The consumption.
I have it. I have it in my ears, too. Is that part of the consumption or am I confusing one disease with another – like the plague? No matter, I’m sick and I’m stuck in bed (THE HORROR) with nothing to do but fret about not working out, tight pants, and my Future As A Journalist.
I’m hoping very much to stay with Village Voice Media in some capacity (NOT AS BLOG JANITOR SHUT UP JERKS) and then of course there is the comic I’m working on and when I say “I’m working on” I really mean “Eoin is working on”. Eoin has been drawing and drawing and researching and drawing and what have I done? NOTHING. I’m an asshole. So I will work on that today because I have no excuses left to not focus on it and…ooh look at that shiny thing!
Dane and I went to the New Communicators Q&A session this week at Substance (an interactive design agency here in Portland). I couldn’t keep my mouth shut (surprise!) and asked if they thought the language on the website was a wee bit confusing and also told them what I was hearing at the event was NOT AT ALL what I got from the site. Turns out the guy facilitating the Q&A was the ahem..author of the website. OOPIE. (It looks like they changed the language a bit but it’s still terrible) Oh well. Here are some pics from the event. Looking at them, you can see…uh..well…mostly that I need to invest in some sort of under eye concealer.
The main reason I went to the New Comm thing is since we’ve moved back I’ve been pretty critical of the tech scene in Portland and I felt like it was time to olive branch some shit out and you know, just shut the hell up. HOWEVER, what appeared to be a good idea (creating a space and infrastructure for local businesses to help each other get shit happening) not only has been done over and over again (with dubious results) but with The New Communicators, the language is so confusing and pretentious I just don’t see how it ’s going to succeed. You see, this is what happens when advertising people get into the business of communications without hiring actual goddamn writers. The first rule of journalism is never use a five dollar word when a ten cent one will do. I guess what I’m getting at is HIRE JOURNALISTS TO WRITE YOUR COPY AD PEOPLE.
That is all.
Subscribe to my RSS Feed
65 comments
I wish I had saved all the tweets I was lobbing forth about The New Communicators while you were at that event. They would work as my comment here.
Something I’ve found about a lot of people who do this sort of thing: They tend to give themselves a great deal of credit. They think they’ve ‘reinvented’ how to do things, but what they are doing is misusing tools. A screwdriver isn’t meant as a paint can opener, after all.
Having been in technology and communications for 31 years now ( yes, since 1978! ) I think I have a perspective that allows me to say that many ‘professional’ communicators stand on the shoulders of giants, thinking the view they have is their own creation.
PS: Go to a clinic. Get some antibiotics. And get cured!
@bix If you’d been on Simler, we could have created a tag for the New Comm and the whole conversation would be there for anyone to see…in order.
Ah, here are my tweets, in order. Just because.
Oh oh good! Thanks Bix!
Sickness sucks, hope the bedrest helps!
I have to say though, drawing is not the same as work, I’m sure drawing to a deadline will be a challenge, right now it’s just spare time, very relaxing. Plus, for this project ‘research’ can be looking at pictures of women, which is hardly difficult
I’m just grateful I’m being given ideas to work with that are rich with possibilities and whatnot
Things like The New Communicators are strange to me, I suppose it at least gets movers and shakers in the same room,moving and shaking.
At least you don’t have syphilis.
Right?
OMG IRIS I HADN’T THOUGHT OF THAT.
Googling syphillis symptoms.
Don’t you mean Syfyllis?™
As a founding member of the New Commincators, I’d like to thank you all for your constructive feedback. It will be very helpful in making this event all it can be.
We too are critical of the Portland tech scene, but unlike you, did not have the insight to do nothing about it. That was brilliant.
But the good news is this: there is a meeting tomorrow evening for you to come and offer up your talent. Free of charge, like the rest of us. I can’t wait to see you.
As a founding member of the New Commincators…
Must… not… snark… over… something… as… small… as… a… typo!
We too are critical of the Portland tech scene, but unlike you, did not have the insight to do nothing about it.
This must be that evolved conversation about which we keep hearing.
More seriously, I adore how all of these circle jerk movements counter criticism in essence by saying “why don’t you put up or shut up and come make it work if you’re so smart”. Which, of course, ignores the criticism that the entire endeavor might be setting out to solve a problem that doesn’t exist, which isn’t something many of us would want to spend our time trying to assist.
First, feel free to call out the typos, I am a terrible speller and have been for 30+ years, I’m used to it.
Second, what’s happening within the Portland comm arts scene, and the industry in general, may or may not be a problem to you, but it is a problem for a lot of us, including, apparently, Kiala. A group of us got together, without support of any organization and in our free time, and felt we might do something to help. We might do nothing, we might fall flat on our face. Or we might succeed.
What confuses me is this: why you’d spend so much of your time trying to tear us down.
Of the people involved: 3 work for Substance, a small, 3 year old upstart created by people who got tired of doing meaningless work; 2 of us left high paying agency jobs to start our own firm because we felt could make brands less caustic to society; 1 of us just moved to Portland and was looking for a way to help out what she perceived as a fledgling but disorganized community.
Our event is ad hoc and we’re looking for participants that will help us take what we have and make it stronger. If that’s not you, I have good news: you don’t have to do anything. However, if you are, as Kiala says she is, critical of the Portland tech scene, I think the question remains: what are you doing about it?
I’m organizing the Portland Winternet Prom along with Trisha Mead, PR coordinator for Portland Center Stage. We’re bringing together all new media and local businesses who have embraced the internet as well as local businesses who maybe don’t know how…to have fun and show them the internet is not some complicated mythical beast. It’s just Facebook and Twitter and maybe a blog. Fun.
That’s what I’m doing.
In all seriousness, thats great.
Now, how is that different from what I’m working on? Why is New Comm a circle jerk? Why do we need to get torn down? Help me out here.
I’m not tearing you down Justin, I’m just pointing out that the language and vagueness of both the website and the Q&A don’t bode well for any kind of success.
What I want to see is action. I want to see some real concrete forethought put into something. Work, infrastructure, a well thought out PLAN OF ACTION and THEN a launch. I want to go to a website and know what I’m looking at and why I want to be involved. I want the people running the thing to know what the thing is that they are running. And I want them to spell it out in plain english.
So I’m not tearing you down Justin. I’m being critical.
1) Can you maybe give us until the actual event before decrying our lack of action?
2) We’re trying something different here. We’re seeing what happens when we don’t tell people what to do. When we don’t spell it out. Will there be some sort of serendipitous collection of events? Maybe. Maybe not. What I DO know: there are lots and lots of events for people that look just exactly like that.
Here is what we have to work with: A bunch of passionate people, who all have companies that in 2009 held a bunch of events randomly over the course of the year. Our thought was: what if we did nothing other than organize these events so they happened at the same time? Would that change anything? Maybe. Then, what if we opened it up to any one else having an event? What then? It’s an experiment in the truest sense of the word.
We’re not event planners, we have no interest nor time to organize the next WebVisions or whatever. And we’re not writers. This is a bootstrap thing, we’re going with what we have. For some people it’s going to work and be fun, for others it’s not. We’re okay with that. If we fail, it effects you and your readers not at all. If we succeed, we’ll use that success to figure out what happens next.
I’m still confused. I freely admit that sometimes that’s me being dense, although it also sometimes is other people being dense. You’re “seeing what happens when we don’t tell people what to do”, but where that falls apart for me is that I remain completely at sea on the matter of whatever it is you’re not spelling out is meant to be working towards. Or, to use the language I’ve used before: I see no concrete definition of the problem all of this is meant, allegedly, to solve.
While I see you saying, here, that “what’s happening within the Portland comm arts scene, and the industry in general … is a problem for a lot of us”, no one seems to be detailing “what’s happening” and why it’s “a problem”.
Instead of an “about” page infested by completely unauthentic New Agey marketing talk about authentic conversation, why doesn’t it simply state — in plain, everyday language free of exclusionary buzzspeak — (1) what’s happening in your community and (2) why it’s a problem.
Kiala, I’m with you on vagueness of The New Communicators. It seemed like empty marketing douchebaggery to me, which is why I didn’t go.
But for the love of Christ, New Communicators is not representative of all of Portland tech. I don’t even consider it a tech event. Looks like creatives and marketing to me.
First off, it’s held at a venue (Substance) where the self-description is “interactive brand strategy and creative experiences.” That’s a design agency, not a tech shop. It should tell you something about the kind of event going on there. And If there’s any group who’s worse when it comes to lots of self-aggrandizing and lack of execution than tech, it’s the Portland creative industry.
Second, it’s a brand new event. It’s not the cream of the crop when it comes to Portland, and I know you’re smart enough not to judge a city-wide amalgamation of events and individuals because of one crappy new event.
If you genuinely want to give PDX a second chance I (or just about anyone) could suggest a couple things to check out that wouldn’t be full of vague marketing language and people looking to sell their personal brands.
Short version: you got a rotten apple. Please pick another and don’t chop down the tree.
“Instead of an “about” page infested by completely unauthentic New Agey marketing talk about authentic conversation, why doesn’t it simply state — in plain, everyday language free of exclusionary buzzspeak — (1) what’s happening in your community and (2) why it’s a problem.”
Yes. YES. Exactly.
@Steven You’re right. Maybe the problem is that the interesting, innovative tech scene isn’t being marketed as aggressively?
I would LOVE to hear your suggestions. Feel free to email me or place them in the comments or DM me on Twitter. Or all three.
Oh and also…yes..I do need to separate interactive and marketing agencies from say Panic, etc…
I suppose in SF, they all get lumped together so that is where I was coming from. (terrible sentence, I know)
Justin,
You asked “why you’d spend so much of your time trying to tear us down?”
I’m confused – At no point has anyone attempted to “tear you down” – the commenters here and elsewhere are simply expressing their opinions, and in Kiala’s case – I think she’s doing exactly what I understand purpose of “The New Communicators” is supposed to be – using her expertise to help the community at large better understand and reach it’s audience.
OK – Here’s the part where somebody tears you down.
I’ll start off by saying that I don’t think it’s a rotten idea – but my instinct tells me that it’s just another way for the “thinkers” to leverage the power of the “doers”, etc, etc, blah, blah, blah.
The thing is… I just found the entire experience to be incredibly disingenuous. I mean… ultimately this boils down to a series networking events, not unlike a thousand other events just like it… no big deal. My problem is was the way in which you chose to market it as a some sort of “movement” or “convergence” – which, quite simply, it isn’t. I honestly felt like the purpose of the event was for a bunch of people to congratulate themselves on being the type of person who would attend this sort of event, it was bizarre and reminded me why I generally try to avoid these sorts of things.
For me it was upsetting because I felt that I was *lured* into a SUBSTANCE+FIGHT marketing event, under the guise of something greater – something that you guys hasn’t really taken the time to figure out.
Again – I have the greatest respect for all of you – but I really feel that we as a community have got to get a handle on the downward spiral of interactive & social media rhetoric.
–
Thanks,
Dane Hesseldahl
http://unhub.com/doesnotvalidate
http://doesnotvalidate.com
dane@simler.com
What Dane said. And what Bix Said. And Kiala. What she said too.
Well this has been a terribly interesting thread to read. I hope it works out for everybody involved – New Communicators, Tech/Creative Community, communities offended by being grouped with other communities, thinkers, doers, blog promoters, social network promoters, problems and/or no problems.
I give this all a huge PDX shoulder shrug.
Where were the chairs? Why were there no chairs at the event.
Also, you’ve not hired writers to make the words on your website, and the copy is terrible. You’ve not hired an event planner, and you had no chairs.
Maybe the first order of business is deciding the value of your mission. In monetary terms. You know, like how much is it worth to you to communicate? With words. And how much is it worth to allow people a comfortable experience to absorb all this new communication.
Beer selection was pretty tacky too.
Well Dane and Kiala I just read the blog post and the comments and I have to say I wash my hands of you both. Once we were friends. Tearing people with good intentions down is beyond the pale and only works well for those who are incredibly insecure – where is the benefit, a few upticks in blog traffic? I personally felt secure enough to walk away from my well paid job at Nemo to start something new, a small creative outfit with Justin that we believe can be a change agent. I feel good about it and I know that Justin does too. To then extend our ideas and support to an ad hoc group of folks in town who have passion for change in the way creative communities can work together makes me proud – it’s something I’ve done my whole career, including my time as a professional musician, giving back to the creative communities that have helped me in the past.
Your disdain for the idea of The New Communicators and by default Portland in general is interesting; did the city do you wrong or are you perhaps looking in the mirror at those bridges you burned as you left, with nary a goodbye to those of us who thought you were our friends? All those times gathered on the deck at my house with friends, as my wife Paddy and I treated you as our guests in our home, only to receive not even an email or call goodbye as you abandoned us (your friends?) in your move to SF.
Your big fuck you to all of us who are working diligently to make a difference in Portland and its creative community is very telling. I for one can live without your two-faced insinuations and self-serving rants. It was sort of nice knowing you both but I’m now happy to put that behind me now.
I’m sure you’ll do well now you’re back. Portland is very forgiving.
Not only is all of that a lovely ad hominem (is this the evolution of conversation you’re after?) but it also nicely — and, admittedly, rather adeptly, adroitly even — sidesteps the rest of us who are not, in fact, either Dane or Kiala. Perhaps that’s because you can’t vomit personal ad hominems at the rest of us, which apparently is the only “authentic conversation” you’re interested in.
dear one true b!x you who are apparently anonymous, what don’t you get about how I honestly feel?
And dear one true b!x let me know who you are and I’ll continue to converse with you, otherwise keep your snide comments to yourself..
Ask around, Dave. 90% of the people who know me know me by this name, not my birth name.
It’s not anonymity, it’s pseudonymity. And if you don’t know how to use Google or WHOIS to see how easy it is to discover that fact, I’m not going to hold your hand and walk you through it.
Ad hominem attacks and “I don’t know your name” are long-established refuges of Internet scoundrels seeking to avoid the content of people’s criticisms.
I can just smell the evolution in here now.
Chris, I’m sorry that you feel so insecure about an ad hoc group that wants to make a difference. Almost all the comments here don’t discuss the content as you say, they are pithy. You don’t have to support the idea of New Communicators but feel free to attack it..
Chris, re: ad hominem
“In the past, the term ad hominem was sometimes used more literally, to describe an argument that was based on an individual, or to describe any personal attack. However, this is not how the meaning of the term is typically introduced in modern logic and rhetoric textbooks, and logicians and rhetoricians are in agreement that this use is incorrect.”
Example:
“Paula says the umpire made the correct call, but this can’t be true, because Paula is a stupid idiot.”
Assuming the premise is correct, Paula’s evidence is valueless, but the umpire may nonetheless have made the right call.
You probably meant to use ad hominem abusive or argumentum ad personam but no, I wasn’t being abusive I was just saying I’m done with all the bullshit that I’ve been silent about and it feels good to be open about it..
Wow Dave.
I have to say, this was unexpected.
In response to your question “where is the benefit, a few upticks in blog traffic?” I’d respond by saying – No, we were simply stating our opinions – which are different than yours. I was under this mistaken impression that the “New Communicators” thing was about the open exchange of ideas, now I know it’s just about the open exchange of ideas that make us all feel good about ourselves. I went to one of these in middle school one time – it was called a “Circle Jerk.”
I just can’t understand this mentality – just because we’re friends, and just because we do business together doesn’t mean that I must have my face so far up your ass that I can’t tell you when you spouting bullshit.
You said:
“I feel good about it and I know that Justin does too. To then extend our ideas and support to an ad hoc group of folks in town who have passion for change in the way creative communities can work together makes me proud – it’s something I’ve done my whole career, including my time as a professional musician, giving back to the creative communities that have helped me in the past.”
That’s great Dave – how does me criticizing the language on “The New Communicators” website take anything away from that? I just said that I found the event to be disingenuous – that’s it – I didn’t say it was a terrible idea, I didn’t say you were bad people, fuck Dave – I didn’t say anything at all outside the face that I didn’t appreciate being told one thing only to show up and be told another.
We’re not tearing down good people with good ideas, we’re asking to not be lied to – and not to be marketed to.
Dave – to add some context here – how about when you showed up to the STRUCK Creative – “WTF is Social Media” event and made a complete ass out of yourself – yelling, interrupting the speakers, cursing, telling the panelists they don’t know what they’re talking about (I’ve heard the recording) … wasn’t that a big “fuck you to all of us who are working diligently to make a difference in Portland and its creative community” ???
So I guess the deal is that it’s just events that you’re a part of that are above reproach?
You said you’re “washing you hands of us” – which is a mature response, given that all we’ve done is disagree with you. I’m sorry Dave – I’m not going to be one of those sycophants who follows you around all day and tells you that everything you do is great. I’m just not like that, some people are.
I prefer to stay true to myself – and when my friends or business associates perpetrate some bullshit like this, I don’t hold back. I expect the same from my friends and colleagues – it’s called respect.
I just made the unfortunate mistake of thinking that you were mature enough to have a disagreement without it becoming personal – my mistake.
I wish you guys all the best with FIGHT – I really do. I’m sorry if what I said offended you – it wasn’t mean as a personal slight or insult. I was just stating my opinion. It’s very unfortunate that we can’t be friends anymore because I thought the event you put on was bad. How sad. I’m really thought you were a bigger person than this Dave.
–
Thanks,
Dane Hesseldahl
http://unhub.com/doesnotvalidate
http://doesnotvalidate.com
I, uh..I guess I just got broken up with on the internet.
Dane,
I will only respond this one time.
You miss the point – this isn’t about the New Communicators, it is about how you and Kiala conveniently dump people when you don’t have a use for them anymore. Or how you walk away from great teams in the workspace because they don’t meet your oh so exacting standards.. It’s about how you will both tear something down and then wave the white flag of friendship – “let’s get drinks!” because you know you over stepped the line. It’s about being rude to those of us who bent over backwards to support you both only to be slapped in the face. Those things are why I’m finally calling BS and putting you behind me. Friendship is basically a social concept based in trust and I can no longer trust the pair of you. I have enough knives between my shoulder blades.
As for this:
“Dave – to add some context here – how about when you showed up to the STRUCK Creative – “WTF is Social Media” event and made a complete ass out of yourself – yelling, interrupting the speakers, cursing, telling the panelists they don’t know what they’re talking about (I’ve heard the recording) … wasn’t that a big “fuck you to all of us who are working diligently to make a difference in Portland and its creative community” ???”
You weren’t there. Those of us that were, and those of us who didn’t walk out in disgust halfway through, would tell you that I didn’t yell nor interrupt the speakers. I only spoke after raising my arm to ask questions. I did tell Amber Case, who is a friend and who apologized for being on such a dreadful panel (she didn’t need to apologize, we all watched the train wreck), that she had her facts dead wrong about the music industry. I am an opiniated person, I admit, but as for making an ass of myself, that’s water off a duck’s back to me coming from you..
The New Communicators is not about me nor anyone person, it is about making a difference. I didn’t know I was “spouting bullshit,” in fact I’m not certain that I was spouting anything. It appears to me that you both fundamentally misunderstand what New Comm is trying to achieve. You want structure where we simply see free form. Think of it as jazz – if Coltrane had to tell his band what to play he would never have made it to the highest echelons of jazz.
Good luck to you both.
Dave,
That personal stuff is based on a single side of the story, and completely inappropriate for discussion here – WHICH IS WHY I ASKED YOU OUT FOR A BEER – so we could talk about this shit face-to-face, like men.
You’re way out of line here Dave.
If you have a problem with something that I did to you as a friend – you should have told me. Waiting a year, and then exploding at me on my wife’s blog and on Twitter (Internet Shitbags – isn’t that what you called us) is hardly an appropriate response.
My personal email is dane.hesseldahl@gmail.com
my phone number is 503.442.5283
I’d be happy to hash this shit out like adults when you’re ready.
I own both an iRobot Roomba and Scooba. I got them for $10 each at some rich person’s garage sale. I’m really going to miss Los Angeles garage sales. They work great.
Wow. Just wow. I am extremely disheartened and insulted to see members of the New Communicators lash out in such a manner at what I see to be much needed critique and criticism of their content and delivery, and Portland’s communications community overall. I mean, isn’t critique what makes things change and become better? I find it especially egregious for a group claiming they are interested in “authenticity”, crowd sourcing input and dialogue. Calling people insecure and accusing them of “tearing something down” from a group that basis its mission on input and dialogue is immature and pathetic. Dave’s personal attack on Dane in a public forum (this blog) is completely inappropriate and should be taken offline.
Furthermore these personal attacks from Dave Allen and Justin’s continuing inability to do the most basic of communications – listen first and take note rather than accuse – illustrate to me that the New Communicators is not a group ready or able to evolve dialogue on anything. Rather, they are reactionary, bullying and exclusionary to anyone who might have a different perspective and offer constructive criticism. Fuck that.
Red Flag alert: I was almost curious enough to want to participate, and given that I will be in Portland during that time frame, am a communications professional myself, and am interested in helping Portland’s communication industry evolve it would make sense for me to be part of this. But the comments from two members of this group are worrisome. Will I be attacked personally in the same manner if I offer a differing opinion?
As for critique of the content and actions, I certainly have some that I hope can assist the New Communicators.
1. Write in Plain English. Clear and concise communications will go much further in getting the ideas and messages across. Right now the language on the website is so convoluted that the ideas are buried. Too many trendy buzzwords and phrases around social media coupled with an overly verbose language translate into pretentious goobeldy-gook. This makes it impossible to understand the basic information of A. What is this group trying to accomplish, B. Why is it important, and C. Why should people care?
2. Make sure the message is consistent and aligned. Language on the website contradicts itself in meaning, often in the same paragraph. For example, in one sentence there is a focus on both 360 communications, but then ends in action of dead end, one way communications. Which is it? Where is the feedback loop back from “dissemination” into conversation? In other words, this paragraph makes little sense: “Communicating is a give-and-take, speaking-and-listening, and New Communicators are compelled to engage in conversation utilizing a mixture of new and traditional tools to disseminate their point-of-view to the world.” You might also want to add, “Just make sure you agree with us, or we will go online and personally attack you!”
3. Practice what you preach! If this group is so committed to using both new and traditional communications tools to solicit input, then why the heck aren’t you soliciting input on their landing page through a blog format, shared survey, or other interactive social media format? Right now all communications solicited are not conversational. This comes across as disingenuous and fairly ill-informed. Like all those people on Twitter calling themselves “Social Media Experts” because they have a twitter account and blogger.com blog. New Communicators needs to walk-the-walk if they want to be taken seriously.
4. As Melissa Lion pointed out but I will elaborate on, if you are going to emphasize in person events, then carefully plan, organize and manage those events so that they are conducive to good communications and make people feel comfortable and welcome. No chairs? You have to be kidding me.
5. Create a safe-space for discussion and dialogue, and focus the discussion on the topics rather than the individuals. Focus on solutions rather than problems. In successful community outreach and development, it is crucial that the organizing group work to set the foundation of open dialogue, listening, and respect, and respond to controversies in a way that is constructive rather than alienating. This is critical for a group whose sole mission is creating a community around input and conversations. The comments from Dave and Justin on this site are very troublesome because they indicate that this group is not very willing or able to handle neither criticism nor online discussion. It is self-defeating to lash out at people who have questions, critiques and differing viewpoints and makes this group appear hostile. Those are communications 101 basics actually: 1. Do not get defensive, 2. Do not personally attack people online, and 3. Focus on the mission of the group and not on your own feelings. In other words: Let your egos go and act as steady and strong leaders rather than emotional reactionaries.
Regardless, thanks for jumpstarting the conversation. I’m reflecting quite a bit here on what all this means as a communications professional and someone that does quite a bit of work in Portland. I think we call that the “reflective communicator”. Sadly, the biggest lesson I’ve learned from the New Communicators is how NOT to communicate.
I’m feeling quite SECURE (and certainly not insecure) about this, thank you very much.
i never trust motherfuckers who misuse the semicolon.
Lizzy,
You have nothing to worry about from my side. New Comm is an open source group. I’m not discussing the pros and cons of New Comm here, ultimately this is just a dam burst. I have offered to step aside from the New Communicators group because of this spat and I await the groups response. How I communicate personally has nothing to do with the rest of the group. Maybe you could take my place and make New Comm something you’d like it to be..
Dane,
Internet shit bag is what The One True B!X called me..I wear the moniker with pride..
Thanks Dave. I appreciate your response. You know, I offer to help the group rewrite the website, should they take me up on that.
As for taking your place – thanks for thinking of me. Logistically that might be a little difficult, especially given the group’s focus on in situ events, since I relocated to New Orleans in July and am only spending minimal time in Portland for work from now on. Still, because I do still do work in PDX in communications, own a house there, etc, etc, I remain interested and vested in making the communications community better. Even if that means offering a perspective as someone outside of the city and region. Which honestly, might a perspective that is needed in this whole conversation.
Let me know if you want to grab lunch or coffee when I’m in town Sept 19-October 30th. Sometimes introductions by controversies can lead to positive opportunities.
I can be reached through my website or at lizzy.caston at that gmail email thingy.
Interesting thread. Interesting idea. I see where everyone is coming from and everyone has valid points. So
You are trying to get people that “found a way to break through” to teach other people how to do it. Great. No problem with that. New World marketing tips and tricks. Awesome. Everyone needs to learn this stuff. Lord knows I do. And, piece by piece, I have been. I’ve been trying to use the new media to do some nonprofit event planning/promoting and it seems to be going well. So here are my thoughts, based on my experiences so far and what I believe is common sense.
1) Cramming all the events into three days seems a little strange. Why not have it on-going? Spread them out? What if I want to go to multiple events and they are all on the same day? Think New Oregon interview series. About once a month Nora Robertson interviews a panel about a particular subject in Portland. One day food, another music, another film etc. . . And it’s all at the same location. The format seems sound. . .and there’s nothing that says you couldn’t have one once a week, trading off locations. Like the restaurants that host OLCC classes. Also, as someone getting into the event planning business, giving yourself 6 weeks (from today – not sure when this all got started) to throw something together that requires a certain level of organization and word-of-mouth marketing is, well, like shooting yourself in the foot. Let the idea for the event come first, then STRATEGICALLY PLAN the best way/time to hold it. I mean, you’re talking about getting venues, at least one host, a speaker, and a bunch of people all to “converge” at the same time. Just getting the venue could take six weeks – depending on who you know, let alone the p.a. (Is that why you didn’t have chairs? I can’t believe none of you sat down. I would have sat my ass down.)
2) That the hosts are taking the role of teachers is something that should be emphasized and made more clear on the web page. At first glance it just looked like people getting together to have a glorified book discussion. (which, really, it kind of is. But book discussions can be very cool if you are reading the right book.) In fact, I would change the term host. It’s really not accurate. A host welcomes you and makes your stay enjoyable. A teacher or a mentor gives you a lesson on a subject. And if there is a lot of Q&A/discussion then it’s called a seminar. New Communicator Seminar Series.
3) Video, blogging, transcription, or whatever means of meticulous and detailed records of each event should be encouraged, if not demanded. You don’t have to MAKE people do things (podcast, webcast, videoblog etc. . .), but be specific about suggestions and what doing them would entail. Don’t assume that people know how to do shit already just because they know how to tweet effectively. Whenever possible, each event should be archived and promoted after the fact. Getting the tools out there to the most people that can use them is the point, isn’t it?
4) Along the same lines as #3 – I would encourage you to create a resource page on your website of all the people/blogs/etc. . . that talk about these types of things. An example of a link I would put on there would be http://www.petmarmoset.com. Ryan Wines really seems to have this new media shit down. Any of you talk to him about putting together a “Convergence?” The Pet Marmoset stuff is written in a context of the music industry, but the principles are transferrable to other industries. I’d go so Ryan speak. In fact, I’ve thought about hiring him to come talk some sense into some nonprofits about how import social media is right now. But I’m poor, so. . .
5) Taking the best pieces of advice from a number of difference sources is what I’ve found to be effective/useful. Encourage that. More specifically.
6) Give people some ideas for gatherings! Throw some potential things out there for people to talk about. Say “HEY! We’re looking for a couple people to talk about social media and the evolution of the music industry!” or “We’re looking for a couple nonprofits to talk about how they use the new communication methods.” Shit like that. Or just make a list. Whatever. Just throw people a bone so they can chew on it.
And just so you all know – I’m not a writer and couldn’t give a shit if I have typos. I’m also not going to read over this and make sure I finished all my sentences. You picky bastards can fuck off.
**notices, after reading this, there are plenty of typos and the formatting makes it hard to read. Thinks an extra 5 mins would have been worth it**
It’s amazing how quickly this devolved.
I’m not in new media. I’m not a writer or a part of the creative class.
I don’t know any of you personally (that I know of) and don’t care if any of you move without saying goodbye.
I do enjoy reading Kiala’s blog and had never heard of the New Communicators until yesterday. I have a law degree and have plenty of experience working with convoluted language, and I still have no idea what the New Communicators are trying to do or are planning to do.
Other than that, maybe let’s take this discussion elsewhere. . .
Well this turning out to be an exciting series of comments!
A woman named Kiala, whom I have never met, states somewhere in her blog that she expects that The New Comm will fail due in part to poor writing.
Some other folks whom I presume are friends or regular blog readers chime in with their thoughts about why it is this idea is going to fail.
Some folks who helped to start The New Comm defend it, and pretty soon two camps take shape.
Some personal history between members of the two camps is brought up, and it becomes personal.
I wonder what different people think about this type of communication?
Is it dangerous to have this type of stuff out in the open?
Is it more honest and transparent now that we know a little bit of the personal history driving some of this?
Is conflict the mark of a primitive discussion, or is ignoring the underlying dynamics of a conversation a reflection of the pathological nature of our age’s communication?
Is this just ‘business’ or ‘marketing’ as usual?
Do we care if The New Comm fails, and how would you know if it failed?
I am interested in how online conversations make people nervous.
I am interested in what The New Comm is about, and in participating with it.
I don’t care about the home page content or the strategy, and I do like the energy and spirit behind it.
I look forward to seeing how it goes, and wonder if I will get trash-talked for saying so.
dan chapman is a socialist!
Dan,
I don’t think conflict is the “mark of primitive discussion” at all. In fact I think that conversation without conflict isn’t genuine conversation at all, it’s pacification.
Being able to respectfully disagree and continue to interact is the mark of “evolved” conversation.
seems this post by shannon paul would be a good read for everyone.
it seems the issue here though is that the individuals involved on both ends don’t separate themselves from their work. instead it’s an extension of themselves. this, i believe, is a great thing*!
*for the most part.
when this kind of thing happens and someone has poured themselves into an action, cause or entity that they believe in whole-heartedly (as justin and dave have), they can sometimes be rendered unable to step back from it and address it from outside themselves.
i really think that’s what happened here. i believe attempts were made, but they were obscured by emotion.
hopefully reflection will make things clearer to everyone.
errr… i guess no links here. this is the post i referred to:
http://veryofficialblog.com/2009/09/07/dont-take-this-the-wrong-way/
Dane, agreed!
That’s a great read – thanks Steve!
Its clear to me that the Dave is a dedicated and passionate person about his career. Its also clear to me that Kiala could have been a bit more tactful when offering up her opinion on the event/mission/homepage. Any person who takes the least bit of pride in their work would have taken offense, especially from someone who is supposed to be a friend. Go ahead, try and justify it anyway you want. “oh, i was simply stating what I felt about the event/mission/homepage” You still pulled a tactless move. If you truthfully wanted to give constructive feedback you may have chosen to have a discussion with Justin and Dave first hand instead of spewing it on your blog.
sincerely, someone who is completely removed from this.(Chris Ramos)
chris, i hate to belabor the point, but according to what i’ve read in this very post, KK infact DID point out that the website’s message did not in fact align with the message promoted at the meeting.
to the guy who wrote it.
that to me does not speak of criticism as much as it does feedback.
besides, i hardly see any spew here. i have a bit of a bukkake/gokkun fetish so i would know.
tact is for suckers.
Ken is right Chris. I said nothing on my blog I didn’t say to everyone ON A MICROPHONE at the event as well as to to the author himself.
Hi Everyone, I’m the guy who wrote our first attempt at describing The New Communicators. This may be obvious
, but I’m not a copywriter by trade and we’re continually working to make the language and description of the event more clear. We had to start somewhere and it’s great to hear so many opinions.
I also wanted to acknowledge Lizzy Caston, Trent Finlay and Dan Chapman for their helpful and constructive comments. This is an evolving concept and we fully expect it to morph into something beyond what we initially envisioned.
Thanks for everyone’s feedback. Personally, I’m excited to see the amount of conversation it has generated already.
I invite everyone to check back with us as time goes on, share your comments and help this thing evolve. http://thenewcommunicators.com/
Onward!
Thank you for the response that we should have gotten from the beginning Erin.
My pleasure. I just thought I’d better let the dust settle a bit.
Good call.
And thank you Erin.
in case someone, read DANE, forgot his father taught, yes, taught communications for many years. at this point in time his father teaches collaboration between groups of people who have similar intersects but can’t seem to communicate or get along. he is very good at what he does by the way!
whose father?
my father is darth vader.
Leave a Comment