Higher education is uniquely positioned to take advantage of social media. Why? We're required by law to remain transparent. The Open Meetings Act and Freedom of Information Act require that we disclose the uncomfortable sort of information that frequently embarrasses the corporate world when it is inevitably revealed by the porous barriers of social media.
The best thing any marketing / advertising / public relations professional can do for their college leadership is to convince them to adopt a radically transparent mindset; to realize that nothing can remain hidden. If there is enough interest in any nugget of information, it will be wrested from the hands that hold it one way or another.
Even US intelligence agencies aren't immune from the reach of social media: the Pentagon has had to deal with tens of thousands of pages and hours of video footage that has been leaked to the journalistic site "Wikileaks."
This is the new model for journalism:
1) whistleblowers leak information to a neutral public holding area
2) the investigation / analysis is "crowdsourced" to hundreds or thousands of can use collaborative Web 2.0 tools to divvy up the homework and quickly digest the content and find the smoking gun
Another important reality of the new era of transparency is that transparency has a fourth dimension: time. Now that so much web content is being cached and archived online to remain publicly-available indefinitely - it can be analyzed decades from now with the analytical tools we haven't even dreamed up yet. Malfeasance may not be caught at the moment, but may be uncovered years down the road as someone applies a bit of ingenuity to some programming code to mash up pieces of data.
Case Study: Wikipedia Scanner (http://wikiscanner.virgil.gr/)
In 2007, then-CalTech grad student Virgil Griffith wrote a bit of code that allowed people to easily track the edits being made to Wikipedia entries by sourcing them to the IP addresses logged with the edits. The results were amazing: corporations including Diebold and Microsoft, and government officials from politicians to the CIA were caught red-handed editing the Wikipedia entries on them. niversity of Colorado just ended the blog of one of its football players that was to highlight his experience throughout the season (after a single post, no less). As ESPN describes, the university was not happy about student Ben Burney speaking openly about college life:
“His introduction began with a description of him waking early Thursday morning next to a woman in his bed, and graduated to mention his libido as he commented that reporting day for players is actually viewed as the end of fun times and freedom.”
While one can understand where UC is coming from, would it really have been such a problem to let the blog speak candidly? After all – it’s these sorts of authentic details about that would make the blog interesting and credible. No one wants to read a sanitized list of talking points from the university PR department.
A football player is having sex and bragging about it? Oh my stars and garters – say it ain’t so! Pretending that college students don’t have sex or engage in irresponsible behavior like drinking gets us nowhere. Better to tackle the realities head-on.
I would have recommended that the university to treat the blog like they would an English class from the outset; take the position of defending academic freedom and the student’s right to express himself. Any resulting controversies resulting from a candid portrayal could be handled in a healthy and transparent way:
* If the blogger publishes a sexist and chauvanistic view of women - respond to it. Let the college community comment. Hold forums and discussions about the damaging impact of this sort of worldview.
* If the blogger is engaging in risky sexual behavior…
…respond to it. Bring in experts and make comprehensive sex education programs available to students. Discuss sexual assault crime statistics on campus. Use it as an opportunity to promote the college’s counseling resources to students who are likely grappling with the myriad consequences of being sexually-active.
* If the blogger presents an unflattering picture of college athletics…
…respond to it. Use the feedback to drive policy changes at the university if necessary. Let this be a way to bridge the gap between the faculty and the athletic programs through open conversation.
* If the blogger is serving as a poor role model to young people…
…respond to it. Have a conversation about why we make athletes into role models in the first place. Engage the blogger and the community about the influences on their lives.
Without a blog, Burney’s behavior is still visible to the community (and likely even to the online community if anyone in his social circle blogs or tweets about his extracurricular activities). With a blog sanctioned by the university, however, the school has a chance to divorce itself from that behavior or to approach it in a more healthy context (an option far less available to UC if the discussion is happening outside of their sphere of control).
The best thing any marketing / advertising / public relations professional can do for their college leadership is to convince them to adopt a radically transparent mindset; to realize that nothing can remain hidden. If there is enough interest in any nugget of information, it will be wrested from the hands that hold it one way or another.
Even US intelligence agencies aren't immune from the reach of social media: the Pentagon has had to deal with tens of thousands of pages and hours of video footage that has been leaked to the journalistic site "Wikileaks."
This is the new model for journalism:
1) whistleblowers leak information to a neutral public holding area
2) the investigation / analysis is "crowdsourced" to hundreds or thousands of can use collaborative Web 2.0 tools to divvy up the homework and quickly digest the content and find the smoking gun
Another important reality of the new era of transparency is that transparency has a fourth dimension: time. Now that so much web content is being cached and archived online to remain publicly-available indefinitely - it can be analyzed decades from now with the analytical tools we haven't even dreamed up yet. Malfeasance may not be caught at the moment, but may be uncovered years down the road as someone applies a bit of ingenuity to some programming code to mash up pieces of data.
Case Study: Wikipedia Scanner (http://wikiscanner.virgil.gr/)
In 2007, then-CalTech grad student Virgil Griffith wrote a bit of code that allowed people to easily track the edits being made to Wikipedia entries by sourcing them to the IP addresses logged with the edits. The results were amazing: corporations including Diebold and Microsoft, and government officials from politicians to the CIA were caught red-handed editing the Wikipedia entries on them. niversity of Colorado just ended the blog of one of its football players that was to highlight his experience throughout the season (after a single post, no less). As ESPN describes, the university was not happy about student Ben Burney speaking openly about college life:
“His introduction began with a description of him waking early Thursday morning next to a woman in his bed, and graduated to mention his libido as he commented that reporting day for players is actually viewed as the end of fun times and freedom.”
While one can understand where UC is coming from, would it really have been such a problem to let the blog speak candidly? After all – it’s these sorts of authentic details about that would make the blog interesting and credible. No one wants to read a sanitized list of talking points from the university PR department.
A football player is having sex and bragging about it? Oh my stars and garters – say it ain’t so! Pretending that college students don’t have sex or engage in irresponsible behavior like drinking gets us nowhere. Better to tackle the realities head-on.
I would have recommended that the university to treat the blog like they would an English class from the outset; take the position of defending academic freedom and the student’s right to express himself. Any resulting controversies resulting from a candid portrayal could be handled in a healthy and transparent way:
* If the blogger publishes a sexist and chauvanistic view of women - respond to it. Let the college community comment. Hold forums and discussions about the damaging impact of this sort of worldview.
* If the blogger is engaging in risky sexual behavior…
…respond to it. Bring in experts and make comprehensive sex education programs available to students. Discuss sexual assault crime statistics on campus. Use it as an opportunity to promote the college’s counseling resources to students who are likely grappling with the myriad consequences of being sexually-active.
* If the blogger presents an unflattering picture of college athletics…
…respond to it. Use the feedback to drive policy changes at the university if necessary. Let this be a way to bridge the gap between the faculty and the athletic programs through open conversation.
* If the blogger is serving as a poor role model to young people…
…respond to it. Have a conversation about why we make athletes into role models in the first place. Engage the blogger and the community about the influences on their lives.
Without a blog, Burney’s behavior is still visible to the community (and likely even to the online community if anyone in his social circle blogs or tweets about his extracurricular activities). With a blog sanctioned by the university, however, the school has a chance to divorce itself from that behavior or to approach it in a more healthy context (an option far less available to UC if the discussion is happening outside of their sphere of control).
