This post is being published on Scott Hibberson‘s “eLearning Library” and Kevin Campbell-Wrights “Wesenwille” at the same time.

Before you think of these points, it’s always worth considering what the purpose of your blog is and who your audience are.  Blogs are read by a wide variety of people, many of whom will not be your target audience – but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t have a type of person in mind.

Some bloggers use their page as a diary, reflecting on events and conversations of the day.  Some blogs provide a commentary and analysis of current thinking and situations.  Others provide guides and inspiration to those working in a particular area or sector.  All blogs stray between these areas, but it’s worth thinking of a primary purpose to target your posts.

1. Bookmark Your Posts

There’s a growing amount of research reporting a rise in the use of social bookmarking tools, so it makes sense to make it as easy as possible for your visitors to favourite your posts. One way in which you could do this is to add social bookmarking buttons to the end of each blog post. Here’s a step-by-step guide on Youtube telling you how to do this:

2. Search Engines & Technorati

If you want people to read your blog, people have got to be able to find it.  One way that blog posts differ greatly from newspaper articles is that they don’t have to be time bound – a blog post today might still be relevant in five years time and still needs to be locatable.

There are different ways people search.  The layman will search for a topic using Google and, possibly, Google blog search.  These primarily work on keywords from the title, body and tags of the text.  Therefore, if your blogging platform allows tags, it’s important to include them and make sure that, where possible, keywords are also in the title and first paragraph.

The other search engine for blogs, normally used by the blogging elite (if such a group exists) is  Technorati.com.  You need to register for technorati and put code into your post to verify it is your own.  Technorati then puts it in a directory (searchable by catagories and tags) as well as making your blog findable via a search engine.  The Technorati top 100 is to blogging what the FTSE 100 is to finance – you’ll only find the cream of the crop there.  The chances of your blog getting on that are similar to those of you winning the lottery, however all is not lost;  there is also the technorati front page.  Different blogs are featured there daily and can, reportedly, raise your traffic by 1000%, at least for a day or so.

3. Mutual Blogging

Blogging differs from the traditional practices of writing journal articles and papers in various ways, but one key difference is that blogs are conversational tools, part of social networking.

Unlike in some disciplines, bloggers should expect comments on their posts, offering constructive criticisms or mutual support. As part of that, bloggers should be prepared to share their own ideas, supports and criticisms by commenting on other blog posts. Not only is this good social practice, but most blogging platforms offer commenters the chance to add a link to their own blog, so it’s a great marketing opportunity. Just a quick tip though – make sure your blog has some posts along the same lines as the subject you’re commenting on.

Like most authors, bloggers love to be referenced and hate to be plagiarised. It’s a great idea to link back to other blogs you reference. Some blog platforms, such as WordPress, pick up on links from other WordPress blogs and alert the author that someone has linked to them, meaning that they in turn may well link to them from their blog or publicise them using Twitter. However, it’s very bad practice to write a blog post along the same lines as another blogger without referencing it back. Even if you’re writing from another angle, it’s always important to keep other bloggers happy.

Many blogs also contain a “blogroll” – a list of blogs on a similar subject that the blog author recommends. It’s great if you can get listed on these but, as they are normally fairly short, you have to be really good to get on them. A good place to start is to put the author whose list you want to be on in your blog roll – but only do that if you think their blog is worth reading anyway!

The important part of any social media tool is the conversation. Social media shouldn’t be one way and automatic tweets about blog posts, repeated tweets about the same subject or pointless references to other blogs detract from both your professionalism and your credibility. Karen Thorne, a self-taught expert on social media use in the tourism industry, has compiled a very interesting blog post on the subject of making effective use of social media without just “giving out business cards”.

4. Persevere with Twitter

A lot of bloggers have been keen to jump on the Twitter bandwagon for its potential marketing power. However, despite Twitter’s often perceived triviality and ease of use, it does actually require a certain amount of sophistication to get right. I’ve heard stories from many people who have tried Twitter, but quickly tired with it as they couldn’t really see the point. When in reality, they didn’t really invest enough time in Twitter to get the point in the first place.

Now, I’m not going to insult your intelligence and say that Twitter is the answer to all your blogging prayers but, used appropriately, it can certainly be the answer to some of them. It’s not just a case of sending out a tweet with a link to your blog post. No, no, that simply won’t do. Anyone can do that (in fact, many do, and when their blog doesn’t get any more hits they give up on Twitter as they can’t really see the point – see above). As mentioned previously, it’s really important that you use Twitter as a two way communication tool and spend as much time replying to others as you do posting tweets. That way you build up a rapport with your fellow tweeters.

But I don’t have time to reply to everyone! Fair point, but then you don’t always have to. You could just as easily retweet other people’s tweets who blog about similar interests as yourself, and you’d be surprised how often the favour is returned, thus circulating your own tweets with blog links to a wider audience.

Another useful tool on Twitter that can help to promote your blog is the hashtag (a keyword preceded by a #). Most subjects will have a hashtag and many users will specifically search for information about a subject by doing a hashtag search. So if you include a hashtag in the tweet linking to your latest blog post you’re ensuring that your tweet not only reaches your followers on Twiiter (which may be quite limited), but that it also reaches all the people on Twitter that are searching under the hashtag as well.  Bingo – your blog post has just reached a wider audience!

Twitter, if you give it the time, can have many unexpected benefits, which is why it’s often called the ‘Serendipity Engine’ by notables such as Chris Brogan and others.

5. Write Quality Posts!

This is undoubtedly the most crucial point and there are no cheats or shortcuts that we can give away here to improve your blog other than to say write quality posts! Obviously, fellow bloggers are not going to return to your blog if you’re only blogging about hackneyed subjects and only ever agree with whatever happens to be the accepted wisdom of the time.

The power of blog posts is there topicality, as they don’t have to go through the time-consuming peer review process that journal articles do, and as such there’s a lot of scope to write about up and coming trends that are still likely to be of relevance at the time of posting.

Like any journalism or writing, it’s really important that you ensure your posts have a new angle on anything previously written.  While controversial posts may not make you popular, they normally get the comments and retweets, while innovative and inspiring posts can even go viral over Twitter or the blogosphere.  Don’t just do an article that says: “John Brown says XYZ – and I agree.”  Instead try: “John Brown says XYZ and I can build on that,” or “John Brown says XYZ, but other schools of thought challenge this view [provide references!]…” etc.  If you are being critical of others, make sure you know whether you are writing your blog from a personal viewpoint, a professional viewpoint, or as a representative of your college, institution or organisation.  It may be fine for you to write: “Well, I don’t agree”, but a professional blog would be more along the lines of “It could also be argued that…” while a corporate blog probably wouldn’t be critical in the first place.

On a final more mundane point, as with any other piece of writing, don’t be too eager to publish straight away though, take a few minutes to proofread your posts, this can make a dramatic difference to the overall professionalism of your blog.

Maybe that’s why, despite columnists, broadcasters and union leaders ranting on about it, the cut word hasn’t really crept into the public sector and voluntary sector blogospheres as much as I thought it might. Nobody wants to talk about it. Partly because they don’t want to enter into political territory. Partly because they are worried that, if they stick their head above the parapet, their neck is vulnerable to the public sector guillotine heading towards us in October.

Over the last few weeks I’ve been fortunate enough to attend a lot of events where some or most of the delegates were from the private sectors. I’ve found a lot of people completely unaware of October’s comprehensive spending review and the unimaginably massive impact this could have on the public and voluntary sector if the worse of the rumours are true. More to the point, a lot of people are staggered to find that public sector morale is at rock bottom. We always say that though don’t we, us whining, unionised, cushy-jobbed public servants? The fact is, this time it is true. I’ve not met anyone in the public or voluntary sector in the past two months who isn’t in in fear of their job, their service area and, frequently, the difficulties their service users might experience if it all comes crashing down.  However, despite this morale crash, people aren’t aware. They are not aware because no one will talk about it.

Then, yesterday, I saw a post from Katie Brown, a friend and co-innovation enthusiast at Leeds MIND, the mental health charity. Katie’s blog is the first I’ve seen that really spells out how low morale is – but it also makes another point, one that is actually very important.  These points together persuaded me that I really do need to write this post.

Her second point was about the vision she had presented for taking forward MIND’s Information for Mental Health. It involved savings. It involved rationalising. It involved, in part, the use of technology and social media to achieve this. But it didn’t involve cuts. No jobs were going to go.

There are very few people reading this who will be under the illusion that the public sector doesn’t need to save. We’re in tough times and, while some may have it considerably tougher than others, the sound bite that we are all in this together is true insomuch as we are all part of the same economy. It’s also true that, in some areas of the public sector there are more ways to save than others. One way of saving money is to rationalise, making use of free, or open source, technology, using social media as a form of communication and embracing mobile working not only as a environmental and productivity raising tool, but also as one that can save organisations huge amounts of money.

So, in a time of cuts, is the public sector embracing this? Well, let’s narrow this down. Is local government embracing this? No, in a word. Recently, I helped organise an event around public sector innovation. Every local authority Chief Executive was aware of this event. Yet, Chief Execs, Directors or even Heads of Service were only really notable by the absence. The promising things that are produced from time to time from organisations representing ICT in the public sector appear to come to nothing. Councils, as a generalisation, still require employees to come to the office every day, still block useful professional networking tools like Twitter, and still see social networking as a novelty that someone in the comms team does. That person in the comms team isn’t usually even a comms officer.

At a time when the private sector are talking about crowd sourcing, social marketing, corporate blogging and putting live chat rooms in their websites to allow people to get on-the-spot customer service, councils are creating a Facebook page but barring discussions in case anyone says something they don’t like. They are implementing text message systems to keep customers informed, but not allowing them to text back. It’s not that they don’t see the use in technology. It’s that they don’t see the vision.

Social media is all about communication and the transmission and organisation of information. It’s no coincidence that this is what much of life as a whole is about and, while it could be argued that money is at the root of all evil, I think it’s fairer to say that communication is often a factor in the issues of a community. People who are unable to communicate effectively, people who struggle to receive and process communications are often the people who councils are supporting.  But, it’s not the comms department doing the supporting.  Communication is at the heart of almost every council frontline service and essential internally to keep the organisation working.  But social media is seen as a way of marketing, and limited to a cupboard in the comms team office. Bosses see it as something to replace news releases, a way of people interacting without the need for people.  This, in turn, sparks a technophobic, and often union backed, backlash of people worried that the computer will replace them. Community development workers have been using the telephone for years, saving a lot of time and money, but people don’t want to press 1 to receive support. They want to speak to someone, the support coming along the way. Social media doesn’t need to cost jobs…and can still save money.

I’ll take you back now, to Katie’s post, her vision that didn’t include job cuts. There’s a bigger picture here, a future that’s much brighter than the confusion we have tonight. But that bright future depends on people listening, people responding and people changing. Right now, we’ve got some room to breathe in the eye of the storm. We’re spending the time battering down the hatches and clinging on to the safest tree.  Not only that, but we’re so busy clambering for higher ground that we’re not looking at new ways to stay afloat.  Let’s look beyond that and start that innovation right this instant.

I suggest a simple action plan.  Let’s think about how we communicate.  Internally.  Externally.  With people.  Not just in term of formal, public relations.  How do we support colleagues, how do we support customers, how do we support each other?  There are new, easier, more effective, cheaper ways of doing this.  Let’s change.  Let’s move forward.

This blog is a-political. But that’s not important because, let’s be honest, if the public sector can’t respond and change now, it will destroy itself. It won’t be a case of blaming the Government.

Today I was talking to several friends who have been, or are, involved in BSF (Building Schools for the Future) programme.  For anyone who’s missed the news the last few days, this was the former Labour Government’s plan to re-build every secondary school in the country, which has been put on hold and looks to be scrapped by the incoming Conservative-Lib Dem coalition.  This isn’t the first building programme cut either – we recently saw funding for a wellbeing centre in Leeds being axed and, during the Labour administration, we saw various college new build programmes cancelled.

This isn’t a political blog, so I don’t intend to comment on the politics of it all.  However, one thing is clear.  Whether your politics is that we need to save money and the cuts are justified or that this is a ideological attack on public education, you have to accept that we’re in a new place where throwing money at problems will not be tolerated and, for the foreseeable future, expensive building programmes are a thing of the past.

When BSF started is was kind of linked in with the whole extended school thing, a project for getting schools to be part of the community.  Indeed, the first rebuild I ever saw was designed to be not just a school, but a community hub.  So, with wellbeing centres, libraries and now schools facing the chop, where does this leave the community?

Well, in a move that will upset critics of the government and friends in the construction industry, I think it leaves it in a place where it can try something new.  Something that’s not been done before.  Something that doesn’t involve the buildings.

There are two stories I need to add in here.  One is one I often reference from a former colleague in community development who told me: “Why am I trying to build a community centre for a geographic community, when that community doesn’t exist any more?”  The second is more recent.  Social media marketing legend Chris Brogan told a recent conference I helped organise: “The difference between a community and an audience is which way the chairs are facing.”

These two adages are linked.  Firstly, because the idea of having community hubs, schools and community centres are very geographically based – they serve a community that is made up of where they happen to live rather than based on their needs, interests or what they have in common.  Secondly, because all of these geographically placed buildings assume a top down approach – a committee, a council or a management team running the building for an audience.  What if the chairs are turned, and the community take control?  What is the old school buildings don’t need to be replaced, because the classroom of the future isn’t a building?

I’ve long argued a concept I call “us, the classroom”.  I base this on the fact that learning takes place all the time amongst young people, chiefly through their collecting, editing, selecting, publishing and evaluating information through social networking.  I argue that, if young people are naturally using this method of learning, why do we ban that method from the classroom?  The real classroom, I’ve declared, is wherever and whenever the learner is.  It isn’t about giving the learner “ownership” because the learner, and the learner alone, owns that space already  So, let’s take this a step further.  Let’s look at this not in terms of the pedagogy but instead in the terms of the learning space.  Is the greatest space the personal space the learner occupies, rather than the building around them?  Open this wider.  Move away from traditional schools and look at extended schools.  Community Space.  Why are we consulting people on one, two or even three options?  Why are we insisting we need to build and construct space?  Some of the greatest spaces are online.  They are shaped, designed, maintained and developed by the users themselves.  Can we learn from this virtual idea and take it back into the real world?

I’m not a community designer, so I probably can’t answer that question.  But I was cheered recently to hear of a graduate whose landscape architecture project went along these lines.  It looked at concepts like gorilla gardening to get the community designing their own space.   Maybe, if we can take those ideas from the landscape designers, take the classroom theories from online learning and the community concept from Chris Brogan we can find some really innovative ways to move education forward – and really build ourselves some schools for the future.

Me and Ken were certain from the start that we wanted certain things from this event.  We chose a Saturday so that people who can’t blag innovation through their job role could come.  We wanted the involvement of senior management and frontline staff.  We wanted involvement from elected members.  Sadly, we failed a little on point 2 (more on that later).  However, the Saturday worked wonders and we had just under 80 people meet at York’s National Railway Museum, including a number of elected members who attended a parallel session facilitated by Cllr Tim Cheetham (Barnsley) and Cllr Simon Cooke (Bradford).  I certainly felt that the attendence of so many elected members really enriched the debate and the audience.  It was nice to break away from a techie/comms event and get more input.

This event’s timing was crucial.  The first LocalGovCamp since the election, we knew about the cuts and efficiency drives that lie ahead.  Innovation isn’t just something that will happen now.  It’s something that has to happen.

I’m not going to try and summarise everything that happened on the day.  There’s plenty about it on the website and we’ll be adding a lot more very soon.  You can also check out Dave Briggs summary here.  I think I’ll keep this blog the way I like it and make it all about me.

I ran two sessions on the day.  The first, run with Al Smith and Ben Proctor, looked at emergency planning and the role of social media in this.  Ben has some background in the emergency planning process and Al led a similar workshop at UKGovCamp, so we were off to a good start.  We didn’t just talk about social media – we spoke about the role innovation could have in mapping resources, mapping crisis points and giving staff the opportunity to work from home.  The conclusions were that emergency planning chiefs really need to take the role of social media more seriously – a hard challenge when so many heads of communications and chief executives seem to ignore it, or treat it as a novelty comms issue.

I thought this workshop would be the bright one of the day.  However, I never expected my session on “Just a game?  Do social and geo-dependant games have an impact in local authorities”  I based it on my recent blog post and the response I’d received from it.  The workshop was very popular and the discussions from it spilled over into the after event drinks and then into the twittersphere.  It’s clear that this is a can of worms that’s been opened and that gaming can, and is, having an impact on local authority activity.  Additionally, there was talk of developing gaming content for local government engagement processes.   However, progress was hampered.  Firstly, there were concerns expressed about security in some games and, more importantly, the perceived security risks that many council gatekeepers might have in allowing their implementation.  The final point was asking how we could expect council chiefs to take games seriously when they don’t even really take social media seriously.

See the theme here?  I was disappointed that we hadn’t managed to get the chief execs and directors we hoped for along – it’s their drives that shape the organisation.  I was also disappointed that we didn’t have many frontline workers there – the people who can tell you what works and what doesn’t on the ground.  Social media, social gaming, innovation, mobile devices, mobile working and new models of communication simply have to be taken more seriously, not just be enthusiasts, but by the people that really matter.

We’re already looking at how we can put our heads together to plan the next move.  Its clear that, in Yorkshire & Humber and beyond, there are real issues and that the debate is starting to move forward.  However, as the situation becomes urgent, the debate needs to reach the senior areas of local authorities.

I’d be interested to know ideas people might have of how we move this forward – post them here, on the LGCYH website or in any other place you think people look.  The key message for me is this:  Look what we can achieve working together.  Now let’s widen that net so that everyone can get involved.

One of my gripes with e-safety policies is that they often only look at e-safety from the safeguarding side of things.  Obviously, this is by far the most important area, however corporate reputation and liability is another angle which is often ignored.  So, you might expect that I was fairly excited to hear this week that a school for the 11 – 19 age group had put in place such a policy.  However, I’m afraid I wasn’t.

The school, which I’ve decided not to name (for reasons that will become apparent), has decided to tackle the issue of videos of teachers in school head on.  Its publicly accessible policy states that anyone posting comments or videos on public websites that show bullying of staff or harm the school’s reputation might be expelled.

Initially, this seems like a good idea.  However, the bit that had me worried was the whole “anything that may harm the schools reputation” bit.  See, I remember that, when working for the council, we had a clause in our contract that we would “not bring the council into disrepute”.  This kind of clause is vital for public sector workers to protect impartiality and confidentiality of public records and integrity, but it is also a get-out-clause that allows someone to be disciplined or sacked for anything that can be deemed “harming” the reputation.  For example, while council officers not on a politically restricted scale are technically free to express their political beliefs, it would be very easy to argue that political beliefs, in particular controversial ones, harm the council.  Thus, arguably, this clause prevents any political discussion by council staff.  I’ve certainly known of cases where union activity was interpreted in this way.  The same could be true of the clause in this school’s safety policy.   The only way to be sure you don’t harm the schools reputation is not to talk about it at all.

A further rule, again issued in the spirit of e-safety, requires all students to sign a “contract” which includes a clause about not identifying that they attend this school on any postings they submit.

Again, it is simple common sense that giving out your school details could breach your security and I’m not arguing in any way that these policies should not be in place.  However, they become far more worrying when you actually see how students are instructed on or interpret them.  One told me that they are not allowed to discuss anything relating to the school, at all, on any social network.  Clearly, the implication of this policy is that the school is not mentioned on social networking sites.  Indeed, a quick scan with Google shows that it’s worked.  There are no identifiable groups set up by students.  However, there are several set up by former students, one of which calls the school “prison-like” and “draconian” amongst many other things.  How can students make use of technology to communicate effectively if they cannot use it to discuss the issues that matter to them?

So, you may be wondering, where is my gripe?  I’ve said that e-safety policies should be taking reputation into account and this one does.  I’ve said that it’s silly to open yourself too much online and this policy prevents that.  Well, my gribe came to me this week as I was looking at a new project that a friend of mine was involved in.  It’s called “The nation thinks”, is part of Crowdworks and is a new forum for political discussions around the forthcoming budget, encouraging users to submit their ideas.

Obviously, this will spurn a lot of political debate.  Useful political debate.  The kind that we want to see more, not less, of.  However, as I registered, I found myself wondering how many people would be put off by clauses in their contracts, vague wording in policies and rules presented as safety being interpreted and enforced as draconian?  In a world where our schools have policies like this and many of our public networks have even stricter ones, where is the room for free debate?

I, and probably most of the readers of this blog, will have argued for some time that the solution in terms of infrastructure is not to lock down systems but to foster awareness of safe and proper practice.  The same is true in terms of reputation.  We need to have a world where we can freely discuss, without worrying about whether we will get into trouble for what we say.  That means policies that are flexible, but make clear what is and isn’t acceptable, rather than simply relying on interpretation.  We need to educate and inform users about the good practice of discussion and debate, the laws of libel and the consequences of sticking your neck out.  But at no point, surly, should we be telling people that they cannot talk about their time at school, or work in any way without fear of disciplinary action?  If we continue on this route, we’ll have a very safe world….but not a world of active citizens.  We might then all be sorry….but we won’t want to say anything about it.

Part of my dislike for this is born from the fact that I love that social networking gives us the chance to share real things with real people and these “social games” seem to trivialise so much of that. Maybe I take life a bit too seriously.

So, when I first saw FourSquare I dismissed it as a game. The network involved gaining points, claiming prizes…it all sounded a bit trivial to me. However, I noticed more and more people using it. Suddenly it seemed like I was the only social media geek not on it, so I thought I’d better give it a try.  What’s more it’s soaring in popularity.  According to the founders, it had 175,000 users last December and, say the LA Times, it has just under 1million users as of last month.  That’s growth on a curve that’s close to the one Twitter had in its early days and only a few 100,000 less (that’s just a drop in the ocean) than facebook had back in the day.

FourSquare is a social game and geo-located service for mobile devices.   When you go somewhere, you use your phone to pinpoint your location and a list of nearby places, such as the park, are shown. You can then “check in” to these places. Once there you can add tips about the places for your other friends (or the wider public) to see. If you go to one place more than anyone else (and at least five times) you become “the mayor” of that location. You collect points for the distances you travel, the new places you add, etc and get trophies. So, how is this different from farmville?

Well, firstly it’s about real places. The next addition is that you can “shout” from locations (basically, tweet, about what you’re doing) which is handy if your friends are there as well and you want to meet up. Thirdly, FourSquare tell us, businesses such as cafés are starting to offer “mayor deals” where to mayor of their café gets a discount.

So, armed with my iPhone and new FourSquare app, I started checking in everywhere I went.  I noticed that many businesses, such as local cinemas, had a presence on there already.  Councils, meanwhile, had none.  I’m not suggesting that people would want to check in with their council.  But they might at their libraries, sports centres, community venues and theatres.  Many of these venues have already been added on FourSquare – but without the council having any kind of control, branding or any other association with it.   They are missing a trick.

Maybe it’s not suprising that council’s aren’t looking at social games like FourSquare.  After all, many are still struggling with Facebook and Twitter.  However, we can see from social games popularity that they are here to stay and the popular ones may well become the household names that facebook and twitter have become.

What this teaches us is that social media strategies need to be built to change.  In 2006, I’d have told you the we needed MySpace strategies.  a few years later we were talking about Facebook, Twitter and social bookmarking.  Just a few months ago, I would have dissmissed social games as being just that  – games that had no community benefit.  Today, maybe we should be thinking about their impact however, along with geo-located services and augmented reality.

In summary, strategists need to be looking beyond the individual tools and looking at the wider vision – how can local authorities keep on top of social media practice and react to new apps and programmes. Are these kind of applications the next big thing for people….or really, are they all just a trivial game?

I’ve known David Wright MP for many years.  I’ve met him in a professional capacity as well as in a personal capacity, having lived and worked in the Telford area for many years.  As someone who is vocal on local and national issues, I’ve often approached David and always found him to be a responsive MP.  By and large I’ve agreed with him or seen his point and he’s always struck me as honest, so when he says his twitter account was hacked when the message was posted, I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt.  I should point out here, by way of a disclaimer, that I’m not connected to any political party nor am I endorsing that people vote for David….I’m simply putting forward my opinion as a former constituent.

My worries about the story were confirmed when I tuned into the media today and realised that the anti-twitter stories that seem to fill the media daily had reached the political stage.  David’s comment, be it a misjudged throwaway comment or malicious hack, had thrown him into the political spotlight and, with it, the use of twitter by politicians trying to engage our interest.

Local BBC radio was quick to pick up the story and keen tweeter Jim Hawkins did a fascinating phone in show about the use of Twitter by politicians.  It kicked off with an interview with Steve Molyneux (@profontheprowl), a fellow social media buff and learning technologist, who has seen the dark side of Twitter himself.   Steve rightly pointed to the dangers of making sure your social media site isn’t compromised.  He also questioned, however, the use Twitter is as an engagement tool for politicians.  More on this point later.  A later  caller summed up my feelings sting: “it isn’t Twitter that’s at fault here – it’s how people use it.”  Another few stated that twitter was simply a “trendy” tool of the moment and that they would “rather see their MP” than hear them on Twitter.  Meanwhile, Conservative HQ, keen to defend themselves against the comments, claimed that: “This is exactly the sort of politics that voters are so sick of”.

What I wondered, looking at all that, was whether this was the sort of politics people were sick of, or whether people were also sick of the politics where a throwaway comment gets blown out of all proportion.  Anyone who reads David Wright’s tweets can be in no doubt of his dislike of the Conservative party.  No one takes issue with this.  He is, after all, a Labour politician.  Even if he had posted his controversial “scum sucking pig” comment, it would not have shown him as a hypocrite, nor devalued his opinion on any policy.  It may have shown him to be juvenile but, if the British public are so sick of juvenile comments, why is it that we crave the controversial guests on Question Time and why is it that Jeremy Kyle still gets such high viewing figures?   Actually, in terms of the latter, why is that?

My worry here is that there are a large group of people who do not engage with mainstream politics but do engage with social media could be engaged in the political process through the use of Twitter.  David claims to be and, to my knowledge is, the only Shropshire MP using Twitter.  Even his critics were quick to congratulate him on using Twitter on Jim’s radio show.  But maybe, as that caller had said, it was how he used it.  Politicians need to maintain some decorum on twitter.

Problem is, when I was recently asked what one piece of advice I’d give to someone starting out their brand in social media, I said: “Think of your brand as a person – a social media account that does not have personality is worse than none at all.”  So, how do you justify this if you can’t make the odd throw-away comment?  After all, we all do this, all the time.

I’m not sure what the answer is, however I do know that, in a world where people are getting on social media, comments will come back to haunt people.  Sometimes, rightly, when they expose that person as someone who is not being honest.  However, when they simply go a bit over the top, I think we should simply demand, and accept, an apology.  If politics becomes about who said what to whom and when, in a world of social media, it will descend into a farce and the tweeters and facebookers, like their “real life” cousins, will join the apathy club.  Maybe I’m not the normal mainstream.  But I want my politicians online.  I want them to make mistakes.  I want them to be human.

It’s taken a long time for a lot of the smaller charities and community groups to cotton on to these ideas, and a few still haven’t. However, it’s at this point that social media comes into play.

Social Media is a branding exercise. Brand has stopped being something that is the domain of the multi national. It’s stopped being the tools of large organisations. It’s even stopped being a sidethought by grassroots campaigners. Brand is now truely in the domain of the individual.  Even the most open facebook user needs to recognise that they are not really sharing everything about themselves – they are sharing select information with the intention of influencing people and affecting how they are perceived.  Like the great multi-nationals, logos, reputation and crisis management are needed.  The logo is the facebook profile picture, the reputation is the groups you join, the photos you comment on or the wall posts you make and crisis management is what you do when someone posts a negative comment on your photos.

I’ve experienced personal brand myself.  At various meetings of the past six months, I’ve found people don’t know me or who I am, but do follow and know about “kevupnorth” (my twitter name).  So, kevupnorth is a user that is known beyond Kevin Campbell-Wright, someone who has his own reputation and on whom people have made their own judgements.  I can’t help but wonder, if I put particular effort into it, whether I could build up a totally inaccurate portrait of kevupnorth, or manipulate his reputation without effecting my own.

The problem is that brand management has been a skill used for decades (or possibly centuries) by incredibly clever operators who we now call “spin doctors”.  It has been honed by exchanges of practice and education.  Yet now, everyone needs to have these skills to make good use of their social networking presence.

To bring this back round to the point of this blog, how is this relevant for communities?  One of the questions in the discussion today was whether I felt every brand would one day be represented via social media.  While I said that they would, I also emphasised that brands would change.  In a world where we are all brands ourselves, it will stand to reason that every community group, every community activist and even every community problem and challenge will be a brand, which will require its own ideas around reputation management, key messages, logos and PR.   If we’re going to tackle digital literacy seriously and support communities in acheiving what they want to, we need to do more than just teach them how and why to use the net and tools for safe usage.  We have to allow them to develop their brand – and give them the skills to manage it.

There were lots of sessions on lots of topics and I can’t even begin to cover every thought and idea that passed my way.  The best thing to do it read the Twitter stream and see all the hundreds of comments.  There were lots of people to meet too, some people who I knew from Twitter and some new faces too.  I won’t list them all, partly because I can’t remember them all and partly because I want to get to the core of this blog post.

My running theme for this GovCamp was, unintentionally, the three Cs:  Community, Crisis and Communications.

Alastair Smith ran a really productive session around social media and the response to the recent snow.  The conversation strayed off into emergency planning as a whole and the role of local and national government alongside the role of media and volunteers.  There were some great stories of how local government had responded using social media, how local government had rallied volunteers and how the media had used council social sites like Twitter to gather information.  Despite a general feeling in the hierarchy of many local government bodies that social media is something for the kids, the snow showed huge hit counts of web media.  One posting even reported 21,000 hits.

However, these great stories were also diluted with the inevitable ones around social media failing during the snow.  There were calls for a greater consistency in the way councils used things like twitter – for example using a #schoolclosure hashtag nationally, so that media organisations could follow everything (which SkyNews did).

In terms of planning for future emergencies,  there was a definite consensus that web officers, ICT professionals, comms officers and emergency planning officers need to work together more to plan for these eventualities.  Somehow a 24/7 approach needs to be agreed.  Other questions raised were:

• What is an emergency – what defines a time when it’s ok to get the boss out of bed to get a tweet?
• How do press staff respond – are press releases the way forward, or is a twitterfeed more useful?
• How does the organisation respond – some schools give their closures to the BBC, not the council PR team
• How does the comms team work with the emergency services, roadwatch and other external agencies around this?
• How is web content updated?  Can key staff access the CMS from home to make web updates?  How do they plan for Twitter or Facebook crashing under increased demand of a major emergency?
• Most importantly, how do they respond to customers?  Obviously emergency queries could be answered online, but is it over the top to assume a 24/7 conversation can take place?  What if someone replies to a school closure with “well that school would close, it’s rubbish”.  How do comms staff avoid engaging in debate?  Should they avoid engaging in debate?

Following on from this nicely, I went to Eve Shuttleworth’s session around how journalism is changing and, more to the point, how comms should relate to the media via social media.  There was strong feeling that video and youtube type content submitted with press releases needed to be in keeping with the spirit of the medium.  There was little point making corporate videos for YouTube.  A lot of doubt was raised that content like this would be used at all, especially as many media bodies won’t use content developed by a council because it’s weighted.  Jim Hawkin’s, from BBC Radio Shropshire, joined in the debate via twitter, suggesting that media releases should remain as text and that actually linking to other content was largely irrelevant – it was a quick, accurate and simple product that journalists wanted.  Despite this, one local newspaper had already agreed that they would take YouTube content for their website.

The final session, run by Robin Grant, looked at how we use the data we can get for consultation.  There were lots of methods suggested and ways of analysing the results were also debated.  My favourite, though, was the feeling that consultation could be crowd sourced, ie that, as part of a formal conversation, we should be tapping into where peopel are talking about the issue already.

I’ll finish this post on a note that really summarised the day.  The first session I attended was a “Local Authority Group Hug”, just a session to catch up where local government was in terms of technology.  There was a real mix form the very innovative to those with complete lockdowns.  The session was facilitated by someone I won’t name, who had come unofficially.  Social media wasn’t recognised in their organisation.  Innovation wasn’t  encouraged.  But that didn’t matter, because staff came from all over the country to see how they could make the change in their organisation.  How they could innovate past the barriers.  It’s that passion for the future that really makes UK Gov Camp.  I’ll certainly be booking my ticket for next year.

There are many arguments for and against having these restrictions and I don’t really want to open the vast can of worms that those debates would involve.  Additionally, I don’t want to go over the whole “your employer, the council, might search for you on google” debate, which has been done to death.  However, having read a recent article re-posted on Twitter by community development consultant Mike Chitty, I did have to think about how this could apply to social media.

The article, from Montana in the United States, revolves around a City Council asking job applicants to submit usernames and passwords for all their social media sites as part of the job application.  They’ve taken legal advice on this and apparently they can do this.

This is an extreme example of councils probing into people’s private lives.   The legal implications of asking people for passwords which, as the article points out, they are bound not to give you by the terms of service, probably means this won’t go any further.  However, I doubt it’s the end of the social media fit for office debate.

Currently, most public bodies I’ve experienced ask you, on application, for the following information:

• To declare any criminal charges or, if relevant, any accusations that have been made against you
• Submit to a CRB Disclosure (police check)
• To declare (and normally to cease) any business interests you have
• To declare any membership organisation you belong to (such as the freemasons)
• To declare (and if applicable cease) any political office you may be involved in

So, would it be that surprising if they started asking you for lists of your online presence?  Do you have a website, are you a member of facebook , what does your LinkedIn history say about you?

There’s always that argument that if you’ve done nothing wrong, you’ve nothing to hide, but the fit for office argument gets tricky here.  What if you’re a member of the facebook group  “I was born in the UK so why don’t I have as many rights as immigrants“.  To some, this is a legitimate, humanitarian debate.  To others it is a political, right wing, cause.  To others still it is an unfounded, racist and prejudicial statement.   If you went to a physical rally around this subject it would be quite easy to determine if it was political or not, based on who had organised it.  You’d be able to judge the tone of the rally and decide if your presence brought the council into disrepute.   However, on a facebook group it isn’t quite so simple.

The standards board ruled some time ago that a politician who posted arguably racist comments on a facebook page had not violated standards because it was a personal account.  So where does this leave public bodies?

Looking back at the guidance from Darlington Council, I note that even politically restricted persons can display a political badge on their person or vehicle…so what about on their facebook account?  What if they also conduct some council business over facebook?

The answers to this, sadly, are policy and guidance.  Applicants, staff and political members need to be clear about what they can and can’t do politically via social media – otherwise we’ll end up with job application forms asking the questions that they do in Montana.