Creative Commons is built on the idea of both serving the public and protecting content creators:

Too often the debate over creative control tends to the extremes. At one pole is a vision of total control — a world in which every last use of a work is regulated and in which “all rights reserved” (and then some) is the norm. At the other end is a vision of anarchy — a world in which creators enjoy a wide range of freedom but are left vulnerable to exploitation. Balance, compromise, and moderation — once the driving forces of a copyright system that valued innovation and protection equally — have become endangered species.

But Creative Commons only works if people contribute to it - I know that my photos on Flickr are always tagged as free to alter, but not to use commercially - I’m happy if someone wants to use one in a blog post, but if they’re going to make a profit off of it, I’d like to share in that. There’s a benefit for the content creator not only in contributing to society’s openness in general, but also in getting work out there, attributed to them.

This certainly isn’t to say that commercial libraries don’t have their uses - if I need a high-resolution photo, or a very specific one, particularly if it needs to include people, I generally end up at iStockPhoto. But photo libraries carry a liability that many creative commons licensed photos do not: the greater likelyhood that the photo you’re using is also being used by your competitors, whether that’s other non-profits in your space, the corporation you’re protesting or just a commercial product that people are familiar with. Good photos in a stock library can be recognized as such by more than just you and sharing photos this way can remove some of your authenticity. With the greater variety of creative commons photos out there, it’s less likely than with commercial houses.

As both a content creator and a content consumer, consider using the creative commons licence. For more information on Creative Commons, check out the FAQ here.

Three teams. Two days. One special ingredient.
THIS is Iron Chef America…Battle Non profit.

Our nimble Chairwoman, the incomparable Beth Kanter, will bring together the best of the best for this epic battle at the 2009 South by Southwest Interactive Festival (March 13-17th). Each team of 3 web experts, chosen from the leaders in the non profit marketing and social media sector (including Beaconfire and Free Range Studios), will meet in the heat of Austin to offer one small deserving non profit organization a delectable 3 course meal featuring: a tasty new homepage, a well-seasoned fundraising campaign, and a perfectly balanced social networking & marketing plan.

We need your help to get there: vote for us on SXSW’s 2009 conference panel picker! Layered with explosive technologies, unique concepts and best practices like you’ve never tasted before, this will be a battle for the ages!

Before South by Southwest, the three teams, each consisting of a designer, a marketing consultant and a social networking guru from different companies, will have 48 hours to collaborate and produce the final “Dishes”, and document the experience. In Austin, at the SXSW panel session, each team will serve their final “menu” to the client and the panel audience, who will vote in real time according to the following categories: unique design & visual concepts, out-of-the box strategic thinking, and the best use of social networking technologies to support the goals of the “special ingredient.”

Who will prevail and change the future for one lucky organization? It’s up to YOU. Vote for us now so that we can whip up this meal and then join us at SXSW and vote for the best team!

Recently one of  our clients asked us to weigh in on the presentation of multi-lingual content on their site - an organization with members around the world that produces publications, trainings and other web-specific content in a number of languages. The client wondered how to present the information in an accessible and useful way to their users.

While not an exhaustive list, these points can serve as a backbone for your multilingual content presentation.  The first distinction to make is whether the site is fully mirrored in multiple languages or if it is presenting a limited number of pages.

If the full content exists in multiple languages, providing tabbed navigation to each language (with the full built-out resources under each) is an effective presentation. The International Center for Journalists’ IJNet site does a good job of this. When you click a language tab, the entire page content and all navigation swap out to the language you’ve selected. You don’t want to promise more content than you can deliver, though, so be careful of setting up a parallel nav structure and re-directing users back to English content for non-translated content.  The effect is jarring and, frankly, inconsiderate.   

If your multi-lingual content is limited, you want to make sure you don’t portray the fact that when you click on a language, you’re getting the same content in another language. Presenting a limited number of resources is best handled by directing users to “Resources in…” (or Pages in or Materials in – whatever works best for the audience). A user can then click through to a landing page that aggregates the non-English content by type.

Link placement on the page is critical. Links to multilingual content (even if it’s not a full parallel site) should be displayed prominently and placed above the fold. Providing content in multiple languages takes a significant investment of time and resources. And if you are making the investment, you most likely want to showcase the international consideration and reach of your organization. What you don’t want to do is force users looking for non-English content to hunt around the homepage to find the link, effectively negating the time and energy you’ve put behind developing these resources.

The visual and functional treatment of links is vital as well. The easy one first, you don’t want to use as the visual representation of languages. While they may provide a dash of color, flags represent countries, not languages. What flag would you use to represent Portuguese language content – Portugal or Brazil? Don’t even get me started on the options for Spanish language content.

Another bad idea… including a drop-down menu with language choices. This treatment does save space within your page layout but it creates a challenge for languages that are character-based such as Chinese, Japanese and Korean.

While listing out each of the language options in their “native” spelling may take more space, it allows non-English reading users to identify their preferred language easily. Also, displaying each content language also serves to showcase your organization’s commitment to international audiences.  InfoComm currently does this on their site.    In addition, to ensure they appear correctly you should use images for the nav items, as opposed to text based labels, to ensure that the labels display as intended. Most computers can handle all language characters but some cannot.

Where should limited multi-lingual resources live on the back-end? I’d suggest they live in the file structure with the parallel English pages. That way, the file structure makes sense in terms of linking and, if (when!) the content grows to a level where a parallel or sub-site can exist, it will be easy to find & identify the resources.

If you are presenting multilingual content, Kudos!  If you’re considering it, bahati njema, Bonne chance,  Buena suerte, Danke, Good luck, Lykke til, Sretno and Желаю вам удачу!

Beaconfire senior consultant Elizabeth Weaver Engel, CAE, will be presenting in ASAE’s new Social Media Lab with Amy Hissrich, Director, Knowledge Initiatives at ASAE & the Center for Association Leadership on Tuesday, August 19 from 8:30 am – 9:45 am. Participants will experience the benefit of real time collaboration through a hands-on demonstration of the latest in association wikis. We will discuss lessons learned and tips for success, and attendees will have the opportunity to try their hands at real-time editing of Associapedia entries.

]]> http://www.beaconfire.com/blog/2008/08/06/come-see-us-at-asae-the-center-for-association-leadership%e2%80%99s-annual-meeting-expo/feed/ http://www.beaconfire.com/blog/2008/08/04/blogging-the-bridge-conference/ http://www.beaconfire.com/blog/2008/08/04/blogging-the-bridge-conference/#comments Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:24:01 +0000 Elizabeth http://www.beaconfire.com/blog/?p=768 Follow the links below to read recaps of some of the specific sessions at the Bridge Conference that took place here in Washington, DC July 23-25.

• Integrating Social Media (Andy Steggles and Suzanne Carawan)
• Breaking Out of Your Creative Comfort Zone (Jon Duschinsky)
• General thoughts on the conference

Many of the presentations are also now available for download at the Bridge site under Presentations.

Editor’s note:  Periodically, 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. With the new iPhone out on the street, we thought we’d ask our tech-savvy staff:

Mark, Functional Consultant: iphone is not currently compatible with metro (other than getting next train info above ground, outside of the system), so heck no. Start giving me a choice of carrier, including Verizon, and then maybe…

But then again, the cost is exorbitant – especially for someone like me who only occasionally reaps the benefits of the mobile internet. I’m hardly ever more than a few feet away from a desktop or laptop for most of every day, so it’s not like I really NEED it.

Sure, at the cheapest iphone is only $200 for the 8 GB version, but add in the ongoing service fees and you’re out quiet a lot. ATT’s basic plan is $70/month for unlimited internet and 450 minutes of talk time – and NO text messages included. So that comes out to $1,040 total cost of ownership in the first year at the cheapest. No thanks

Lynn, Principal Consultant: I’ll only even think about an iPhone if they extend carriers beyond AT&T.

Eve, Creative Director: A a current iPhone addict, it was tempting to upgrade but I resisted for a few reasons. First, I didn’t wanna fix what ain’t broke — Im so in love with this device, I didn’t want to do anything that would come between us, including the 2.0 firmware update that I could implement right now if I wanted to. Secondly, I’m holding out for a 32gig model so I don’t have to pick and choose what music/media I can have on it (as I need to do now with my 8 gigger). Lastly, the “new” features that are only available on the 3G (like speed, outlook synch and others) are not as high on my priority list like picture SMS would be.

Maybe when I’ve had my baby for a year around xmas time, I’ll take the plunge.

Kristin, Project Manager: No, I’m not going to upgrade because I like my super tiny, low-tech phone that only makes calls and sends text messages. However, if I was considering replacing my phone, I wouldn’t go with the iPhone because it’s on the AT&T network.

Tim, Functional Consultant: I’m not planning on upgrading.  I am as dissatisfied with my current phone as I’ve been with any other phone I’ve had.  At least this one came nearly free with my Verizon plan.   I don’t hate it nearly as much as I would if I’d paid hundreds of dollars for it.  Oddly, since I am a bit of a gear-freak, I’m not looking for a phone to do more; I don’t even need the camera in the phone I have now, never use the internet, and don’t play games.  I suppose, when it comes to phones, I’m a bit of a Luddite.

Eric, Senior Consultant: When the put a respectable hard drive on the iPhone and make it available for carriers other than AT&T, I’ll upgrade.

Shiloh, Production Specialist: I will not be upgrading to the new iPhone, as I have poured all my extra gadget cash into the Wii.

Kate, Administrative Assistant: I’m quite happy with my old iPhone, especially since it means I get to stay on the more inclusive old AT&T plan. I was also able to get a bunch of new updates and new applications that were released with the new phone. (For example, the free application “Shakespeare.” I now have the complete works of William Shakespeare hanging out in my phone, taking up negligible space.) I’m rarely an early adopter, but I think that it’s paid off for me in this case.

John Brian, Marketing Consultant: I probably won’t buy an iPhone until they add functionality like copy/paste and the ability to run things in the background. The app store is nice in theory, but the way Apple has to approve all apps and patches, combined with preventing apps from integrating with features like the phone and iTunes keep it from really letting users get the most out of their phone. Plus I’m not wild about having to switch to AT&T.

Rahul, Tech Lead: I’ll wait to buy it when it’s either $50 bucks or Free. The Motorola razr was similarly priced when it first came out and now is given away for free for the basic version.

Why pay full price when Apple will have to subsidize it under impending competition from other market players that are approaching to or have already exceeded the hardware capabilities of the iPhone.

The Android OS by Google will make a level playing field in the new cell phone wars.

Taylor, Software Engineer: Reasons why I am resisting the temptation to get an iPhone

4) Not only is it a lot of money to purchase the iPhone itself but then I would start paying for monthly internet on my phone and I’d probably want to buy apps and download more music, etc. I don’t want to open all those doors.

3) I find it healthy to be disconnected from the internet for portions of the day (ie. My 7 minute commute) 

2) I have been very impressed with the reception I get with Verizon and I have NO interest in switching to AT&T

1) I can get the red sox scores by text messaging google and that is really all that matters!!!

Ali, Marketing Consultant: I share my fellow coworker’s opinion on two points: cost and provider.  I’ll switch to the iPhone when the former shrinks and the latter widens.  Either that or when my Verizon Q dies.

Elizabeth, Senior Consultant: Although I really want one, I also really like t-mobile, so until Congress steps in and requires carriers to unlock phones so you can use any phone with any carrier, I’m probably sticking with my Razr.

.Arlene, Office Manager: No I don’t plan to upgrade.

Google’s policy goes on to ban the use of more than one exclamation point anywhere, repeated question marks, and, best of all, SMS shorthand like “U” for “you.” These sorts of things are my pet peeve, and I’m glad to see that Google’s running a “stupid filter.”

Compare that to the practices of many banner ad servers: the more annoying the better. Case in point (animation removed for everyone’s sanity):

Does this signal a generational shift in the culture of advertisers? Google Ads are designed to work be as relevant to your content as possible, and Google works with their advertisers to increase clickthroughs, creating a sort of reverse revenue share with their content scores.

Banner ads, on the other hand, are often irrelevant to the story, and don’t really ad value to the reader - they’re the cost of doing business for a free internet. Yet for all the different ad blocking software out there, I haven’t seen this kind of zeal for blocking adwords (though if you really want to, here’s a client-side way).

As both an advertiser and an internet user, I’m hoping we’ll see the web move in a more SEM-style direction here. Providing value to your users rather than annoying them into looking seems to be a solid strategy for everyone, and I hope the market will come to reflect that.

Michael led a packed room through a brief review of the differences between microsites and landing pages.  A microsite is a separately promoted part of a larger Web site that is designed to meet separate objectives and has a separate URL.  A landing page is designed to incite one particular action via a specific, measurable offer.  His presentation included a decision matrix to help participants figure out which might be the best approach for their particular projects.  He also quickly discussed the potential risks and benefits of each approach before turning the floor over to the case studies.

Felicia Carr then walked us through NPCA’s Elect Teddy campaign, which was launched to encourage the 2008 presidential candidates to make public their positions on NPCA’s centennial initiative and protecting the health of our national parks system.  Although some of the secondary goals of the site were not achieved, Barak Obama, John McCain, and Hillary Clinton each submitted complete answers to all NPCA questions for publication on the site.

• Check out NPCA’s Elect Teddy site.

Vinnie Wishrad then presented Conservation International’s Lost There Felt Here campaign, intended to help prevent deforestation.  The campaign, which was designed to be viral, was supported by a PSA featuring Harrison Ford that was distributed through YouTube, and was, by all accounts, a smashing success.

• Check out CI’s Lost There - Felt Here PSA on YouTube.

Audience members, Vinnie, Felicia, and Michael wrapped up the session discussing the best applications of microsites versus landing pages and the decision criteria Beaconfire uses to help our clients make that choice.

• Download Michael Cervino’s slides (PDF).
• Download Vinnie Wishrad’s slides (PDF).
• Download Felicia Carr’s slides (PDF).

And, if you’re a non-profit: how does this affect you ability to reach your supporters? 

The problem of information overload can be thought of as a signal-to-noise issue.  The signal, like a radio signal, consists of all the content you actually want and need from the internet: travel plans from a visiting friend, an urgent question from your boss, or a blog post from a key thinker in your field.  The noise is everything that gets in the way, all the irrelevant or unimportant (to you) content that you need to dig through to find the signal.  That includes chain emails from friends and coupons from Amazon.com, but also a lot of content that might be interesting if only there weren’t so much of it.

Sorting out the signal from the noise takes up time.  For some people, slogging through the noise in their email becomes such a hopeless task that they declare email bankruptcy: they give up and start fresh with a new email address.  Other people find tools to stay organized: group their blogs in a feed reader, tag their emails, and generally use more technology to solve their problems with technology.  Some question whether information overload is as much of a problem as the media (and studies funded by software companies) tell us.  But whether or not we’re drowning in our email, managing the flow of information in our lives seems to be an increasing challenge.

If you’re a non-profit, there are simple things you can do to help your supporters avoid information overload - be part of the solution rather than part of the problem.  Your subscribers care about your cause, and they’ll support you when they think of your messages as important.  By making sure your messages come through as signal (and not as noise) in the minds of your supporters, you increase the chance they will pay attention, and you also help reduce their inbox clutter.  Everyone wins!

Some easy things you can do:

• Watch the frequency of your messages. If you send emails too often, they may start to feel like spam, even if spam filters don’t catch them.
• Have something to say. If your messages are pointed, relevant, and interesting, your supporters will look forward to reading them.  Tie your message to a specific action, or tell your supporters about an important new effort.  Make your point in the first paragraph of the email.  Ask yourself if this message is worth the time they’ll take to read it.  If it’s not, give it a bit more thought.
• Know your value to your subscribers. Chances are, they signed up for your list because they want something from it, be that information, involvement in your cause, or entertainment.  (I promise they didn’t sign up because they thought “hey, I don’t get enough email”…)  Know what your subscribers want, and give it to them.

If these tips sound suspiciously like email best practices, well, there’s a reason they call them “best practices.”  But unlike using a clever subject line or checking your spam score before sending, these tips help you strengthen your relationship with your list over time, not just boost your response to one email.  By respecting you subscribers’ inbox, you’re building a relationship of trust with them, one where they go out of their way to read your email because they know it’ll be worthwhile.

YouTube’s latest monotization attempt comes in the form of ads  that pop up at the bottom of the video during play (pdf). While users can click to remove them, they appear randomly and are built into the player, so adblockers can’t find them (yet). And while everyone acknowledges that YouTube needs monotization from somewhere to remain free (they’ve probably got the biggest bandwidth and storage bill on the internet), a new Ipsos study shows a gap between users who accept ads in TV shows streamed online and those who would accept the same for YouTube.

Ars Technica theorizes that this is because users are already used to seeing ads in their TV, while they aren’t used to it with their YouTube, but I suspect that it’s because users understand that while someone has to pay for that episode of Heroes to be produced, and are willing to subsidize it, they also understand that the popup that’s appearing on someone’s YouTube video is likely not going toward a revenue share with the creator, and they don’t see YouTube’s hosting as a value add to the point that they would put up with interruptions.

For non-profits, though, these popup ads raise an interesting question: what’s going to appear in the middle of your video? Is your ad asking people to protest a company’s action going to see that company’s ad appear? Will Congressional candidates be attacked for ads that appear in their video, the same way they’ve been attacked for the places their ads appear? I suspect this loss of message control may scare some non-profits away from YouTube and toward other services, like BrightCove, where they have more control over their content.