance Clement, Craig Aaron and S. Derek Turner. In this paper the case is made for why we need public media (examining both the crisis that exists and where there may be opportunity), how it’s possible to fund a public media trust, a section about leadership, diversity and expansion, and lastly, some great conclusions about how to take these ideas and spur action.

Lastly, if you’re interested in these issues, mark your calendar. Free Press will be holding its next National Conference for Media Reform in Boston, MA, on April 8^th-April 10^th, 2011. This conference brings together thousands of activists, media makers, educators, journalists, scholars, policymakers and engaged citizens to meet, tell their stories, learn tactics, and hear from great speakers and build the movement for better media in America. You can sign up for updates, or visit the conference’s website for more information as it becomes available.

BlueGreen Alliance Hosts Green Jobs Conference

Last week the BlueGreen Alliance, a collaboration begun in 2006 by the Sierra Club and the United Steelworkers, convened in Washington, D.C. for its annual Good Jobs, Green Jobs conference. The conference, although packed with hopeful discussions and plenaries on greening up America's power grid, proceeded under the looming (and surprisingly undiscussed) reality of the unstoppable geyser of oil billowing into the Gulf of Mexico. And although a series of inspiring speakers from both environmentalist and Union perspectives talked about joining forces to bring clean energy jobs back to a new America, it was hard to believe the change they spoke of was anything close to what will be necessary to wean our culture from its greenhouse gas addiction.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi spoke early on the first morning of the conference, kicking off the three days with crowd-pleasing lines. Met with cheers, Pelosi likened our current "Green Revolution" to the Technological Revolution and the Industrial Revolution. We have, Pelosi said, a "moral responsibility to protect God's planet."

But in a smaller talk later in the day, Dick Williams of Shell said in his thirty-year career with the company, he's never once been asked to do anything "immoral, unsafe or unethical" for the company. Obviously there is some difference of opinion on the morality of drilling for oil, and just what constitutes "protecting God's planet."

Williams has recently been appointed President of Shell Wind, but seemed to view it as a fledgling crutch designed solely to offset the carbon footprint of the rest of the company. And with only about 50 people on the payroll of Shell Wind, many of the Union workers in the audience were left frustrated, feeling that Green jobs in renewable industries remain somewhat elusive. A woman in the audience complained the industry has yet to welcome Union members. Others corroborated, saying the renewable industry too often hires contract workers and won't offer benefits or steady work. It still behooves workers to go to oil and gas jobs over green jobs.

But in part, the conference was designed precisely to bring attention to those hurdles. In a plenary session, Leo Gerard, International President of the United Steelworkers, spoke of the need to make Green Jobs more accessible and easier to get in the U.S. "What's the difference between having to rely on Chinese wind turbines versus Mideast oil?" Gerard asked.

The difference, of course, from an environmentalist's perspective, is that at least wind turbines are "clean" once they're working, no matter where they were manufactured. This distinction emphasized an interesting split between the environmental contingent and the Steelworker contingent. One side is motivated more by helping the planet, another by helping workers. During a smaller session, a representative from the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers said, "Historically, our biggest concern has been, what is this going to cost us?"

But perhaps motivations don't matter so much, when two factions share an end result.

Although the overall feeling of the conference was proactive and positive, the kinds of major shifts necessary -- and still possible, if industry and political leaders act quickly -- were not alluded to. Natural gas, nuclear, and even "clean coal" were included at different points in the conference with the rest of the "green" energies.