Blogs may no longer be as trendy as Twitter or FourSquare, but they’re still on that list of social media “must haves”. If your nonprofit doesn’t have a blog, someone probably thinks you should.

It’s possible that they’re right; a good blog can be a real benefit to an organization, giving you a strong voice and a controlled channel to converse with your supporters.

But not all blogs are good.  A bad blog — one that’s rarely updated, where the content is full of marketing gimmicks or spam runs wild in the comments — can do you more harm than good. If you can’t put real effort into maintaining it, it will make you look lazy, and could even hurt your reputation.

Don’t get me wrong. I love blogs. But I love  good content even more, and a blog without good content isn’t much of a blog.

Before you take the plunge in starting your own blog, consider what you’re getting into. If you can’t answer “yes” to almost all of these questions, a blog may not be the right channel for you, at least not right now.

Will one person be in charge of updating it? If you don’t have a staff member who’s excited about it, and has the expertise to maintain it (or at least the will to learn), your blog may languish without attention. They don’t need to do all the writing (in fact, a blog may work best with many writers from across your organization), but someone needs to run the show.

Can you update often? You don’t need to post every day, or even every week, but any blog needs regular posts to draw readers. If posts are few and far between, readers will lose interest. If you don’t have staff with time to devote to blogging (and a manager to oversee the schedule), along with a steady stream of potential topics, you may not be able to maintain the volume you’d like.

Do you have good content to post? A blog is a great place to tell stories and share news that don’t fit into your other communication streams. But if all your best content goes to your email newsletter, or (worse yet) you face a monthly struggle to identify good content for your emails, then a blog is just going to compete, and will likely take second place.  Without compelling and unique content, geared towards your blog’s audience, you might as well be recruiting those readers straight to your email list.

Do you have an audience in mind? At the outset, you should have an idea of who will read your blog, and what it will add that they don’t get from your other communications. It could be a demographic group. It could be core supporters who want to know more about what you’re up to. It could be other bloggers. But it should be someone.

Will you allow comments? Blogs, like any social media, are about conversations. But plenty of nonprofits don’t allow comments on their blogs. Sometimes there are good reasons, but more often, comments are blocked out of fear of negativity.  Without commenters, a blog is a one-way news stream. In that case, why bother with a blog? Why not just update a news section on your website?  Comments, both positive and negative, generate energy around your cause and give legitimacy to your voice. You’ll certainly need to develop guidelines, and take the risk that negative voices will seek you out on your blog… but if you can’t take that risk, then your blog isn’t really a blog.

Will you monitor comments? On any blog, you’ll find good comments, boring comments, unflattering comments… and junk.  It’s usually a good policy to allow and engage with commenters who disagree with you, but it’s always necessary to set some standards.  There’s nothing more unprofessional than a slew of spam comments on each of your posts.   Even comments from “real” people should be removed if they are irrelevant or vulgar.  A spam filter will take care of most of the problems, but you still need to pay attention – encouraging the good commenters, engaging the controversial ones, and shutting out the truly unwanted.

Will you promote your blog? The main reason for writing a blog is (presumably) to have readers. How will you bring readers to you?  A message to your email list might be an obvious first step, but promoting your content in an ongoing way – by highlighting popular posts on your homepage, integrating blog content into your email stream, tweeting your favorite posts – will help your readership grow.  How can you encourage your colleagues to promote and take advantage of the blog in their own work?

When it comes to slideshows on Web sites, you’re pretty much got two choices: Adobe Flash, or JavaScript (which for the purposes of this post we are no going to call jQuery*).  Up until the last year or so, the only way to deliver the level of sophistication required for slideshows, has been with Flash.  Increasingly though, we are recommending the use of jQuery over Flash for the majority of the slideshows that we make as  part of our site designs, and are even being asked to convert existing Flash slideshows to jQuery .  First things first, though, what is Flash and what is jQuery?

Flash

The best way to think about Flash – for the purposes of this discussion – is as a bit of magic, included on a Web page just like an image, that can do all kinds of really cool animations, transitions, play sound and movies, and nearly display nearly identically on nearly all browsers that have the flash plug-in installed.

Flash has been around for quite a while and has a very robust set of tools (made by Adobe, and formerly by Macromedia).  It has been used to create the sites, movies, slideshows, or multimedia players, that you see on millions of Web sites.  For the sake of this comparison, I am going to talk specifically about slideshows that are created in Flash compared to those using  jQuery because that is the vast majority of the Flash that we have traditionally used in our projects.  And ’cause that’s what this post is titled.

Flash Advantages

• Great looking fonts
• Smooth, complex animations
• Robust development tools

jQuery

You may have noticed that I have referred to “slideshows created in Flash” and “slideshows using jQuery.”  This is a fundamental difference between the two.  While Flash is an embeddable object created in a specific application, jQuery is a JavaScript library that can add a bunch of really neat-o functionality and effects to elements that already exist on the page. This means that you have HTML, and then on top of that, you have jQuery making that HTML jump through all kinds of hoops, sit, roll over, and even sometimes, though hopefully not often: play dead.  jQuery is JavaScript, which means that some experience with the ubiquitous scripting language is going to make things much easier.  There are hundreds of plugins which exist as additional JavaScript files along with the HTML they need to act on that you can simply copy and paste in to your web page to add whatever slideshow you want.  Many of these existing plugins slideshows have comprehensive documentation that even those without lots of experience with JavaScript can follow.  Basically, if you know your way around HTML and CSS, you can figure out how to at least use jQuery.

The jQuery library can either be downloaded from the jQuery Web site, or you can link to hosted versions from jQuery, Google, or Microsoft. I tend to use the Google-hosted version because it is very popular and likely in use on many other sites. Because of that, if your visitors have previously visited a site using the same linked library that you do, their browser will not have to download it again and you’ll save the 150-ish KB of download that the library requires.

jQuery Advantages

• Generally smaller, and quicker (150KB+ though, for the main library)
• Less time to create, very simple to manage
• Superior accessibility and findability
• Works on iPhones
• Free

Picking One

There are many questions to consider before you when even decide to use a slideshow (see “Parting Shot” below).  I’d say that, if you do decide to add a slideshow to your page  jQuery will be the best choice in 98% of cases.  It offers most of the abilities of Flash (depending on how adept you are at JavaScript) and has the added advantage that it is used to animate images and text that already exist in the page.  This is of monumental importance to search engine optimization, accessibility, and cross-browser/cross-platform support.  That your images and text already exist in the page means that it is basic content that you manage in your authoring system.

Even if a visitor has all styles and JavaScript disabled in their browser** the content contained in your slideshow will be present for them to see (albeit in a way that may break the beautiful layout of your page which is already the case if they have styles turned off).  This is the essence of accessibility: that all content on your page is available to all visitors regardless of how they access your page.

There is no cut-and-dried answer to the question “Flash or jQuery,” though I’d argue that in the limited scope of slideshows jQuery has a decided advantage.  In the end it really depends on what you are trying to communicate, to whom you are trying to communicate it, and how you want it to look.  If you want to be able to use any beautiful font available to your designer, utilize sophisticated transitions (though jQuery can match much of Flash’s capabilities in this regard), ensure that your slideshow works on all browsers with the Flash plug-in installed, and don’t need to support iPhone users, then Flash may be your best bet.  If you are, however, willing to limit your font options, want to be sure that your content is available to all users, on all browsers, regardless of platform, and are willing to limit slightly the sophistication of transitions and animations, then jQuery is the clear winner.

Parting Shot

And that brings us to the end, but I simply cannot leave without a final parting shot regarding putting  a lot of time and money in to designing and developing a slideshow.  I, and others in the office are looking with an increasingly critical eye toward the effectiveness of using slideshows at all to highlight important information.  A too-cursory review of too-few site analytics begins to suggest that very, very (very!) few visitors see more than the first slide of any slideshow; Even fewer engage with the sideshow controls (if present, to move forward, back, or pause);  And fewer still click on any links found on slides beyond the first.  Do not assume that the third, or even second, slide will get any attention at all.

One of the drawbacks of many new interface options presented by Flash or jQuery (or any of the other JavaScript libraries out there) is that they have offered an easy solution to a very old problem: gigantic homepages where every department in an organization demands a presence.  Similarly to simply adding more and more content to a homepage until visitors have to scroll tens of screens down to read it all, we are now asking visitors to engage more and more frequently with tabs, slideshows, accordion widgets, and more to access the same “too much content.”  Have we just shorted the all-too-important conversation about focusing an organization’s message and simply allowing “all of it” to go on the homepage?  And what about people who don’t or can’t use these new widgets? Perhaps another blog post?  I nominate Jo!

** Chances are pretty good that if styles and JavaScript are disabled in a browser, so is Flash.  If your slideshow reads its content from an XML feed, the path to which you define in the JavaScript call to the Flash object, your slideshow will not work even if Flash is enabled but JavaScript is not.

As of Wednesday, Old Spice is officially the king of viral marketing.  (They’ve even crowned themselves.) And we could learn a lot from them.

If you missed their amazing day of viral content, you might be living in a cabin in the woods (without WiFi), but ReadWriteWeb has a very good summary of their campaign. In a nutshell, they released a series of dozens of viral videos, produced almost in real-time, where their Old Spice Man, Isaiah Mustafa, responded personally to comments on YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, and bloggers.

There are a lot of factors you could point to as critical for their success, not all of which can be easily reproduced. For example:

• a great sense of humor (and the ability to laugh at themselves)
• an incredibly sexy, half-naked spokesman
• a now-legendary production team making ad-quality videos at a rate of 7 minutes per video
• lots of freedom from the corporate higher-ups

But what impressed me most, and the reason they became a trending topic on Twitter, is the personal attention they paid to their audience. Not everyone got flowers like Alyssa Milano.  But anyone who messaged Old Spice that day had a chance at their own video. You didn’t have to be a celebrity to get a few seconds of Mustafa’s personal attention.

Even if you didn’t get your own personal video response, you still felt like he might be talking to you. (And by “you,” I mean me.  I’m pretty sure he was talking to me.)

You can’t fake that kind of personal attention – but you can achieve it with a little hard work, no matter whether you’re a tiny non-profit or an international corporation. Maybe you don’t have the whole world paying attention to you.  But someone is paying attention, and you can pay attention right back at them. You don’t need a handsome spokesman, just a Twitter account, a Facebook page, or a volunteer with a phone.

Though, a handsome spokesman wouldn’t hurt.

Since it’s Friday, here are a couple more videos for you:

The notion that list growth, fundraising and/or advocacy is “a campaign” with a finite start and end date is something of a misnomer. There are rare, exceptional cases where a perfect storm aligns in which a campaign succeeds spectacularly. In these cases when people have a deep personal concern about a policy problem that is covered in the media (or emerging in the media), the marketplace is ripe for a campaign. That personal concern is highly motivating, critical to a campaign and something we think of as the “Do I Care” factor.

When the “Do I Care” of constituents meets with a spectacularly simple, compelling campaign message and call to action, rapid and radical growth is possible. This “perfect storm” is truly for the vast majority of organization.  For most, the break-through campaign is difficult to achieve and not necessarily something that their online marketing strategy should be based. Fortunately, the experiences of the past have taught many organizations that the “online (more…)