WhatsTheBuzzAbout.com

Have You Mastered Being Succinct?

Have you noticed that over the course of the last few years, communication via the internet seems to be expecting us to express more using fewer words? It has become commonplace to see yellow smiley faces to represent happiness and other moods, acronyms such as roflol to represent that we are laughing (rolling on the floor laughing out loud) and tweets in 140 words or less.

On web sites we are asked to summarize ourselves using no more than 25 key words, or to give a quick synopsis of our expertise in a profile, or lists our “needs” and “wants” in less than 50 words for each category.  We are told that in order to be understood, we should write for an 8^th grade student or below (using the United States educational system as an example).  We are encouraged to think in outline form using bullets or numbers to help clarify our statements for readers. We are expected to be “politically correct” in the United States and “culturally correct” and sensitive when using the written words without the benefit of body language or facial expressions to help connote the meaning and the respect.

With all the expectation, we are learning how to be succinct. We use shorter sentences. We adopt the headline news approach in our emails in order to avoid the undesired “spam” filter.  We use smaller words – words that will not send someone to the dictionary to determine the meaning.  Our hiring officials generally take less than a minute to review a resume, and may discard for errors in punctuation or grammar on first review.

In short, the demands on us are now to adapt to the quick bite. We must communicate our information and questions rapidly. The pace of life and work seems quickened by this need to get the “point across” in short order.  Should our children be taught in school to be succinct? Is brevity the goal? If it is, we may lose some of the beauty of words, thoughts, ideas, creativity, and expressiveness along the way.

Have you mastered the art of being succinct without losing your authenticity?

What is your buzz about?

Do You Feel Restricted from Being Authentic?

When social networks first began to emerge, there appeared to be relatively clear distinctions between personal and business networks. For example, MySpace was considered to be a personal network and Xing (formerly OpenBC) was considered to be a business network.  There was actually some confusion with using the term social network, until that term became adopted to describe both business and personal networks.  Many people attempted to separate their personal social networks and their business social networks—some still attempt to do so.

As the popularity of social networks grew, the blur between personal and business social networks diminished.  Business associates on business social networks found colleagues on their respective individual personal social networks and vice versa and requested to connect. People began to connect with the same people on multiple networks.  Advice givers were quick to point out that reputations could be enhanced or damaged by virtue of using certain applications or posting certain things on specific networks. Employers and executive recruiters began to scour personal social networks for insights on clients and candidates. Parents monitored children. Some spouse and significant others monitored their loved ones.

The fun of purely social applications, such as dating applications or what is your flower-type applications began to be tainted by the need of many to ensure that he or she reflected purely business appropriate content. Older adults and business people began to participate on social networks such as Facebook, which had been traditionally the territory of the under 30 set.

More and more content on these social networks became accessible to non-members through search engines, such as Google, which collect information and organize it for retrieval. We have the possibility of controlling only part of the information which is collected on us depending upon the web site.  Individuals looking for us through a search engine can easily find us if we are a member of a social network such as LinkedIn™.

Now we know that where we participate and what we enter online is archived and often retrievable by others. Has that affected your decisions about

·         What social networks to join?

·         What groups or forums to join?

·         What applications to add on those social networks?

·         What postings or comments you make?

·         What RSS feeds you add?

·         With whom you connect?

Most people will admit that they do edit themselves with respect to those areas. The repercussions about being 100 percent authentic , i.e., joining, posting, and connecting can be insurmountable. It seems that there is a need for a social / personal network where people can feel free to be themselves without being judged and where others pledge to maintain confidentiality about what they read and observe and take no adverse action as a result of any information on that social network.  Dreaming about the impossible social network is fanciful.  The only privacy that one has now is what he or she chooses not to share, and sharing only certain information with certain people online is almost impossible. Being truly authentic has been lost in the rush to implement data gathering, data analysis, and data mining.

What is your buzz about?

Does Spam Have Value?

According to Merriam-Webster Online - http://www.merriam-webster.com – the term “spam” has a fairly innocuous definition.  It defines spam as “unsolicited usually commercial e-mail sent to a large number of addresses.”  Wikipedia takes a tough approach by defining it as “Spamming is the abuse of electronic messaging systems to indiscriminately send unsolicited bulk messages” - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.

Both these definitions define spam as having the characteristic of being unsolicited.  What is implied when people speak about spam is that spam is not only unsolicited but unwanted. There is also an unstated inference that spamming constitutes some indeterminate number of unsolicited e-mails.

However, these definitions do not address a number of points:

1.       They beg the question of what constitutes a “large number of addresses.” Is a large number 50, 100, 100, 10,000, or more?

2.       Was the content of the e-mail identical or at least similar?

3.       Did the sender farm the e-mail address using electronic compilations or purchase the e-mail address?

4.       Has the sender established contact with the recipient other than through this e-mail?

5.       Is the information accurate, trustworthy, and not a scam?

6.       Can the recipient opt-out without triggering more unwanted e-mail?

7.       Should the recipient have expected to receive the e-mail?

8.       Was the e-mail of interest or of no interest to the recipient?

Perhaps the definition of spam should also include the concept of sending unexpected and unwanted similar content e-mails to at least 1000 email address. Perhaps spam is beneficial more often than not using the very loose definitions from Merriam-Webster Online and Wikipedia above.  

Let’s take a live case to consider. An organization has over 1,000 members. The members provide their e-mail addresses as part of joining the organization. The organization has not specifically asked whether they could send e-mail. They send an e-mail to each of the members announcing an event that is free, open to public, and provides free health screening services.

So what happens to the all the e-mails? Some e-mails are blocked by spam firewalls. A member opts-out of the e-mail list, even though he or she is provided his or her e-mail address. Some members have blocked attachments in an attempt to catch spam. Other members write thank-you notes for keeping them informed.

According to the earlier definitions this e-mailing is spam.  However, it is only spam to those who did not want to receive it. Some have let technology make the decision for them as to whether they should receive it. They will never even know it was sent to them.  They have given their power in this instance away.

Spam has value as long as the recipient wants to receive it. It only becomes spam to an individual when it is unwanted.  Are we placing ourselves in the position that we have to list everyone we provide our email address to as a safe-sender? How very cumbersome.

Consider whether your networks, groups, organizations, forums, companies, etc could be trying to reach out to you and may be blocked from doing so.  Add them to your safe senders list to ensure that you can receive their e-mail. On the other hand, do not provide your e-mail address to an organization if you do not want to be e-mailed.  Why join in the first place, if you are not interested in hearing from them?

Take responsibility for any unsolicited e-mail that you send. Work out a system to ensure that you do not become a “spammer” by default under the broadest definitions given to us above.  Be a good steward of your contacts and help them contact you.

Spam is not the enemy. Not all spam is generated with evil intent. Spam can be a good friend by exposing you to new ideas, new trends, or new people. Be a good steward of your contacts, and help them be good stewards as well.

What is your buzz about?

Are You Online Authentic?

As humans we are complex beings. We have been taught from a young age that it is acceptable to act differently in different settings.

As children in a restaurant or in a formalized worship setting, we were to be quiet, stay in our seat, and be respectful. However, on the playground, we were allowed to run and scream and laugh and push our friends down the sliding board. It was simple then, either we were allowed to be children in a situation or we were expected to be little adults in a situation. Our parents or adults told us how to act.

As teen-agers, we learned about authority and expectations from the adults in our lives—parents, teachers, coaches, mentors, etc. We learned to decide for ourselves how we were going to act in each setting. We decided if we were going to do our homework, abide curfews set by our parents, share personal information with certain adults even if they did not ask to know, join gangs, volunteer to help clean-up a river, etc.  We began to understand that we can create unique personalities which we can put on at off at will. Expectations of us from parents were different than those of us from brothers or sisters, or teachers, or peers. We learned that one person could be happy while another could be disappointed for the same action we took. As we grew, our choices grew.

In the adult physical world, we learned new roles as employers or employees, spouses, parents, mentors, leaders, etc. We learned to vary our conduct from the manner in which we conduct ourselves at work to the manner in which we conduct ourselves at home or in other social areas of our lives. In the physical world, conduct may be is easier to observe and to commend or criticize by multiple segments.  We do not normally pert chart our home life and we do not normally answer the phone at the office, raise our voice, and call for XYZ to pick up the phone as some of us might do at home. 

Enter the social media world and its ever-increasing melding/blending of personal and private information. Some of us entered the social media world from the personal vantage point; we may have opened YouTube to share videos, for example.  Some of us may have entered the social media world from a professional vantage point; we may have joined LinkedIn™ to be able to reach other professionals.  Do you remember your first foray into the social media space?

What we include in our profiles, post on groups or blogs, and what we join or with whom we connect in social media all defines us in the electronic world.  We may have had this impression that we could maintain separate roles on social media sites and it may have been true for the early years of social media. For example, we could have joined MySpace or Facebook for personal use and Ecademy or Xing for professional use. Our posting and participation could be limited in each. Now, the evolution of software programs enables us to marry content in many respects.  Even if we do not choose to do so, others may publish some of our content on other platforms.

We may have multiple business hats as well. Some of us appear to be finding it difficult to reflect our authentic self and be in concert with what we are supposed to represent from a business point of view. We may choose to be silent if we disagree with a post in order not to have a public disagreement which might reflect poorly on our business, or worse, be in conflict with someone else with whom we have a business relationship. Perhaps, we have several online businesses and we have chosen to be concerned about which business we represent with each public posting.

Confusion is the result of a lack of authenticity. A lack of authenticity stems from our choice to feign to be something that we are not.  Everything we enter in the social media space is perceived as us – everything we say or write should represent who we are as an individual. If that is not in concert with the business side of things, then do not say or write it…same difference as not running around in a restaurant as children.  In this case, we have to control ourselves.  If we have trouble juggling our multiple hats, we need to put one of the hats aside.

Our business and personal lives are being inextricably linked in social media. We need to consider who we are and let all of our social media data reflect those parts of us which we are willing to share with the world. Those parts that we want to maintain as private should not be put out there in cyberspace. Be authentic. It is much easier to be real than to try to be something you are not. You drive your online persona – not your employer, not your friends, not your colleague – you. You are in charge of your electronic presence.

 What is your buzz about?

Do You Respect Your Readers?

Every day it seems that there are reasons someone could choose to take offense on social media sites. People can post perceived offensive language or offensive topics, stir up arguments, or monopolize conversations. It seems that any of these are examples of disrespect of readers or group participants.

Is the use of profanity respectful?

There is one very well-known aggregator of social media which chose just recently to use a word which is commonly considered profane in the subject line and body of a post by a moderator. The word is not one which most parents would be pleased to hear their child or teenager express and usually implies that a least one person is somehow related to a member of the animal kingdom.  It seemed a little unusual for a professional site to use such a term.

Certainly the person to which that term referred can be expected to potentially take offense, as can others with linguistic sensitivities. It seems only a matter of time before the spoken word of that ilk that we often hear in news, films, recordings, and television broadcasts might be common in the written professional word. However, is that something that those of us who blog, read, publish, or correspond really want to promote?

Is posting an idea or topic which could be construed as offensive respectful?

Someone offered a product for sale yesterday in the amount of $9.11 on a particular group. Some individuals are particularly sensitive to the date of September 11; i.e. 911 as you might understand if you followed the events in the United States. Let us assume for this purpose that the posting of an item for sale was acceptable on that forum or group. Should that individual have offered that item at that sale price on that day?  What if a percentage of sales was targeted for survivors—does that change your opinion? Was that tasteful or appropriate? Was it respectful to others? Should people be precluded from bidding that amount on one of the auction forums? Should people be precluded from discussion about whether the news reports have been trustworthy in their reporting of the 911 events? What about the concept of free speech?

In this case, the individual might have understood the significance of that number and chose to market a product using that well- known number as a dollar amount , but it is possible that others might not. It seems that a short note from the moderator off-line to the poster could have handled the matter and had a good conclusion. Should the moderator intercede at all to protect those with thin skins? But, stay tuned below:

Is continuing an argumentative thread for a whole day respectful?

A conversation erupted from that single post about the sale amount and the veracity of the news reports surrounding the event and evolved into a series of postings with attacking personal language and continuous restatement of previous positions and arguments? We may decide to sit on the sidelines and just not contribute to a heated discussion. Even if you agreed with one or the other individuals, did you just wish that they would stop and turn off his or her computer? What if one of the people in this endless cycle was a moderator of the group?  What happened to the gentlemanly way of agreeing to disagree and ending it after a post or two? Did you ever wish that you could somehow just carve a particular thread out of what gets blasted to you?

We have all experienced continuous threads that seem to have their own life spans. Sometimes, it seems that someone just has to win—just has to be right—just has to have the last word—just have to have the last bragging or argument rights. Would it be wonderful if on these groups, we could have an immediate poll and vote on whether to let a thread continue to flourish on the group?

When we post, we should be cognizant of the power of our words and the effect that those words may have on others. Be judicious, clear, and concise in posting with an effort to present material in a way to mitigate some of the claims of offensive material. Don’t monopolize group postings or be repetitive. Treat others with the respect you want and expect reciprocity.  Step up to the plate and be the role model.

What is your buzz about?

When to Join or Leave a Group

We seem to be bombarded with invitations to join social media web sites, social media networks, and various groups. It is very easy to look at the description, or perhaps just the title of a group which someone sent to you or is on a web site, and make a quick decision that a particular group peaks your interest. You decide to click and join. Then what? 

Sometimes, someone whom you respect asks you to join a group. The invitation could be a standardized language invitation generated as a result of that individual’s contacts being loaded and compared to current group members.  Alternatively, the invitation could be individualized or at least given the appearance of being individualized.  Does that matter to you?  Do you join because the individual inviting you is a business associate, a client, a colleague, or a friend? Do you join just so your name shows up in the members? Do you join planning to be stealth or planning to participate?

One of the large social media networks has recently chosen to limit group participation to fifty– a relatively small number in comparison to other platforms.  It has limited group ownership to ten. These actions have caused many individuals to recast their group participation on that platform. Individuals now have to proactively consider which groups to join and which to leave in order to hit the platform operator’s pre-determined magic number.  

You may find the following exercise helpful in getting and maintaining a handle on your groups.  Create a spreadsheet and list the platforms you are on. List the groups on that platform that you are on. List the web site link to each platform and to each group. List the web site email post address if there is one. Then step back, and look at your list.  Perhaps some of them are designed to be passive. However, most are designed to facilitate conversations. Are there more than one hundred?  Maintain the sheet and you will be amazed as the list grows. You will start to see a pattern, a pattern of platforms which are actively growing, groups which are actively growing, moderators who are active, and participants who are active. This little worksheet will give you a window into your preferences and your affiliations.

Joining a group is optional, assuming that you meet the criteria for group membership.  Usually, pro-active participation is also optional. Leaving is not so easy because may group owners will follow-up asking you the ‘why’ question.  Replying back to them in an inoffensive way is that his or her group is no longer as significant to you as before might be a little difficult for you to articulate.  

Take control of your group life. Decide which groups are truly interesting to you and to which you want to participate and maintain your association. Decide which groups are not significant to you and leave those groups to those individuals who have the interest in them.

If you do choose to control your group life, you will find that your responsibility burden will lift and you will become more energized to participate in the remaining groups or new groups that are in your interest area. Buzz those groups often and enjoy the positive aspects of being in groups that are the right fit for you.

What is your buzz about?

Is Passive Participation on Social Networks Acceptable?

When you decide to join a social network or a particular group on a social network, do you consciously decide to be stealth– i.e., just read the postings and not provide any comments or postings of your own?  It appears that the normal expectation of a member of a social network or group is that he or she fully completes whatever the profile requirements are of that entity and at least reads the postings. Sometimes, the nature of the social network or particular group is something that you want to follow, however membership might imply an unwanted meaning.

The term “Fan” on Facebook has that double meaning. Sometimes you might not want to be a fan but still want to watch and learn from a particular group. Perhaps one of the interesting terms that Twitter uses is “Follow.” You can follow someone and never agree with a thing that he or she posts. No one expects that you are a “fan” or that by following you agree to connect people together through in-mails such as connecting on LinkedIn™ implies.  Twitter permits passive participation and no one thinks the less of you if you elect to be passive.

Moderators of social networks and groups, as well as many bloggers welcome and encourage pro-active participation. The 80/20 rule does not seem to apply to social network groups. The majority of joiners and readers never contribute a written posting or comment. Often, those who do post frequently may appear to be monopolizing the group or forum just because there are so few other participants.

Many moderators carry the load for their network or group and, therefore, those groups have grown to expect that from the moderator. The moderators continue to post new topics in an effort to retain interest, spur conversations, provide information, or encourage the newest members to become involved. Moderators have taken on the role of provider as well as moderator.

Some individuals have chosen to conduct their business on a social network and rarely go off-line, depending upon that social network to maintain the history.  Entire transactions have occurred on Skype, Ecademy, etc., with no “off-line” communication. You can completely ignore groups to which you belong on certain platforms and have a thriving off-line or on-line platform connection with individuals as a result of shared groups. If someone goes to groups which you may have joined, there may be no record of active postings by you.

If we each made a commitment to contribute one posting or one comment to each of our groups at least once a year, can you imagine what the impact? Groups that have one hundred people would at least have one hundred different postings/comments to consider and groups of thousands would be greatly enriched.

Make a commitment to follow each of your groups or forums and to post at least once a year if you have something of value to contribute and being passive is not a condition in your mind of participation.  You will be surprised at the positive fall-out that you will receive by that small effort. Buzz about encouraging others to do the same and watch the proverbial snowball effect.

What is your buzz about?

To Blog or Not to Blog?

Perhaps you are already a blogger, perhaps not.  If you blog, your blog may be one of the most read blogs on the web or perhaps it is just for you or for your family. In any case, blogging is a commitment.  Someone or many may follow your blog with expectations that you may not even know about or understand.

Therefore, how do you approach starting a blog or what the content should be in a blog? There are a series of fundamental questions to ask yourself.

The first question should be whether you are willing to make a commitment to blogging? Blogging is not like a personal diary or journal. When you have a diary or a journal you can just stop and you disappoint no one. While you may have the option not to post or to disband a blog, there is always someone on the web who may be disappointed to not find a post or your blog.

The second question you should ask yourself is why are you starting a blog or writing on a topic? Are you starting it because you want to have the opportunity to explore a particular topic and receive feedback? Perhaps your rationale is simply that almost everyone you respect has a blog. Perhaps, you believe that it is necessary to raise your credibility from a professional viewpoint. Perhaps you think that it will drive traffic to your company. Perhaps you are frustrated with a company or a product, and want to discuss that publicly. Perhaps you have a deep interest in a subject or a philosophy, etc.  If you know what the driver is, then you can set your personal expectations about how often to blog accordingly.

Assuming you are committed to blogging and understand what is driving you to blog, the next step is to determine is the mechanics. Perhaps you want to post on someone else’s blog. Perhaps you want to start your own blog or a second blog, etc. If you start your own blog, you need to determine what you want the feel of your blog to be. You can decide the host, layout, colors, crispness, images in your blog, etc. There are a myriad of choices and they are all yours.

Another step is to determine what the content will be of each blog. You may want it to be all original thought. You may want to post a scholarly blog, replete with references, attributions, etc. You may want a combination. You may want to develop the content so that it can translate into a book or a personal or family historical record, or an adjunct to your business. You may decide that each blog you write does not have to have any relevance to any other blog in that site.  Again, the choice is all yours.

Blogging is an interesting exercise in free expression. It permits the public exploration of ideas and thoughts and provides a brief glimpse into you as a person-what is important to you about that particular topic. Blogging gives you the opportunity to start a buzz and to be heard. If your heart is in it, you will be successful and it will not be a burden. Jump into it thoughtfully and enjoy the freedom that blogging affords.

What is your buzz about?

Do You Understand How to Use Your Social Network Platforms?

If you are reading this blog you must be among the many people who subscribe to or are members of more than one virtual social network and, therefore, have the ability to use all the bells and whistles of the platform on which that social network resides. Have you ever explored all the features of each platform?

Most of us join a social network because someone we know or want to know belongs to that platform or has recommended it to us. If you are like most of us, you do a cursory review of the platform, fill in the data about ourselves that is required, and voila become members.  We explore the obvious applications available on the site, such as – can we post, can we send in-mail to other members, etc.?  Then we move onto to the next thing on our to do list.

The rush to join various networks can be invigorating. Joining multiple networks can be beneficial. Being able to quickly communicate with individuals whom you may or may not know in those networks is phenomenal.  However, we may be not fully taking advantage of everything a particular network has to offer or aware of its restrictions, if we do not step back and learn more about the actual mechanics of that network.

Does the lack of taking time to fully understand these mechanics cause a problem? Perhaps. We chose to simplify our participation, and by doing so, may not access the technology which could help us connect, develop stronger business relationships, or ease our workload.  Using only the basic social network technology is like having a cell phone and never using text messaging, or a great camera and never changing the settings for light or distance. You can enjoy and use the technology, but you may be missing out on something that you might really appreciate and is beneficial to you. 

Think about taking the time and singling out one social network to which you belong. Fully explore it, the settings, etc.  Then take another one and do the same. You may be surprised at some of the features which might be there and are not readily apparent.  You also might find some restrictions which don’t work for you. Post discussion threads and let others help you learn, answer questions, etc. Make suggestions for improvement on the platform. Platform operators and moderators need to know what you need or want to have to make the platform stronger and work for you.

Let people know what you have discovered that works in a platform in order that others can benefit from your experience. Don’t buzz about writing negative things about the platform or deleting your membership if you are disappointed for any reason before you give the moderators and platform owners a chance to respond. Buzz about being a change agent and take the positive route.

What is your buzz about?

Do Discussion Boards Extend Conversations Unnecessarily?

Most of us subscribe to discussion boards, whether they are called groups, forums, wikis, or social media networks.  We may be active on those boards or we could be stealth, also known as lurkers.  Lurking simply means that we rarely, if ever, participate on the boards. Some lurkers consistently read what is posted or sent to them from the boards via e-mail or RSS feeds.

Often, individuals will discuss the board content off-line, meaning not publicly on the board but through chats, private e-mail, or voice conversation. There is no way to capture the number of lurkers who actually read the messages unless they sign onto the web site to read them.  There is no way to capture lurkers or others who have discussions off-line. We can only follow the threads of conversations on the boards to determine who has chosen to be heard in writing.

Perhaps it is the fact that the posters are comfortable in having their postings read in a public forum often becoming part of a search engine’s history, or being read for comments as simple as a “thank you” or long diatribes which appear to simply be attempts to “be right.” Two things come to mind as contributing to stealing of readers’ time–etiquette and rehashing.

The first is the yet-to-be-established board etiquette. For example, is it really necessary for six or seven people perhaps to simply post comments, such as “thank-you” or “will check the site out you suggested.” Why do some people feel it necessary to send a comment to a board to potentially thousands of people who subscribe through an RSS feed or choose to read each message?  Cannot we just agree that each person who posts a substantive message will recognize that we appreciate that posting, whether we agree or disagree with the content of that posting? If someone wants to check out a recommended site, just check it out. If we wanted to know what he or she was doing every minute, we could sign up for Twitter. If you want the poster to know that you will check it out, write to them off-line. If we do not post such trivial comments it does not mean that the rest of us are unappreciative, etc.  

The second is the apparent need for some individuals to have the final word or to keep posting the same comment using different wording in an attempt to be right. The boards sometimes deteriorate into positional bargaining or outright arguments instead of simply permitting variances in opinions to co-exist. Most have us have seen examples where all etiquette is tossed out and it seems that we are watching a grown-up version of a school yard fight between a couple of bullies, including name calling, with a few soft hearted “ can’t we all just get along” people on the sidelines chirping in on occasion.

Sometimes I just want to leave a board for these time-sapping reasons but I rarely do. Instead, I just wait it out until they take their verbal toys and go home. It is a good thing that humans need sleep. It seems that only that need sometimes stops the barrage or the trivia. Do you find your mind buzzing unnecessarily also?

What is your buzz about?