blog

I was perusing the Presidential candidates’ blogs a couple weeks back, looking to see where they were headed in my old stomping grounds in Wisconsin, when I came across this item, at the bottom of a post about a supporter-created video:

You can create your own video ‘mashups’ too — feel free to download high resolution footage from our resource library today

Though I was annoyed that they put mashups in quotes (putting web 2.0 terms in quote marks, as if you’re not quite sure it’s a term yet, is almost up there with saying "online blogs"), I was fascinated by how open they were to releasing raw video footage to their supporters.

Looking around the internets, it looks like Obama’s campaign isn’t alone in releasing semi-raw video footage to supporters, but it’s a practice that hasn’t trickled down to non-profits yet. Below the jump, I explore the how this has paid off for some candidates, and why NPOs should join them.

(more…)

Editor’s note: Each week, we do a survey of Beaconfire staff to get impressions on a variety of non-profit technology issues. All opinions expressed here are solely those of their authors. Since video is becoming a more and more important medium for non-profits to use, we asked: What’s a youtube video that you would pass along? Note that these aren’t specifically videos we think non-profits should emulate, just examples of the diversity of opinion as to what makes a viral video.

Jeff, Principal Consultant: I usually pass along the videos I’m just seeing after everyone else has seen them. Here are two:

• Thai prisoners doing thriller dance
• Obama “Yes We Can” video

Eric, Senior Consultant: Cat playing the piano!

Taylor, Software Engineer: My top 5 youTube videos that make me laugh (I’m pretty sure they are appropriate)

• How to stop a kitten fight (depends on your sense of humor)
• Kick his Ask!
• Charlie bit my finger - again!
• Serious Baby… sometimes
• Grape Crusher

Marissa, Functional Consultant: Yo Gaba Gaba - the Party in my Tummy.

John Brian, Marketing Consultant: I’m generally a fan of anything that makes me laugh with or at political figures. Consequently, some of my favorites are:

• Barack Obama - The drawing board
• Any Mike Gravel music video
• Michigan for MItt
• The better John McCain “No we can’t” videos - John.He.Is and the Billionaires for Bush remix

I was also impressed by the responses to some of the user-generated content contests - particularly the Colbert Greenscreen Challange and The Office - make your own promo contest.

Michael, Principal Consultant: There’s no question in my mind what the greatest YouTube is of all time: Ask A Ninja from digitalfilmaker

This comedy series with witty repartee about all things pop culture has a dedicated (albeit highly disturbed) following - including me.

Tim, Functional Consultant: There are just too many to choose from, but I always enjoy Barats and Baretta. They’re great at short bits that deliver just exactly what they intend to delver. No fluff, just funny.

• Mother’s Day
• Mantage
• Maxwel Dorian, Valedictorian
• Completely Uncalled For
• To Do List

David, Software Engineer: http://www.wherethehellismatt.com/

Mark, Functional Consultant: Anything with monkeys in it… especially…

Trunk Monkeys

Lancelot Link

I could go on and on… River Dance Monkeys

Kate, Administrative Assistant: Here are the only YouTube Videos I’ve ever passed around:

• Hillary Clinton’s “Caucusing is Easy” video, because it was genuinely humorous and informative (now I know how easy caucusing is!)
• Mike Gravel’s throwing the rock into the pond video, because it was weird and therefore funny.
• The cartoon parody of Mike Gravel’s throwing the rock into the pond video, because they apparently agreed with my assessment of the first video.
• “Series of Tubes” music video
• (I was also a big fan of Jib-Jab, but it hit the streets before I knew what a U-Tube was.)

The common link for me is being able to have a laugh either with or at politicians. The Clinton brand of self-effacing humor really tickled me, which was great for them, because it lead me to help get out their message. The rest were videos where the politicians involved probably would have been better off if their videos hadn’t made it into my mental space.

Erika, Operations Manager: Vista Wonders

Several Beaconfire Clients also have videos you should check out - like this introduction to Bread for the World’s Hunger Justice Leaders event or NPCA’s Teddy for President campaign ads. If you’re interested in learning more about how Beaconfire can work with your non-profit to create a viral video, please give us a call or send us an email!

One of the most interesting things about the Internet is its impact on the evolution of language, turning verbs into nouns and nouns into verbs (ala “Facebook” me). A more recent emerging trend of web 2.0 technologies doing just that is Twitter, a simple service that allows you to communicate quick and concise messages to your “followers” - friends, family and co-workers - about what you are doing. You can now Twis or Twoogle with Tweeple all day and night (not my words. You can get your own at Twitter glossary)

More interesting than “what” is “why” Twitter? As the site says, “Because even basic updates are meaningful to family members, friends, or colleagues - especially when they’re timely. Eating soup? Research shows that moms want to know…”

Though I don’t think it will take me 10 years to latch on to this trend (i.e. how long it took me to take up blogging), “microblogging” is going to have to evolve past its hyper-connected, information overload, time sucking, egocentricity before I add another tool to my box. To be fair though, here are some “tweets” about Twitter in true Twitter form, which limits all messages to 140 characters. What do you think? Over hyped or exactly what you’re looking for?

1. Launched in Oct ‘06, many point to last year’s SXSW conference for its take off. More info & useful links from Mark Glaser & DoshDosh
2. In Jan ‘08 Twitter reported just over 750,000 registered users with 3,399 new users daily (for sake of comparison, Facebook has 250,000).
3. “…its status & image has been upgraded from toy to tool - can [it] ‘leap from’ a small, enthusiastic group of tech-savvy people to the mainstream.” ‘ Mark Evans
4. “A hybrid of chat, social networking and blogging,” it’s built on the attraction to community, need to be social and desire to matter.
5. Pres. candidates are twittering “the new reality of Campaign 2.0, where web-savvy campaigns are trying to attach themselves to as many social networking sites as possible.” (ABC)
6. Even if you don’t use it to chat, there are a number of practical uses of short, concise messages like RemembertheMilk.com
7. “…as with most Internet phenomena, users hacked [it] into something completely different - place I turn to if I need a quick question answered…”‘ Patrick Ruffini at TechPresident
8. “Twitter hate is the new black - [though haters] do have a good point. Do you really need to know that I’m eating a tuna sandwich for lunch? Probably not…”  Robert Scoble, a top Twitterer with almost 7,000 followers
9. “…intriguing, useful & addictive for those who live on the move. One observer called it “the Seinfeld of the internet…a website about nothing.”  The Guardian
10. “More than a status app, it is being used as a 1st alert mechanism for the dissemination of news & for immediate discussion surrounding [it].” Josh Catone, ReadWriteWeb
11. Is it worth it? “the average Twitter user lists six to 12 “friends” on the site and choose to receive cell phone updates from three friends.” (ABC)
12. ‘[it's] different from other e-tools. “When u get an email, you have to respond to it, but with Twitter, there’s no expectation of a response.” ‘ Twitter founder Biz Stone
13. “…has turned distraction into an art form. It’s like hanging out at a bar with a bunch of interesting people…& forgetting that you have to go home.” Scott Karp
14. “…inability to immediately embrace Twitter means you’re old…Admitting you don’t ‘get’ [it] is like admitting you can’t hear those specialized ring tones only audible to the young.” - Helen A.S. Popkin, MSNBC

When I was in college, one of my most difficult classes was scenic painting. Not only did it mean trudging into class at 8:00 am (the only class with that distinction in my five years of school), the professor would amble around behind us as we were painting and, if were looked like we were stopping to ponder our work thus far, shout "Paint faster!"

While it had the effect of giving the class a sort of sweatshop feel, the practical reason for his argument was that the faster you painted, the more work you could do, and the more money you could make in a year.

Today, who among us doesn’t wish we had more time? My available time at the office for blogging is limited, so any tool I can find that lets me blog more efficiently is one that I’ll latch on to. Here are five ways I’m able to get posts done faster, so I can blog with less time or churn out more posts in a week:

(more…)

This week, Wikipedia commemorates its seventh birthday:

Wikipedia was formally launched on January 15, 2001, as a single English-language edition at www.wikipedia.com, and announced by Sanger on the Nupedia mailing list. Wikipedia’s policy of "neutral point-of-view" was codified in its initial months, and was similar to Nupedia’s earlier "nonbiased" policy. Otherwise, there were relatively few rules initially and Wikipedia operated independently of Nupedia. Wikipedia gained early contributors from Nupedia, Slashdot postings, and search engine indexing. It grew to approximately 20,000 articles, and 18 language editions, by the end of 2001. By late 2002 it had reached 26 language editions, 46 by the end of 2003, and 161 by the closing stages 2004. Nupedia and Wikipedia coexisted until the former’s servers went down permanently in 2003, and its text was incorporated into Wikipedia.

Of course, it’s up to you whether or not you believe this - we’ve written several posts debating the general veracity of Wikipedia. But regardless of whether you view it as a tool for serious research or not, it’s undeniable that Wikipedia has made a splash. Its entries are among the top Google results for multinational corporations and presidential candidates, become so popular that it had to ban Congress from editing their own entries, and, according to Alexa, was the eight most visited website in the world (as well as the only non-profit in the top ten).

It’s spawned countless spinoffs, from the purposely amusing Uncyclopedia to the unintentionally funny Conservapedia. It’s even been "honored" by Stephan Colbert as the root of wikiality.

So happy seventh birthday, Wikipedia - may you continue on for another seven years to help us win trivia bets, laugh at Onion headlines, and edit our own entries to gloss over our flaws.

Editor’s note: as a new feature, we’re doing a weekly survey of Beaconfire staff to get impressions on a variety of non-profit technology issues. All opinions expressed here are solely those of their authors. This week, we asked what people thought was the most influential web 2.0 site of 2007 - here are their answers:

Michael, Principal Consultant: What Web 2.0 category had 15% of Internet users engaged yesterday? What 2.0 revolutionary medium has Seniors, Boomers, GenX-ers, Millenials, Right Wing, Left Wing, Centrists and outright wackos using it? My vote for 2007 Most Influential Web 2.0 Site goes to YouTube.[...]

Tim, Functional Consultant: Facebook for three reasons: It successfully bridged the gap between the rockers and kiddies on MySpace and the fine upstanding professionals on LinkedIn, they had a huge jump in registered users in the past year…and everybody says so, and that’s a huge part of web 2.0.[...]

Mark, Functional Consultant: Flickr is one of the most useful Web 2.0 sites out there. While YouTube may be its more glamorous headline grabbing cousin, Flickr is more useful to more people as the taking and sharing of digital photos is much more pervasive than video.[...]

Milo, Marketing Consultant: Niche social networks: in a world of media fragmentation and long tails, it only makes sense that impersonal behemoths like MySpace and Facebook will lose ground to a smaller, more intimate and focused online communities — like the soon-to-come Shoe Tube — where users can more easily find others who share their passions.[...]

John Brian, Marketing Consultant: Social news sites, and Digg in particular. As I’ve noted previously, social news sites let you pick your own like-minded editor and are becoming a necessary commodity in a McNews world.

Brad, Client Manager: I’d like to suggest the widest influence wasn’t a particular site, but a type of site: the RSS aggregator, which not only makes user-contributed content much easier to manage and access, it also puts the user in editorial control…The power of 2.0 isn’t simply in content generation, but in content distribution.[...]

Kate, Administrative Assistant: I would suggest Facebook, because it’s very accessible to the masses. Also, there’s very little that will be more tangibly influential to the younger generation than their friends telling them when something’s cool.[...]

Eric, Senior Consultant: Yahoo! Groups. In 2007, listservs reached a big milestone: more than half of all Internet users now subscribe to at least one listserv, up from about one in three in 2001. Not only that, email that goes viral has more real world influence that the hot topic du jour at the web 2.0 hype leader du jour. That’s because older adults are much more likely to actually act on their opinions…and older Internet users disproportionately favor email for staying in touch over newfangled web 2.0 alternatives.[...] [for more, read Eric's report on Listserv use for nonprofits (pdf) -ed]

Amy, Functional Consultant: I’d have to 2^nd Kate’s nomination of Facebook - great minds and all of that. It’s most important to me because it’s helped me re-connect with family and friends who I haven’t seen in 10+ years.

Jennifer, Project Manager: The growing popularity of user reviews and ratings on products and services offers great promise for engaging the lowest common denominator…We believe it more when we hear it from our peers. From Netflix to Angie’s List, this Web 2.0 feature has had increasing influence on the American consumer in 2007, and offers great promise in 2008 for influencing consumers of nonprofit resources, services and ideas.[...]

Erika, Operations Manager: I would vote for Facebook as well… One of the things I’ve enjoyed the most about setting up my own page has been being contacted by people I haven’t heard from in a very long time, simply because they found me on Facebook. [...]

There were also submissions for less-heralded, but also important user-generated content sites like KittenWar and StuffOnMyMutt. Some answers were longer than we had room for - read full responses below the fold. And be sure to stop by next week to find out about the browser preferences of the Beaconfire team.

(more…)

With the Iowa Caucuses today, I thought it might be good to do a quick roundup of interesting tools that the Presidential Candidates have put together to get out the vote. As happened in 2004, many of these tools will probably trickle into the non-profit sector over the coming year, as we see what works and what doesn’t.

First, I’ve got to say that I love Mitt Romney’s Varitalk. I remember when Snakes on a Plane used this same technology to put together calls from Samuel L. Jackson - my office spent several good hours sending calls to each other. Now you can have robo-Mitt call your friends, address them by name and holiday of choice, and tell them why he’s right for their most important issue, along with a reminder to vote in their own state. It also shows on caller ID as being from a phone number of your choice, and Mitt mentions that it comes from you.

Of course, there’s potential for abuse in applications like this, but that’s going to be true in any voter-generated content application - it’s really no more risky than a simple "Tell a Friend" form. I did find it odd, though, that there was such a limited selection of names Mitt could say. While I’m not surprised that "John Brian" wasn’t in his repertoire, I was saddened that he couldn’t call "Marissa" or "Taylor" by name, and I guess referring to the other guys in the field as "my opponent" has left him unable to say "Rudy" or "Duncan." Seems pretty closed-minded for a guy named "Mitt" who named his son "Tagg" (neither of which he can say, incidentally). But I did appreciate the option to make a contribution and get a real call, or at least a better robo-call (I didn’t make a donation to find out - I’m pretty sure I need my $25 more than Mitt).

Two more big things that impressed me, and a bunch more that I don’t have room to review in depth, below the fold…

(more…)

One day, when I was in middle school, our principal sent us students home with a letter. My mom read it, furrowed her brow and reached for a red pen. She then mercilessly corrected the grammar, put the corrected letter in an envelope, and sent me back to school with it.

Which is why I was shocked to review an online conversation I had with mother, which contained many English offenses, among them, the word “tonite” (seriously, the correct spelling only contains one extra letter �?? is it really that much more difficult to type in that ght?

If only the �??stupid filter�?� was ready for prime time, I could have salvaged the childhood image I have of my mother.

(more…)

I want to take a moment to disagree in part with both Andrew’s and Marissa’s recent posts about the story wherein a professor assigns his students articles on Wikipedia to write in lieu of traditional papers. First, a disclaimer: while both Marissa and Andy have Masters’ degrees, I do not, so I don’t have the experience with peer review that they do.

But as someone who went to college in the internet age, I can attest that there’s a lot of skepticism of research done online. I’ve had a variety of professors who ranged from full blown Luddite ("If it doesn’t have a Dewey Decimal number, it isn’t a fact") to mild traditionalist ("You can use lexis-nexus, but make sure your archaic citation formats are right or I’ll downgrade you to next Tuesday") to early adopter of academia ("Use the latest research you can find - just be prepared to defend your sources if they start with geocities.com").

By and large, there was a common skepticism of the web as a research medium - the thought behind it is is that if it’s easy to post and easy to find, anyone can do it. This is the sort of elitism that I’m predicting won’t survive my lifetime - check below the fold for why.

(more…)

I found the post by John Timmer on ars tecnica regarding one professor�??s use of Wikipedia entries in the place of a term paper quite fascinating. While I agree with a number of points made by my colleague Marissa in her post, I have a slightly different perspective on it.

When I was an undergraduate, I intended to complete a PhD in microbiology and enter the world of academia. Even though I ultimately dropped out of my PhD program to pursue an MBA instead, I had enough exposure to develop a profound, first-hand appreciation of the rigors of the peer review process.

Nothing in my undergraduate experience really prepared me for the debate, criticism, and justification the peer review process entails. Sure, professors make critical observations and suggestions about any work product that you turn in, but ultimately it is just one person evaluating your work, and that one person has dozens (or more) of other people�??s work to review as well. The breadth and depth of their analysis is significantly lower than what one can expect from academic peer review.

Timmer�??s post mentions that many of the students�?? works were ultimately removed, significantly edited, or incorporated into other entries after a lengthy discussion process amongst Wikipedia contributors. While admittedly, the Wikipedia process is not controlled solely by well-respected academics and I am sure that the commentary may stray towards unfettered attacks rather than constructive criticism, the process remains roughly analogous to that of peer review.

Even though Wikipedia cannot be considered as a reliable source of information from an academic perspective, it seems to me that it could provide an interesting means of introducing students to the wonderful world of peer review. For those interested in pursuing a career in academics, it could be a valuable means of testing one�??s ability to defend a position, expand upon a thesis, and develop the tough skin required to accept criticism and use it to build a more solid foundation for an argument.