
by Ron Edwards - Strategy Director (27 October 2009)
‘Send us all the invite on Facebook’.
‘I’m going into withdrawal. I haven’t looked at the camera blogs in over a week.’
‘This is a Blackberry office. Just Ping him.’
‘I so don’t want to friend her. I guess I’ll accept but I’ll just switch on all the privacy settings.’
Society has been digitized – that’s no surprise to anyone. The sky is blue, and the internet has changed our lives. But what people don’t realize as often, what hasn’t sunk into our collective consciousness, is how the rules of online communities differ from those of physical communities – and exactly how extensive and deep-rooted the cultural framework of each community is.
Many of today’s people spend six, eight, ten, twelve hours per day, sometimes over half their day, interacting in online communities. That’s not even taking into account the multi-taskers who spend their waking minutes living in the ‘real’ world while simultaneously existing, conversing, participating in a handful of digital cultures. If you add up a multi-tasker’s daily hours in online communities, it might be more than 24 hours per day – more time than spent in the ‘real’ world.
Each online community – from a group of friends on a social network, to a circle of professionals who inhabit their own specialized region of the blogosphere, to the citizens of an industry forum – possesses their own customs, their own rules, their own politics, their own communication methods and etiquette.
First, just think about cultural essence that comes to mind when you envision different kinds of communities. The narcissism of Myspace. The reciprocal altruism of a programmers forum. The not-so-subtle courting rituals of Adult Friend Finder versus the soulful outreaches on eHarmony.
But then go deeper. How does the narcissism manifest itself? Why? To whom? When? Certainly you don’t find shirtless men flexing in towels at every reflective surface on a city street. Nor do you find women walking at such an awkward angle that every onlooker can see down their shirt. Not many people want to have 2,387 friends in real life. And ghetto blasters are a blip in the past – do two-thirds of the people you see in daily life force you to listen to their personal taste in music at every encounter?
The reasons why behaviour of an online community manifests itself the way it does are just as substantial as the underpinnings of behaviour for an offline community. Because of this depth of cultural development and organization within online communities, the implications of digital ethnography for commerce stand tremendous. We’ve all heard about some of the grand marketing failures of the past when companies branch into a new culture. Just as much care and background research and localization strategy needs to take place when you branch into an online community. You can’t throw your print ads onto Facebook, just as you can’t throw your Hong Kong marketing strategy onto a French market.
The emergence of digital ethnographers such as Micheal Wech and danah boyd (yes, she writes her name uncapitalized as some kind of digi-political statement) shows how seriously academics are now taking digital culture. In fact, some of them already have a decade of specialization in the subject under their belt. And now, technology companies are also piling onto the train and incorporating ethnographic research as a vital component of their working process. For just a few brief examples, see this cnn.com article that touches on the efforts of Microsoft and Nokia.
The tech companies may be early adopters, but online communities affect every product. If other industries don’t follow suite, they may soon find themselves with a Chevy No Va on their hands.
There is some interesting conversation floating around about the convergence of online and offline identities.
Basic skeleton of the conversation is that back in the ANCIENT days of online communities, you know, like 2004, online identity was more divergent from offline identity. People's Myspace personae and Livejournal personae and chatroom personae could be very different from real life. People were shaping identities that were either built upon their real-life identities or sometimes a completely new fake identity. But now, because of the advent of sites like Facebook, where you are much more linked to your actual real world identity and there is less anonymity, offline identity and online identity are more similar.
So the answer may be that you could be a right old bastard in 2004, but in 2009 and 2010 unfriending is (almost) akin to real life breakup.
Here is the key quote,
"People are only going to invest in a phone if they see real value in owning it."
This can be expanded to people within a corporation. Especially when you are talking virtual, not brick and mortar, it can be difficult to show the value of a concept or idea to someone who is not as savvy or knowledgeable.
That quote holds true for both clients in a corporation and the end consumer.
It can be difficult to convince a client of the value of social media - or at least the value of strategizing around the rules of the community instead of sticking to the rules of traditional marketing. And it can be difficult - and rightly so - to engage end consumers with any kind of social media outreach that tries to force a traditional marketing style on top of an online arena instead of embracing the rules of the community. No one wants to be friends with an ad.
advertising advocacy Android athletic branding BlackBerry booking brand branding browser Buddhism business celebrate CMS competition concept consumer behaviour copywriting creativity Destination branding digital digital culture digital ethnography digital map diversity domain names Facebook FarmVille flash football fun Gladwell Google Hotmail innovation intellectual Internet iPhone language logos luxury goods luxury goods marketing luxury marketing Market research marketing marketing trends media mobile Naming New York Times NGO non-profit online branding online games online marketing online meeting planner online networks Persuasion photos revenue revenue-generating right brain social media social media business social media games social media marketing social media networks Starbucks Strategy sustainability tastemaker team Tipping Point tourism twitter UN video Web 2.0 website workshop World Cup Zygna
Comment 1: Caroline Loevner - Concept Developer
The OED’s word of the year for 2009 is “unfriend." (A word which apparently dates back to 1659). What beautiful simplicity this seems to promise! With a click, we may simply excise an offending person from our acquaintance. Another favourite: “detag” promises that we may erase the weekend’s embarrassing antics. So in this age of digital ethnography, how many of these new rules and etiquettes will we be adopting into real life? Can we ignore unfriends when we see them around town? Can we pretend that a detagged episode never took place? Or does Miss Manners' Guide to Excruciatingly Correct Behaviour still apply when the computer is turned off?