Yes, the internet can feel like the wild west, from which both parents and educators may be tempted to shelter their children and students. However, just as old-school book banning and burning didn’t work, all out censorship or hyper-restrictive access is not the answer to challenges presented by new media access.

The sea of inappropriate content – either by age group or societal values – is typically the first bug-a-boo to rear its head when “children” and “internet” are used in the same sentence. That’s a relatively easy issue to deal with, however. As children, we were all taught to avoid high-crime neighborhoods or how to traverse them safely, not to read books or magazines or see movies with content ill suited for children, and even to walk away from friendships with kids who make bad choices.

Those same skills and values come into play when teaching children how to navigate today’s electronic community. Educators and parents alike can achieve this by not creating oh-so-delicious “forbidden fruit” with censorship and instead guiding students to engaging, informative and age-appropriate content and tools that they find simply irresistible.

For example, tried-and-true content providers like National Geographic and PBS have wonderful kid-friendly content and games. Aggregators like Kidsites.org and 100topkid.com make tracking down kid-friendly sites a no-brainer. Kids can also have fun making their own content with click-of-a-button web tools like ScreenCastle, or more advanced tools like MeeMov, Masher and Stupeflix.

Of greater concern is an increased need to teach our children intellectual discernment when it comes to retrieving and absorbing content from the web. Parents and educators alike need to provide guidelines that limit a garbage-in-garbage-out experience and enhance critical thinking skills because the old adage, “Just because it’s in print doesn’t make it true,” applies now more than ever. Gone are filters such as the tincture of time and peer-review on the front end and the practical constraints of time and place when retrieving information on the back end.

On the upside, the fast-paced, “wiki” nature of the web means that just as quickly as inaccurate information is posted, corrections, rebuttals and reviews appear to balance the conversation. Our role, then, is to provide the children in our lives with the core skills needed to effectively navigate and process the infinite sources of information on the web.

Specifically, we need to teach our children: 1) Critical thinking skills, so they don’t believe everything they see or read – either on the internet or in the physical world, 2) Where and how to find trusted sources of reliable information, so they can fact check on their own and develop a substantive knowledge base and personal opinions, 3) Develop flexible thinking, so they can accept new, credible information that may refute their current thinking, whether it be regarding an urban legend or a scientific advance.

You’ll notice that none of these skills are really very new. Each and every one of them is a vital component in a high quality education. We know that with them all children advance from rote memorization of facts to the intellectual fluency that is the foundation of lifelong learning.

Without a doubt, Web 2.0 is here to stay. Our job, then, is to transfer these invaluable skills from traditional learning environments to the seemingly limitless classroom and community found on the internet.

triplets11Oh! Did you feel that? That little rumble in the universe when social media acceptance reached its tipping point?

If you’re reading this (or any other blog for that matter), go ahead and give yourself a firm pat on the back for your role in tipping the scales. And, if you’re on one of the “big three” social networking sites—Facebook, LinkedIn and/or Twitter—give yourself a much-deserved gold star. Not only are you a consumer of social media, you’re a content creator who’s added your unique voice to the conversation.

If you’re relatively new to social networking, you’re still probably wondering what the difference is between these venues, and why in the heck anyone would want to be on all three?

“Facebook helps you connect with your past. LinkedIn helps you connect with today. Twitter helps you connect with your future.”

I wish I could remember where I heard this, because it’s one of many ways avid users are describing the differences as they see them. Here are a few more from the Twitterverse:

ItsMikeD: We learn with Twitter, LinkedIn adds the polish, Facebook satisfies the kid inside.

KarlBimshas: LinkedIn=Work,Facebook=the bar after work,Twitter=the water cooler,MySpace=the bar after midnight lol

SusanSweet: LinkedIn=networking event, Facebook=reunion, Twitter=crazy cocktail party

According to blogger Ari Herzog, while each of us uses social networking sites differently, the general tone for each is chit-chat on Facebook, networking on LinkedIn, and collaboration on Twitter.

Ming Yeow Ng has received some terrific feedback about usage patterns on Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter from readers of the Mr. Tweet blog.

For those still wondering if the whole “social media” thing has a meaningful place in your organization’s marketing mix, a recent PRWeek survey showed that 62% of journalists pitched via Facebook, 42% via LinkedIn and 18% via Twitter, although they all still favor email.

GeoffPeterson says it more bluntly in a recent Twitter post, “If you’re in recruiting and not using any part of ‘The Social Web’ (i.e. Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook) you are in the stone age.”

Need more convincing? Then check out these executive guides to social networking and this two-part report about digitial moms by Razorfish and CafeMom.

So, how about you? In your mind, do each of these “social spaces” fulfill different purposes? Does their purpose influence the content or tone of your posts? What’s the single greatest value (business or personal) that you’ve derived from each?

Looking forward to hearing from you … and creating a little aftershock in our own little corner of the cyber universe. Cheers!

becky-megaphone_jpg1Remember when you had to be really, really mad or annoyed or offended before you would take up a pen to complain?

Never mind sending an “atta-boy”.

By the time you scoured the house looking for a pen and something to write on, hunted down to whom exactly you should address your pat-on-the-back, found a stamp, and remembered to drop the envelope in the mail, the adrenalin rush of customer (dis)satisfaction had worn off.

Customer feedback inevitably took the form of “survival of the meanest.”

The powers that be knew it, too. Which is why they adopted fudge factors, something like every negative letter they received spoke for at least 100 other people, and every positive for another 1,000.

Okay, I made those numbers up, but you get the idea: 1) For the most part, we had to be really, really moved one way or the other before we’d bother to express ourselves and 2) Marketing departments had very limited feedback to work with when they wanted to improve their products or services.

These days, savvy marketers peddling products, services, news, and even the afterlife, have embraced the two-way communication of Web 2.0 as a fountain of real-time, no-holds-barred feedback. They are lurking on social networking sites and (the brave ones) are engaging their constituents in meaningful conversation.

For example, the folks at Starbucks need only type their name into a Twitter Search for feedback on a current menu item (@doctortiffany: Starbucks Tarragon Chicken Salad Sandwich = $5.95, but yummy.) or to gauge reception of a new product introduction (@tamir: trying new instant #starbucks – it is not too bad!).

No doubt a negative post would generate a direct message from Starbucks offering to make it right, as well as a critical internal look to fix the problem for good.

This direct line between buyer and seller makes it’s so much easier to make some noise … and actually be heard.

Successful organizations are using Web 2.0 to glean intelligent intelligence about what their customers/clients/constituents need and want, and not just what they want to sell them. They are replacing old-school customer resignation with genuine customer satisfaction, a critical step on the path to customer loyalty.

In a recent interview on public radio’s “Marketplace” with Kai Rysdall, Sociologist Dalton Conley dubbed pda-toting, twittering folks “the elsewhere class”, i.e., those who are increasingly in more than one place at one time.

“… if they’re at home ostensibly having dinner with the family, their minds — or perhaps their thumbs as they click away on the Blackberry under the table — are actually communicating with other folks somewhere else back in the office. They might be more distracted at work because they’re also worried about the fact that their kid is home sick, and after this meeting they have to rush right home to relieve mom or dad … We’re always en route to elsewhere if not physically then in some communicative way …”

For the record, I don’t use my pda at the dinner table (that’s rude) and still marvel when the person in the next bathroom stall answers their cell phone (that’s gross), but Conley’s point is well taken.

A pitfall of all our real-time connectivity is the increasing tendency to move away from being truly present in the moment and wander (at least mentally) elsewhere.

(more…)

Yes, what they say is true. When I first heard about Twitter, I couldn’t figure out what on earth could possibly be so interesting about following the mundane activities of friends and coworkers … let alone people I’ve never met.

“It’s like being at a cocktail party with all the smartest, coolest people you know,” explained Fusionary Media’s Jack Baty.

Since taking up the Twitter habit, I’ve definitely found that to be true, which is great since I haven’t been to a truly smart or cool cocktail party in years.

(more…)

Next Page »