Netroots Nation Livestreams!

Many of you may have heard of the Netroots Nation conference that's taking place right now in Vegas. For those who have not, it's a conference for grassroots activists and bloggers who use the Internet and new communication technologies to advance progressive politics. It was launched in 2006 by Daily Kos, and is now exists as a partnership with Democracy for America.

What's so great about a conference a few thousand miles from DC? They live stream! Here's a list of the 70 panels going on between now and Saturday: http://bit.ly/cHjH7g

A lot of panels are issue focused, but many are specifically about social media and online communications, and a handful feature eminent speakers (note that the times listed are Pacific Time, so add three hours for ET). Obviously most of the content is politics oriented, but the techniques and technologies can be universally applied. Here are a few I recommend:

Online Grassroots Fundraising for Candidates, Causes and Concerned Citizens

THU, 07/22/2010 - 4:30PM, Miranda 8

Online Advertising for Progressive Causes and Campaigns

FRI, 07/23/2010 - 10:30AM, Miranda 8

After You Hit Send: How to Integrate Social Media into Campaigning and Advocacy

SAT, 07/24/2010 - 10:15AM, Miranda 6

Online to Offline Engagement

SAT, 07/24/2010 - 1:45PM, Miranda 6

Growing Your Email List

SAT, 07/24/2010 - 1:45PM, Miranda 8

Extending Our Reach: New Tools for Online Progressives

SAT, 07/24/2010 - 1:45PM, Miranda 7

From Online to Offline: How OFA Leverages the Web and Social Media for Real-World Organizing

SAT, 07/24/2010 - 4:00PM, Brasilia 1

Metrics-Driven Design for Progressive Organizations

SAT, 07/24/2010 - 4:00PM, Miranda 7

To access the appropriate live stream for each panel, check here for the Ustream.com link: http://bit.ly/aFR8ud

Lastly, if you are super interested in staying on top of it all, follow #nn10.

FaceTime for Health

I mentioned in class yesterday that the iPhone 4's FaceTime feature had recently been used in surgery for the first (known) time. After looking up some info on this, I saw that this surgery took place at Valley Presbyterian Hospital's Amputation Prevention Center, a state of the art facility that just opened earlier this year. The Amputation Prevention Center is focused innovative, preventative approaches to limb preservation in patients diagnosed with diabetes (a number that sadly only seems to be rising). The core approach of the center is a "team-based" technique, pairing vascular surgeons with podiatrists.

While the surgery itself was performed by Dr. Lee Rogers at Valley Presbyterian, the help came from Dr. David G. Armstrong at the University of Arizona's Southern Arizona Limb Salvage Alliance (SALSA). Rogers called Armstrong via FaceTime for a real-time wound patient consultation. The doctors communicated during the surgery and followed up later for a second opinion on a different patient.

“While the University of Arizona has had one of the world's top telehealth systems, the ability to communicate quickly with something that is an afterthought has the potential to alter how we work with our colleagues and patients. Just as with the iPod in music and the laptop in computing, it is not the change in technology, but the change in form factor and ubiquity that alters this landscape," Dr. Armstrong said in a press release.

Though video-chatting has been around for a while now, FaceTime sets itself apart in its mobility. People tend to carry their phones around, so it's certainly more convenient than a computer. Of course, some limitations are that you must both have an iPhone 4 and a WiFi connection.

Article here: http://tinyurl.com/38pgqom

When I was looking this up I found a group called 3G Doctor. According to the site, you can "video consult" with a registered doctor, but they're not meant to replace your regular physician or an emergency room. They also advise you only ask questions that can be answered from a remote location (like chronic pain, rashes, side effects...). It seems a little sketchy, but I guess they're filling a need - they're 24 hours a day, every day of the year. Only those 18+ in Ireland and the UK can use the service, which is £35 each time you call (via paypal, credit, or debit).

Facebook reaches 500 millions members

Facebook officially reaches over 500 million members. After only six years, Facebook has broken many records and become the most widely used site on the internet. Zuckerberg made an unusual television appearance while being interviewed by Diane Sawyer where he talked about controversial issues such as an upcoming IPO, the Facebook movie, and Ceglia's lawsuit claiming to be owner of 84% of Facebook. Though Facebook is valued at $20 billion, Zuckerberg tells Sawyer that they are running Facebook to serve people, not with the goal of an IPO.

The interview does not talk about Facebook's recent customer satisfaction survey that ranks the company very low--alongside airlines and cable companies, but Zuckerberg and Sawyer do talk about the new Facebook movie, which Zuckerberg says he will "probably" not see

Check out part of the interview and related videos on abc.com http://bit.ly/9Xweq4 and the article on mashable http://mashable.com/2010/07/21/zuckerberg-sawyer/

Digital Diplomacy

Here is the article in the New York Times I talked about in class about Digital Diplomacy. Many interesting issues in this article regarding "Twitter diplomacy." Some are fierce critiques of the use of social media by the State Department but others feel that with the administration's open government push, this type of diplomacy is critical. What do you think? Is this only a natural extension of social media? What obligation or role do companies such as Facebook and Twitter play in ensuring this type of outreach?

Social Media Doesn't Auto-Correct?

I've heard this time and again from people loyal to the freedom of social media - "A self-editing mechanism exists naturally in the blogosphere... Bloggers correct each other almost instantaneously." I wonder if Shirley Sherrod would agree.

In case you don't have a news-loving boyfriend to force all the cable news programs on you (MSNBC, Fox News, CNN), here's the background: Andrew Breitbart has a conservative blog, Big Government. He posted a video showing a speech Shirley Sherrod gave to the NAACP. As a result of this video and the attention it garnered, yesterday Sherrod was asked to resign.

In the speech, (**note to any speechwriters out there, your words can travel FAR!) Sherrod tells a story about how she decided to deal with a white farmer given the needs of local black farmers. What the video on the blog didn't show was her conclusion that both white and black farmers needed help. The story exploded into a reverse racism breaking news on all channels. In the end, the full video came out from the NAACP, along with an apology from the NAACP. The full video shows that Sherrod used the story to illustrate how she had learned from the event (in 1986) that both black and white farmers needed help. That it was a poverty issue that all suffered from.

What's more interesting is that the blogger, Andrew Breitbart, admits he didn't do it to expose Sherrod but instead to incriminate the NAACP for holding racist events. In the end, Sherrod is the one who paid the price.

Breitbart told CNN's "John King USA" on Tuesday that releasing the video was "not about Shirley Sherrod."

"This was about the NAACP attacking the Tea Party, and this is showing racism at an NAACP event," he said. "I did not ask for Shirley Sherrod to be fired." (Source)

So even though a blog and online video outed her, why didn't another blog and the full video come to her rescue?? Where was the auto-correct?

Now Sherrod has lost her job and her reputation over something someone posted. Besides the insanity of this event on its own, what about the bigger picture? You think things like this will ruin social media? Forcing people to list sources on blogs? Or is this just the new name of the game and we all need to have personal listeners to make sure we auto-correct our own stories before they get us fired?

It was a painful yet fascinating evening watching this story unfold so I had to share.

Is Facebook suffering from privacy issue?

The privacy issue of Facebook has been long debated. People even claimed to quit using this social networking website because their privacy is not well protected. Even though Facebook was given the lowest score in recently released 2010 American Customer Survey compared to other websites such as Google, Bing, Wikipedia, Yahoo and YouTube, it keeps attracting more users. Late this week, Facebook will hold a celebration for gaining 500 million users. Speaking from my personal experience, this world seems to be dominated by Facebook and Twitter. Almost all websites, corporations/organizations, and even governments in this country are using Facebook. Facebook logo can be seen everywhere. When I feel overwhelmed by Facebook-related messages, I, as a Facebook user, can not quit using it. Why? Because too many people are using it. I sent a close friend an email the other day and didn’t get any reply after waiting for 4 days. So I thought I should try Facebook. To my surprise, she replied within 24 fours, This is a dilemma. I can’t quit because I’ll be isolated from the majority of my friends. Mark Zuckerberg, founder and CEO of Facebook, will be having an interview with ABC News’ Diane Sawyer on Wednesday. Let’s see what he will say regarding Facebook privacy dilemmas. For the article about lower customer satisfaction scores of Facebook, see http://mashable.com/2010/07/20/facebook-survey.

Social Media Demographics

This article is a few months old, but it offers really interesting insight (and perhaps useful content for your final projects...if you are not presenting tonight) into the age groups of each social network. Believe it or not, the average social network user is now....37 years old.

Remember when it was just for college kids? Well, now the average age of social media users is actually OLDER than the coveted 18-35 year old advertising sweet spot.

The article has a bunch of interesting charts, but the easiest for me shows each network by average age, ranging from Bebo (avg age 28.4) to Classmates.com (avg age 44.9) and everywhere in between.

Interestingly, the 18-24 group is not currently the dominant demographic in ANY of the social networks analyzed in the article. Most networks are dominated by the 35-44 age group, which has become the most “social” demographic. This is the generation of people who were in their 20s as the Internet took off in the mid ‘90s. So, those 'early adopters' have stuck with it!

Facebook hits the same average age as all social networks (38.4). This does raise a question -- has the average age of social network users actually shifted, or is 35-44 just the average age of everyone with access to the Internet? It feels like social media is just that ubiquitous...is there really anyone who isn't on it yet?

http://tinyurl.com/yctss8r