The Bivings Report - powered by the Bivings Group

Guest post by Alan Haburchak

The morning of day two here at the Personal Democracy Forum conference was all about online communities, what they mean, how they can be used and what they say about culture and global culture and society today. Randi Zuckerberg (the other Zuckerberg), Facebook's head of marketing was up first and talked a little bit about how communities have arisen on on Facebook that have lead to real-life movements like the anti-farc protests that occurred in Colombia last year. But other than pointing that that that group had used social media to organize, she didn't have much more to say.

Next up was Alec Ross, who serves as Senior Advisor for Innovation in the Office of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Ross explained how Sec. Clinton is re-imagining the idea of diplomacy to not just be able "white guys in white shirts with red ties" talking to each other, but rather a citizen-to-citizen approach. As an example he touted the State Department's SMS-based Pakistani-relief initiative that they pioneered earlier this year.

The really amazing highlight of the morning however was Michael Wesch, a cultural anthropologist exploring the impact of new media on society and culture. Wesch gave a shortened version of a presentation about YouTube as a cultural phenomenon, which he and 200 students at Kansas State University created. There is video of Wesch's talk at PDF09, though the quality is not ideal. The amazing thing was the collective joy in the room as everyone felt the hope that Wesch expressed for what online communities like YouTube might be able to create in the face of the pessemistic attitude that according to Wesch, had been cultivated among a lot of young people since the 1990s. Highlights from Wesch's presentation were his clips from the Free Hugs and MadV - The Message memes.

Finally the morning closed with Mark Pesce, know as a digital futurist, who talked about the inherrent potenital danger of what he called "ad-hocracies" on the web. As evidence, he pointed to the fight between Wikipedia and the Church of Scientology. Pesce's talk was intersting, discussing how because of their size, the members of the church were able to break the social contract of Wikipedia, ultimately leading to Wikipedia banning them from editing the site. Speaking after Wesch's emotionally charged YouTube presentation, Pesce's point came across as too academic, although important as internet communities reach critical mass.

Ultimately what I and I think most people will take away from this look at web communities is the sense of hope in was Ross and Wesch had to say. Diplomacy can be as simple and effective as sending $5 to someone in Pakistan who needs it from your cell phone, and while YouTube comments may be the worst thing on the internet, the ability of that community to be incredibly personal AND to inspire positive action en masse is amazing.

Guest post by Jessica Rudis

Two of the biggest announcements made at PDF this year complement each other in an interesting way. The first announcement, made on Monday, was that YouTube had launched a reporting center that teaches citizen journalists skills to improve the quality of their reporting.  The second announcement, and perhaps the biggest news to come out of the conference, was that the U.S. Government has launched a project to increase transparency and accountability, providing open data on a new Web site.

These are complementary because, of course, any properly functioning democracy needs to have an informed citizenry.  For years, people have relied on media gatekeepers to set the national agenda, inform them of current events, and act as government watchdogs.  Of course this has changed in recent years, but it will be exciting to see things change even more when citizens are taught how to be better reporters and given the data necessary to track government spending and activity.

Having an army of citizens to monitor government data and report on what’s going on would be a great thing.  It won’t diminish the role of traditional journalism because there will always be a need for serious investigative journalism.  Journalists will still need to go deeper than what is handed to them to make sure the data is accurate, numbers aren’t being fudged, and that secrets aren’t being kept.  The government may say it is being open and transparent, but it is up to journalists to ensure that that is really the case.

One of the themes of this conference, We.Gov, is becoming a reality.  As long as people stay interested in looking at the government data online (which may be hard, with things like the “Charlie Bit Me” video as competition for attention), we can participate more in our government than any generation before us.  We have already proven that citizen participation on the Internet can affect the tone and impact a political campaign, now we have the opportunity to use the Internet to directly affect policy-making as well.

Guest post by Alan Haburchak

It seems like there is a certain generally accepted truth about age and ideology in America: Young people are liberal and vote Democratic while the older generation tends to trend more conservative. There's even that old chestnut usually attributed to Winston Churchill: "If you're young and not a liberal you have no heart, if you're old and not a conservative, you have no brain."

That seems like it would make sense, and is certainly backed up by exit polling in the 2008 presidential race where two-thirds of 18-29 year olds voted for Barack Obama. But in a panel at the Personal Democracy Forum today, Simon Rosenberg and Morley Winograd of the New Democrat Network, presented research that showed political leanings are intensely generational. The Millenial Generation (the kids today, born after 1980 with their Facebook and their Twitter) identify as "liberal" almost two to one. No surprise there.

But, the same survey given to Generation X (those born between 1960 and 1980) when they were the age Millenials are now shows over 60% identifying as conservative, and the Boomer generation (born between 1943 and 1960) split almost down the middle. Young people have not always been so overtly liberal minded as they are now, according to Rosenburg and Winograd.

For Rosenberg and Winograd, the reason for this lies in a theory put forth in a 1991 book called Generations. According to the authors William Strauss and Neil Howe, the twentieth century, and actually the last 400 years of human history can be divided into twenty-year four-generation cycles, with each successive generation conforming to a specific type. Todays Millenials are the current cycle's "civic" generation, they're optimisitic and believe in community action and volunteering (the hallmarks of the Obama presidency). The Gen Xers on the other hand come from the "reactive" generation, characterized by self-reliance and entrepreneurship (the political hero of this group: Reagan).

The relevance of all this theorizing, according to Rosenberg and Winograd, is in how it has and will continue to shape the political landscape of the United States. Given how liberal the Millenials are, and the fact that there are more of them than any generation since the Boomers, they will probably dominate at least the next two electoral cycles, if not even farther into the future. This means that if Rosenberg and Winograd are right, the Dems can plan on another big win in 2012 and probably in 2016 as well.

That begs the question, what comes next in the generational cycle? According to the theory, the next generation is going to fall into the "adaptive" category, which means they might be a lot like John McCain's "silent generation," meaning a lot of them will have deeply-held conservative beliefs and will probably wonder how their parents can be so liberal and open-minded. Plus, they'll want to know why the old folks won't shut up about this Face-Twitter thing they used when they were kids.
 

We started The Bivings Report back in 2001.  In its first iteration it focused exclusively on online marketing, and was written primarily by a former employee named Andrew Dimock.  Andrew did a great job in those early years of building an audience without much writing support from the rest of us. 

In late 2005, we launched a new version of The Bivings Report that had a broader focus.  We started writing about the work we do and how we do it, and more generally about the things that get us excited.  We also invited everyone in the firm to contribute. 

Expanding the scope of the blog was a pivotal moment for us.  The blog has built a solid readership and is an important part of our marketing efforts.  More importantly, I think the process of writing the blog has made us smarter and better at what we do.

We put up our 1,000th post the other day, so I figured it was a good time to go through the archive and highlight some of our most popular posts and favorites.  Here goes:

• Redesigning USA Today - Our design team took a shot at redesigning USA Today.  Even though the design is three years old, it is still better than the current USA Today and most newspaper site, in my opinion.
• Wordpress vs. Drupal - This post comparing the two platforms still gets hundreds of visitors a day due links and search engines.  It is our most read post. 
• Comcast and Twitter - Now it seems like every other day someone goes in and mines Twitter for  customer service trends.  Back fifteen months ago when we did this analysis, it was still a new thing and this post got a lot of attention.
• 9 Ways Newspapers Can Improve Their Web Sites - This was our first truly viral post, and spawned a brief period when I was obsessed with list posts.  I could relapse at any time. 
• Five Technologies that Will Impact the 2008 Elections -  Another post that went viral during our list post phase.  This was also the first post from our blog to make the Digg homepage.
• John Edward’s 2: The Campaign Site -  I pretty much loved all of head designer’s, Tom McCormick, campaign website reviews (Clinton, Edwards 1, Obama 1, Obama 2,  McCain 1, McCain 2, McCain 3, and Rudy).  But this one is my favorite because it led to hate mail from a few Edwards supporters who don’t get Tom’s sense of humor.

Like many, I logged on to Facebook at midnight Friday night/Saturday morning to grab my chosen Facebook URL and to reserve some vanity URLs for clients as a way of protecting their brands.  I wasn’t alone - within 24 hours of the launch more than 3 million vanity URLs had been claimed. 

Over the weekend, I entertained myself by typing in some interesting Facebook URLs to see who had reserved them.  That led to me typing in www.facebook.com/democrats and www.facebook.com/republicans to see if both parties had claimed their brand on Facebook.  As you’ll see if you click through, the DNC has claimed /democrats while the RNC does not yet control /republicans. 

This was baffling to me, as I can’t imagine anyone in the tech space not knowing about the vanity URL land grab, and I knew the RNC had a larger following on Facebook than the DNC (84,000 to 43,000, after looking it up).  So what’s going on?

I looked at it further this morning and solved this great mystery.  It turns out the RNC has invested their resources in building a group instead of a page.  Groups are not eligible for vanity URLs at this point. 

I’m sure the RNC made the decision to create a group instead of a page long ago, when it was unclear what the best practice was for companies and organizations.  Facebook launched new page functionality in February of 2009, and only at that point did it become clear that pages were the way to go.  The key advantage of pages over groups  is that as a page admin you can create status updates like regular users, which then appear in your fans news feeds.  If you are the RNC, these status updates can be a really powerful way to drive action.  With the launch of vanity URLs, the case for pages over groups is now even stronger.

This is sort of a bummer if you are the RNC.  They have outperformed the DNC on Facebook, but are handicapped by their decision to create a group instead of a page.  They have probably gone too far down the group path to switch at this point.  If I were them, I’d want a do over.

President Obama made his way into office with a tech savvy campaign team and promises to use new technologies to change the way government gets its job done. With the campaign over and the administration under way, shifting rhetoric into action has happened in notable ways but also raised major concerns.

The Center for American Progress held a roundtable discussion Monday with a few of those working inside and outside government to improve Federal impact and navigate some of the hurdles presented by opening government up through technology.

“The Web and the Federal Government grew up in different neighborhoods,” CAP Senior Vice President for Online Communications Andrew Sherry said in his introduction.

Speaking directly on how these two elements from different sides of the track are learning to work together was Alec Ross, Secretary of State Clinton’s senior advisor for innovation, who led the roundtable’s central discussion on 21^st century statehood, and what he termed “Diplomacy 2.0.” (more…)

When it comes to website design, I’m a big proponent of usability.  I like sites that load quickly, present me with clear choices and minimize graphics and Flash.  I believe the design should serve the content, and that anything that gets between the user and the information they are looking for should be removed.  This focus on usability is the overall philosophy of The Bivings Group, although I probably take it to the extreme in my preference for minimalism.

Generally speaking, this focus on usability serves the needs of both the client and the end user.  Online branding is more than just soothing colors, cool photos and catchy slogans.  How people perceive your brand online is largely determined by whether they find what they are looking for.  In most cases usability equals good branding.

However, there are times when the needs of the site owners and the visitors diverge.  Splash pages are one such example.  (more…)

The Bivings Group attended the Politics Online 2009 conference in Washington, DC, earlier this week to listen to and participate in a large-scale dialogue on how technology is and is going to change the political landscape. Here are a few important lesions I learned.

1. Politicians are getting technical

Actual politicians, not just their IT and communications departments, are learning how to use web tools. Secretaries of State and members of Congress addressed conference attendees on how they’re using new technologies to make their jobs more effective and to improve communication with constituents. Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner is working with Google on the Google Voting Information Project.

California Secretary of State Debra Bowen manages her own Facebook and Twitter accounts, rather than handing the task off to an assistant. The cost of stressing out her communications team a bit is worth it for Secretary Bowen to connect directly with Californians.

(more…)

Bivings Group Director of Client Services Andrew MacDowell spoke to a panel focused on gaining and utilizing a large supporter base for initiatives online. The panel, titled “Fishing with a Keyboard,” was one of dozens of break-out sessions included in the 2009 Politics Online conference held in Washington DC April 20-21.

Click here for information on The Pickens Plan by the numbers.

Energy advocates and online mobilization experts gathered at the Center for American Progress Action Fund in Washington, DC, to talk about successes and challenges in gathering activists both on and offline.

Heather Lauer, director of online strategy for the Pickens Plan, talked about the process of gathering the Plan’s 1.5 million-plus participants and building a social network to connect members. (As the technical partner of the Pickens Plan, The Bivings Group has provided ongoing development and support on the Plan’s web communications network, including its primary site and its Ning-based social action network, Push.)

Other organizations, such as the Energy Action Coalition, built supporter bases through focusing on the goals of a particular voting group. The EAC spread its message among young people throughout college campuses and focused empowering the under-30 vote.

No matter the strategy, all members of the panel agreed on the importance of coming together in a combined effort to face energy challenges and the need to reach out to a growing base of supporters.

"We have a tremendous amount of education that needs to be done and we also have no time. This is not something that the good guys are going to win on the inside," said Brad Johnson of ThinkProgress.org.

In order to reach a broader base, Michael Silberman of 1sky.org emphasized 1Sky’s tactic of organizing community events around key issues, which can be effective both online and off. Silberman and his team worked with Greenpeace to organize rallies and push constituents to contact legislators during Congressional recesses.

While enticing audiences to participate in specific events can be a highly productive way of gaining new members, participants on the panel said it is not as effective as maintaining a long-term, sustained strategy of support.

“We’re relying on dedicated Moveon.org members to motivate other members,” said Michael Sherrard, who works on Moveon.org’s recent Power Up America campaign. “To make real progress is going to require a building crescendo of organizing.”

On top of organizational strategy, the panel discussed effective messaging methods of both within their supporter bases and with the public. Panel moderator and Associate Director for Online Advocacy Alan Rosenblatt recommended using a closed-audience SMS communicator to share messages within your group, and “leveraging Twitter makes that dynamic more public” if you are aiming for a broader audience.

The Center for American Progress Action Fund promotes regular InternetAdvocacy Roundtable discussions as part of its Wired for Progress program. Online attendees can watch live streams of discussions and submit questions online. A listing of past and upcoming Internet Advocacy Roundtables is available here.

In February we launched brand new, upgraded, and comprehensively re-designed versions of The Personal Democracy Forum’s sibling websites, personaldemocracy.com and techpresident.com.

There are tens of new features and offerings, but highlights include:

PdF Marketplace :  a commercial bulletin board for the poli-tech community.  Job postings, domain sales,  resumes, web services — all have a place here for exposure to a highly targeted audience.

The Pdf Network :  The Forum’s new membership program, providing insider access to key poli-tech thought leaders, discounts on conference attendance, networking, and advance notice on impending developments in the field.  (Bonus:  a subscription to one of several magazines is included in your membership.)

VoteVid :  This is techPresident’s video forum, on which anyone can propose, share, and vote on online political videos.

Topics :  The content produced by PdF’s magnificent stable of bloggers is now drawn directly into a set of seven verticals (eGovt, Fundraising, Mobile, Advertising, Video, Strategy and Cool Stuff)

Ratings and Metrics :  blog posts are now rate-able through an AJAX-based five-star ranking system, and posts can be sorted by such metrics as “Most Emailed ” and “Most Read “.

Charts:  PdF has added charts set to visually track such developing phenomena as the 2012 GOP presidential field, and the latest rankings of key political figures in terms of their Technorati rankings as well as the number of friends each has accumulated on Facebook.

Calendar :  a listing of all of the most important and groundbreaking upcoming events as determined by the PdF editorial team.

Advocacy :  a centralized grouping of the key players in political advocacy, along with profiles of each.

The reaction has been overwhelmingly welcoming and positive thus far, but have a look for yourself. Visit the site , create your free or paid membership , subscribe to the blog, learn about the fast-approaching 2009 PdF Conference .  Then, let us know what you think.

I attended Drupalcon last week, which is a bi-annual Drupal conference for developers, themers and business development types like myself.  I had a great time, so here are some quick thoughts on the conference.

(1) Drupal people are really nice.   Conversations came easily and people are willing to share.  In his presentation, Kyle Williams mentioned that the reason he got into Drupal was because the community was so supportive and positive.  He’s right.

(2) Multiple people wondered aloud why the Drupal alien logo has to be so scary (see alien in upper right).

(3) There were few Republicans at Drupalcon.  David Cohn wrote a great article a few months back about how Drupal has helped power the progressive movement.  Based on the demographics of the folks at the conference and the sites showcased, Drupal is still being used much more aggressively by left leaning organizations than those on the right.

(4) Anyone that has used Drupal for any period of time knows how dramatic the changes are when a new version is released.  There are tons of sites out there still running on Drupal 4 and 5 due to how hard it is to upgrade.  In talking to folks at the conference, that really is by design.  The Drupal community is focused on pushing the code forward.  If the cost of progress is problems with backward compatibility, so be it.  This is in stark contrast to packages like Wordpress that worry much more about relatively easy upgrades.

(5) In his presentation, Neil Giarratana mentioned that one advantage of Drupal is that tons can be accomplished through configuration using administrative tools as opposed to through customization, which inevitably involves hard core developers.  Configuration is relatively easy and cost effective while customizations are hard and expensive.  This has been my experience as well, so it was nice to have Neil articulate the divide so well.

(6) Neil also had a good quote, saying that Drupal is free in the same way a puppy is free.  By the time you feed it, take it to the vet, etc. it actually ends up being expensive.  This is true of all content management systems, but I think it is important for people who launch Drupal sites to account for ongoing upgrades and maintenance.  One of the great things about Drupal is that it is relatively easy to make changes and the development never real ends.  Companies should plan for that when they launch sites.

(7) On the negative side, the sessions at the conference were hit or miss, more so than at any conference I’ve been to before.  I saw a few sessions that were among the best I’ve seen at any conference and a couple I literally got nothing out of despite being interested in the topic.  As someone who submitted a panel idea that wasn’t accepted, the inconsistency got me wondering about how the sessions were selected.  My guess is that it was a bit of a hybrid between votes and editorial process. 

(8) On the positive side, Drupalcon was the first conference I’ve been to with a fooseball table.

(9) If you were on a PC, the wifi at the conference was spotty, particularly if you are on Vista.  If you were on a Mac, it seemed to work fine.  The Drupal community is definitely Mac friendly, so this was probably some sort of conspiracy. 

(10) I saw a lot of examples of great Drupal work at the conference, but I would put our work up there with anybody’s.  I’m really proud of the work my Bivings co-workers have done on complex Drupal sites like IJNet, Personal Democracy Forum, Techpresident and Wild Australia. 

Below is a great segment from the Jon Stewart show on Twitter.  In the clip he gently mocks the trend of politicians and media types jumping on the new media bandwagon in a search for relevance.  Found on Venture Beat.