Over and out–see you on Twitter @rocglobal

Thanks to all for a great session! Thanks Bev, Beth and the entire community! And please visit me at my blog Media Is A Plural

yes, a look at that Ted talk shows that 7 out of the top 10 viral videos were funny ones — and not intentionally created to “go viral.”

So let’s try at least to emulate what works? Even if it involves cats, I don’t care!

Well, I’m ready for that too!
:)

Yes, that’s one sure sign…Also, there is a limit to the amount of television advertising that can be effective when both campaigns are saturation-bombing the air waves–but only in about 9 ‘swing” states! At a certain point people simply turn off to the broadcast bombardment…Online video works quite differently

FB will do whatever it can to try to create a “walled garden” experience that you never have to leave to do anything–chat, email, purchase, you name it!

On the other hand, there are a lot of things to dislike about current forms of online payment, like PayPal. It wasn’t very “pal” like for that outfit to shut off contributions to Wikileaks and Juliam Assange, now was it?

Well, “going to Harvard” may come to mean something completely new and different in a very short period of time!

Yes–and soon!

One of Facebook’s current biggest problem, for example, is the fact that more than half of its users now access via mobile means. And FB hasnt figured out yet how to squeeze ads into that experience. What you suggest is one likely future “solution!”

Zac Moffat, who is Romney’s digital chief, made a great presentation at this year’s PDF (where NO Obama people agreed to appear!) One of his main points was the extent to which people are turning off television and simply not watching it anymore — at least not “live” when it happens. Looks more than ten percent are watching NO television now–and another 20 percent are skipping ALL the ads when they do. Moffatt points out that means 30 percent of your hoped for audience isn;t even seeing your TV ads anymore.

Hence the beginnings of the turn to online video ads, carefully targeted to individual voters… By 2016 online ads will become a major force, and tv advertising will lessen even further…

What not LULCATS? Oh well–here’s a good example despite that! remember KONY 2012? Say what you will about the Invisible Children group behind that effort — you can’t deny their social media strategy was brilliant and brilliantly effective. They engaged THEIR community to use social media to reach out to a handful of celebrities with huge Twitter followers to link to their video. When Oprah, and Justin Bieber, and Ryan S eacrest did so–the rest was viral video history.

So there are lessons to be learned from that… Look also at the Ted talk by the community engagement guy from YouTube on what makes things go viral–and then try to emulate them!

Social, mobile, local is the future of all media….

MOOCs are upon us! Massive Open Online Courses, from such stellar universities as Harvard, MIT, Stanford, etc are beginning to turn the old academic world on its head. Instead of a few lucky elite paying tens of thousands of dollars a year to “attend” a university, imagine courses with 1200 or 2500 participants engaging in the materials each week — not just for “credit,” but actually to learn…

Meanwhile prominent professors are quitting their tenured positions to start outfit like Coursera — a social entrepreneurship company that partners with the top universities in the world to offer courses online for anyone to take, for free. They say they envision a future where the top universities are educating not only thousands of students, but millions.”

Obama used social media in 2008′s campaign largely for field organizing and money raising. He then spent much of the money on old media–ie television advertising.

But those days are already gone, and the current campaign is different. The real problem is that neither candidate is likely to continue with their efforts to reach out to us and open up via social media ONCe they are in the White House.

IMHO, the biggest single failure of the Obama presidency has been his failure to continue to use social media to build and extend a constituency to fight for change the past four years. Instead he chose to attempt conciliation with the Republicans and to more or less ignore the progressives — which is one reason he’s in such a close race at the moment…

Also, regarding my “take on the society of cellphone and Facebook junkies,” I guess my answer is that it’s unfortunate to be addicted to anything. I like a cold beer every now and then, but I don’t drink a case a night.

And there are times I thank the Lord for the invention of cell phones–and yes, Google, and Twitter, and all the other marvels of these days of miracle and wonder — and then there are the times when I curse their existence!

Re your remark that “Building a new society involves actually building that society, rather than being a mere reflection of the proliferation of media,” I couldn’t agree more. That is one of the very point I was trying to make earlier to the self-sytyled cynics and those expressing the feeling that no matter what, the powerful corporations will snuff out all our efforts, etc

I understand why people feel this way but one of the main points of my book is that the digital information revolution is truly a game changer, at least potentially, in all sort of says and in all sorts of field.

Higher education, for example is about to be radically disrupted and transformed into something entirely new, and it could be to great democratic benefit in the end, just to mention one exciting new area..

Beth, you say “it is widely believed that it’s only recently that the GOP has caught up to the Democrats in terms of new media skills.” That’s not my take–I think it’s pretty clear that at least by the 2010 midterm elections the Repubs –including people like MArco Rubio and RickPerry, interestingly –were very active in social media and it made a difference in the races.

In any event I’d say at the moment parties fully recognize the need for and power of social media–at least in terms of getting re-elected.

As mentioned earlier, however, Obama never followed through after 2008 on the transparent governance piece — so the question is, Will the parties use this great new tool ONLY to perpetuate themselves? Or will the winner go on to use it to extend and improve governance?

Beth makes a great point about the need for an online/offline mashup strategy. (One group that does this well is Meetup, of course)

But this need is also evident in the silly debate between self-styled “cyberrealists” like New Yorker writer Malcolm Gladwell or Evgeny Morozov and people the term “cyber-utopians,” who claim Twitter and Facebook actually CAUSE revolutions instead of facilitating the growth and increasing the reach and efficiency of “offline” movements that have been agitating for change for years, even decades.

As activist Omoyele Sowore is quoted in my book, “The Internet has helped revolution; but the Internet is not revolution.”

Love the anecdote about your Dad! And yes, FB can both UNITE and DIVIDE –and it is constantly morphing and changing, often with little to no regard for its community, which does tend to make it even more confusing. Basically, I think of it as a tool,like a hammer — something that can be used to build or destroy things, depending on who is using it and how!

I honestly don;t think money is much of a determinant factor any more in any of this…and if rich progressives only give to the Democratic Party, et’s go disrupt them too!

The name of my blog (accessible at roryoconnor.org) is “Media Is A Plural.” For the first time in history, we can all now be,simultaneously, creators, distributors and curators of media of all sorts.

Understanding what this transformation means and how powerful it can make us is an essential first step. For example, if you want someone “in the media” to do a story—go ahead! As Scoop Nisker once put it,”If you don;t like the news, go make some of your own!”

Only now it is easier, cheaper and faster to do that than ever before…