Nice article on social media’s power over more traditional forms of PR – here
A challenge to the marketing world – how to adapt to the new social media paradigm. I feel there is a fight on, and ‘they’ will not give up easily. Marketing and advertising will also be fighting for its existence, even if it has to wear a social media mask! Can they fool us?
I know stats aren’t the most reliable things in the universe, but here’s some to drop into conversation over dinner tonight! Did you know there were 90 trillion emails sent in 2009?… Tonya (my wife) loves it when I talk like this…
The State of The Internet from JESS3 on Vimeo.
Busy working on my assignment for my latest MA module on Internet Cultures, and came across an old love of mine. Personality Types! Studied this area a little in my degree, looking at personality types of young Christian leaders. So, the thought of including some Personality Type thinking in my MA strangely excites me. Now, is that wrong?
So, my thought was – what kind of person writes and maintains a blog? What personality types do bloggers have? Are they all introvert thinkers? Without doing some serious research, I can’t make any big claims here, but thought it would be interesting to analyse my fellow bloggers on my MA course using a great little website called Typealyzer.
This clever little website scans your blog’s content and suggests what personality type the writer is. Of course, not a highly accurate method of testing, but to my surprise – it got me as an INTJ – spot on. (Introvert, iNtuitive, Thinking, Judging.)
More about the Myres Briggs Personlity profiles here.
So – the extensive research of my fellow MA students is found below (based on their blog’s content today – of course, it may reveal something different tomorrow!)
It seems that the majority of us fall in the Introvert category (11 out of 14) and also the same percentage are thinkers, but not all of these are introvert thinkers. Now this doesn’t show real blogger’s personalty preference as we are all required to write a blog for our course, and many of us do not maintain a regular blog outside the course. It does, however show a lean towards introvert thinkers for those studying Media, Culture and Communication at the Institute of Education on the Internet Cultures module!
Here is the profile provided by the website for the most popular personality type on our course – the ISTP – the ‘Mechanic’.
“The independent and problem-solving type. They are especially attuned to the demands of the moment and are highly skilled at seeing and fixing what needs to be fixed. They generally prefer to think things out for themselves and often avoid inter-personal conflicts.
The Mechanics enjoy working together with other independent and highly skilled people and often like seek fun and action both in their work and personal life. They enjoy adventure and risk such as in driving race cars or working as policemen and firefighters.”
If you have any further thoughts on this area of thought – do comment me. Check out your own blog’s personality type here.
WordPress now welcome you to call them from anywhere in the world and leave a voice mail message on your blog! You need to call a US number, but this only costs 1p/min from a mobile phone if you sign up with someone like 18185.
Just did this – appeared immediately!
Big Book
Digital Generations by David Buckingham and Rebekah Willett – 2006
A key book in my area of study for my MA has been Digital Generations by David Buckingham. It looks closely at how young people use technology differently from the older generations and what the implications are for understanding this new generation.
Buckingham begins this collection of papers by taking the time to define what he means by digital generation and suggests that we belong to a ‘generation’ not solely tied by our age, but by our media usage. Those of us who can reflect nostalgically on old TV shows may be grouped in one generation, while those who watch reruns today for the first time may be grouped in a different generation. Even though both groups have interest in the same TV show, they come from a different generation, thinking and feeling differently about the show.
Creating a generation-identity holds power. Buckingham suggests that the media industry redefines generational categories to maximise profits. For example, Youth Culture is no longer just for young people, but for whoever consumes it.
Buckingham points out the stark differences in media that the new generation are growing up with. TV dumbed down its audience by transmitting its content, whereas the Net raises intelligence through its interactivity and dynamic content. Technology produces generational differences.
Children have an intuitive, spontaneous relationship with technology, unlike their parents. This creates a wider generational gap. Children encounter ‘discovery’ rather than ‘delivery’. They are learning a new Net-based language and hence a new culture, identity and generation is formed. “TV led the baby boomers to accept the status quo – the Net radicalises young people to be more active.” (Buckingham)
Buckingham takes a brief look at the issues of Internet safety and suggests that parental responsibility for young people’s safe-keeping while using the Internet is hard to police. It cuts across trust issues in the family, and it seems that little is being done on privacy invasion further up the hierarchy (Government).
Amongst other chapters covering a range of areas of discussion, the other most interesting for me and my chosen area of study was chapter 11 by Lois Ann Scheidt. She takes a close look at the reality of the blogosphere to discover than more than half (66%) of blogs started in 2005 have been left inactive. However, of those still maintained, most are of a diary nature (70%), a vast majority are run by under 30 year olds (92%) and a high percentage are produced by adolescent girls (34-38%)
Scheidt argues that producing a blog helps to create a digital fluency in young people, so even a short-lived blog can help develop the digital generation. Technology has filled a void for disenfranchised youth and provided them with a power that helps build identity. Scheidt goes on to outline the importance of mentoring alongside technology as the key to good youth work and youth identity building. With the phrase, “Identity is enacted in participation” (p313-314), Scheidt goes on to demonstrate this using her own experience within a youth project called ‘Hopeworks’.
She strongly suggests that young people need roles to create identity. I would argue that roles play a part in creating identity, but identity forming is based much deeper and is influenced by a number of contributing factors, including roles of responsibility, but not limited to them. It is unfortunate, I believe, to tie so much importance in what you can do, rather than on who you are. Our self-esteem and identity are developed by a greater understanding of who we are, rather than what we can do, or our responsibilities.
The question, ‘What do you do” is often followed by: “I’m a … teacher.” We should not be defined by what we do. Our identity should not be tied up in what we do – or else, when what we do is threaten, our whole identity is at risk.
‘What do you do’ should be answered, ‘I teach…’ Identity’s question is – ‘who are you’ – not something we ask each other very often in this culture.
Scheidt completes her chapter by enforcing her beliefs in young people being both mentors and mentees. There is much scope for this style of youth work within the world of technology. Young people can pick up new skills very quickly, and can then be part of someone else’s learning. Technology really can aid a young person through adolescence and identity forming. Technology can provide a platform for young people to try on various roles, imagining themselves as different kinds of people. Online experiments are another way to express oneself, and self-expression is an important developmental process for identity formation.
A lot of young people use computers – they have to, it’s how our schools are run. A lot of young people use social networking websites – they want to, it’s how friendships work today.
However, a lot, isn’t all. There are many young people across the country who do not have an active facebook account, msn address or even an email they check regularly. A lot of young people are just not wired that way.
Computers and technology demands that everyone knows some basics. Some young people are not interested. Maybe they see through the lie of the value placed on technology. They see the real worth of playing with real toys, not virtual ones. They see the real worth of meeting friends face to face, not virtually. Many young people don’t use technology the way we expect.
I’ve thought a lot about different approaches to online youthwork. With some young people, this approach can be very effective – regular status updates and opinions expressed online can lead to all kinds of follow up. Many young people choose not to display their lives, thoughts or opinions online and will fall through the youth work gap if we invest too much in technology too soon.
Youth work will never be completely online, but to those investing huge amounts of time and money in technological youth work – remember, not every young person is wired that way. Note to self: don’t forget the young people who swim in the real world – you can’t catch everyone with the Net.
Let me introduce you to two churches I’ve come across as I’ve travelled around the diocese meeting with youth workers.
The first church, St Wealthy’s is a well resourced church from a wealthy area. They can afford to employ paid youth workers and attract plenty of volunteers into their youth programmes. They can put on events that draw people from miles around and appear very successful. The Youth workers are well resourced with materials and technology to hold young people’s attention and they regularly join forces with other large, wealthy churches to put on impressive city-wide events.
The second church is St Poverty’s – a smaller church from a poor area with only a small number of young people connected to an irregular youth group. They have little to offer. They struggle on with a team of volunteers who do not have the time to invest in long term planning or with organising anything more than a weekly gathering for the handful of young people. They fear loosing their young people to the larger churches, and feel a lack of direction.
However, both these churches have something precious to offer each other. And i’m not just saying that to appear fair or ‘Christian’ – I really do believe it.
In mission – we relate. Mission used to be understood as those who ‘have’ going to those who ‘have not’. The wealthy giving charity to the wealthless. Those with power, helping those without. These are admirable virtues of service and sacrifice – Biblical principles – but ‘missional’ shortfalls.
Mission used to be a one-way relationship. We have; you don’t have – I will give to you. A more valuable view of mission is – I have and you have. We have different things that are valuable to each other, but we sometimes need to look beyond appearance to find it.
A few years ago, I went to Zimbabwe. I went as part of a team with a number of young people to get involved in a number of projects. We went to Bulawayo with the idea that we could help the Africans build some toilets for the local school, and help out in a number of other Christian projects while we were there. We went to give.
We arrived to find families living in financial poverty, but rich in spirituality and happiness. It’s a lie that the media continues to feed us that all Africans are sad and suffering.
The family we stayed with lived in a series of mud-huts, had a few chickens scratching around and walked half a mile to the nearest water pump each day. We got involved in their daily routine for the few days we were there and learnt that life was much more than possessions. We enjoyed singing, laughing and working together. We reassessed our own value on wealth and possessions, status and power in the light of our new friends who exercised such freedom and joy in the simplicity of their lifestyles.
We came to give, but we all received so much more than we could have ever given. We had financial wealth, but they had a spiritual wealth that we had never seen before. The tables turned, and we are forever different thanks to our Bulawayo friends and a few days spent together.
So, translate that into Sheffield diocese if you will. It appears that there are some poor churches, poor youth programmes in need of help. They may even believe that they are poor with little to offer. I believe the truth is every church, every youth worker, every young person has something precious that they can offer in a relationship if we look past the wealth/experience/resources that dazzles us and share what God has placed in each person.
Give what you have – if it’s wealth – give generously without the need to control. If it’s faith – share and inspire others. If it is poverty – teach others to understand the challenges and blessings you receive. The gospel is about giving and receiving. Not to oppress others and control them, but to bring freedom. See the precious gift in each other and be open to being amazed at what you can give and receive from each other. This is my message to youth workers across the diocese of Sheffield – Value what God has given you (however unimpressive it may appear!) and be willing to share and learn in true mission work.
This post follows on from ‘It’s all been done before’ and poses a powerful question to youth workers.
I find youth workers behave in one of two ways – generally. They either copy things from others (good ideas that they think they can replicate in their own youth work setting) or, they create their own new ideas. You either surround yourself with resource books, or unleash your creative side.
There is, of course, a sliding scale of originality and imitation. We all take some inspiration from others, making the necessary changes to an idea to make it fit our setting. We must allow experience to influence our own practice – it’s how we learn. However, I feel I know the point at which I am either simply imitating something because it saves me time in preparation or whether I’m taking an idea, and transforming it into something new. Imitation is time saving, but kills creativity. The youth worker can get lazy if poorly time-managed. Never having the time to ‘innovate’ but only to ‘imitate’.
The last-minute youth worker has no other choice but to run to a book that offers everything on a plate, or to maybe copy something he/she has done before. The one that values creativity must allow time for it to flourish. When we engage in innovative youth work, we hold more conviction in our practice and are able to motivate people more easily. We deliver with a passion and enthusiasm that is never found in imitative youth work. We use ourselves as a resource – we connect and relate genuinely.
Imitative youth work tends to deliver and sit back to wait for the results. It is detached from self (youth worker) and has engaged less in the creative process so doesn’t own the outcome as much.
I value innovative youth work so much and find it hard to sympathize with the resource-based, creatively dead delivery I sometimes see. If you must use resource / ideas books – promise yourself you won’t copy someone else’s ideas. Wake up your creative side and mix those ideas up until they become your own.
Don’t let the cleverness detract from the message…
I had a thought today while chatting to a youth worker in Sheffield. No, it didn’t hurt, but it’s something I’ve been thinking about more and more recently.
Taking on this new job has challenged me to question things more. I’ve done youth work since I was a youth myself – helping to run the group that my dad helped to run before me. I moved to York to train as a youth and children’s worker. While in York, I moved from trainee, to youth worker, to youth and children’s co-ordinator over 8 years. I then worked with CMS for 5 years as a national youth adviser, and now I’m working with Sheffield Diocese as the Director of Youth Ministries. There is something in me that says “it’s all been done before” – at least the temptation is to do the stuff you know has worked before, but I’m getting more uncomfortable about that by the day.
Chatting to my new youth worker friend over a rare roast beef sandwich, I heard myself say that I just don’t want to do things as we’ve done them before. The world is changing and young people don’t behave like they did 5 or 10 years ago. Getting young people together for a big knees up isn’t necessarily the right thing to do, even though it worked 3 years ago. Encouraging youth workers to do this or that training course isn’t necessarily the right thing either. We need to look to the new ways before we plump for the old ways (can’t believe I just typed ‘plump’ – an underused word me thinks 😉
The challenge is clear – think, reflect, analyse before deciding the course of action. Maybe it’s not all been done before…
mike's blog 