Simon has just started the first official live blog of a UK summit here. Now press accredit a bunch of other bloggers (if you haven’t already).
Category: Leadership
Urban Obsessives or Civic Revolutionaries, they still look much like this…
Take a good look at this picture. It is full of what I would call ordinary folk. None of them appear to be super heroes, to fit the heroic mould we have created for our social entrepreneurs and active citizens.
They are David Barrie’s fellow “bloody minded obsessives” who have collaborated on this urban project. He tells us
there are about ten people missing from the shot but this picture includes community leaders, an architect, a property developer, a former school cook and a janitor who won an Order of the British Empire – in part for her commitment to the cause. Every town or city in the world has such a group.
Dejan calls them urban obsessives.
Doug Henton of Collaborative Economics has a positive, more romantic catch-all description of the cadre.
He calls them civic revolutionaries.
I mention it simply because it is people such as these that populate the stories of the Grassroots Channel Podcast. You can see some of the pictures of these folk on our flickr account. More than 50 stories almost all from Birmingham. That’s a lot of bloody-minded urban obsessive civic revolutionaries for one city – but I know we’ve only just scratched the surface.
Downing Tweet : and so the conversation begins.
More on Downing Street on Twitter this lunchtime, Very friendly, would like to have a name behind the address please and I suppose my feedback would be that until we know who you are we don’t really know how to relate to you.
There has been loads of blog other suggestions since the Downing Tweet Twitter feed appeared last Thursday.
Here on Podnosh we were asking if this was anything special and what the social web might mean for politics and patronage, as we all potentially dance the merry dance of getting digitally close to those in power.
Simon Collister puts us social media enthusiasts in our place by reminding us that:
I spoke to a client’s government relations manager recently about how he communicates with MPs and Peers. His reply was: “Mostly by phone or letter…. Although some are starting to now use email.”
Emma Mulqueeny is a twitter fan and summarises why it does and doesn’t work:
Twitter rocks – but only if you use the Internet to communicate: email, Facebook, blogs etc. If you don’t it is as pointless as setting up an email account and not telling anyone about it… nothing will happen. My personal use of Twitter has been to share experiences and validate thoughts.
Is “Downing Street” interested in using Twitter to “validate thoughts”. The business of using it to ask questions assumes you need to know answers. So what sort of questions could the Prime Ministers Office ask on twitter? Would it be “How quickly should we get out of Iraq?” or “Purple or Red Tie for PMQ’s”. Most of my Twitter friends use it for both.
Techprogressive (Hello, do you have a name?) offers this sound advice:
be less boring. And be more human. Twitter’s a new form of media — use it that way. Post observations, insights people wouldn’t see in press reports, jokes, reactions to news.
Twitter is about forming relationships with your followers, so it doesn’t work if those doing the tweeting just come off sounding like public relations bots
Nils at NDNL echoes all these suggestions and expands on them a touch:
So, @DowningStreet, tell us who you are and keep things worth our while. Know we’re a different audience. Make sure any “news” you push our way has that sense of immediacy we’ve come to know and love over at Twitter.
If you, and others, keep that in mind, get personal with us (can you?) I suppose this will work. If not, the unfollows will hit you harder than you’d held possible and the, essentially great, idea will founder.
Meanwhile our own Brummie web news guru Paul Bradshaw offers a techie slap on the back over at Poynter:
so far their feed mostly offers a kind of Twitter shovelware using Twitterfeed. But that’s not bad in itself. Actually, I think it shows a higher level of tech savviness than simply twittering.
So I’d like to sum this all up into “Hello my name is Nick: what’s yours?”
Downing Tweet: is this about the personal, celebrity or patronage?
There has been a lot of interest in Downing Street joining Twitter. But does it really mean much, or anything, that’s new?
At the moment number 10 is using it predominantly as a means to feed us links to press releases plus the odd Youtube film. Very good.
Within less than 24 hours 178 people were following the updates and very sociably the Prime Minister’s Office has begun following fellow twitterers. Sorry if we’re a bit loud.
Simon Dickinson was very fast to blog it, as was Paul Bradshaw who treated it as a tweeting and blogging news exercise. Marshall Manson and Stuart Bruce wondered if this is the first Prime Minister(s office) on Twitter. If this is true it doesn’t seemed to have interested Twitter on their blog but has raised eyebrows in Holland, The US and Spain. Shane Richmond is sceptical about its true value, Steve Clayton treats it as a bit of fun while Matt Wardman has started laying claim all sorts of other twtiter/govt feed names.
This is not the first time the UK Government has ventured onto twitter.
I’ve been following HMGOV for a week or two now. Again it is quite literally a feed of news (as HMGOV sees news). What is interesting is that so far it has only attracted myself and 12 other followers (as I took that grab earlier today).
So what is going on?
Does being a top 100 follower give access to power? Glib I know but there was no equivalent rush to follow HMGOV. (Update – his was set up on the personal initiative of Justin as a personal tool for tracking news updates using twitter)
It is clear that Downing Street is potentially much more influential than a news feed from something called HMGOV (which doesn’t even have a link to a home page) and the social web is partly about patronage, attaching oneself to those with greatest/most useful influence. This is echoed by the fact that celebrities will often have the most ‘friends’ on any social network.
Is it also a minor indicator of how the web is essentially personal? Following HMGOV is like befriending the NHS – amorphous and meaningless. DowningStreet is smaller and one can imagine (just) that a known individual (called Gordon Brown) might see or even feed the feed from time to time. However I think the account might build more enduring relationships if it had a name behind it and not Gordon’s because that isn’t credible.
What other questions does this throw up:
- How do senior government figures use patronage as they extend their professional social networks online and will it differ from how they act in other networks?
How far will their feeds, blogs, social network profiles attract such large audiences that they diminish the influence of mainstream media?
Any answers? Any other Questions?