talk boards for love and friendship for Brum-ish blogging, web and social media types
I've heard the "brum social media scene" described as a clique a couple of times — and while from my perspective i don't see that it is (it's grown from 0 to a loose network of 100s in just a year) the perception is as damaging (almost) as it actually being one.
So - how do we widen the circle?
First off all, this is not a unusual or that problematic in the sense that it happens again and again. Here's a personal example.
Back In The Day when I did zines there were cliques a'plenty. I started off in a small clique that didn't think it was a clique because it was at the bottom of the pile but it certainly was. My clique came into contact with the most established cliques and I had a similar reaction to what we're getting. Who put these people in charge? Isn't this supposed to be a non-hierarchical thing? Why don't you practice what you preach? After a couple of years, though, I found myself part of that bigger more established clique and consider some of them to be very good friends to this day.
How did that clique form? Very simply, some people looked at what was going on and thought "we should do this and that" and they did it. But in the progress they became friends with each other and that put up a barrier.
And that's probably the nub of all this. When you set up a space (be in online, offline or just conceptually) where the intention is to bring people together so they might talk and share knowledge it's inevitable that they will bond in some way (or, in common parlance, become friends). I've no deep understanding of tribal psychology but I suspect part of the reason for bonding is to define yourselves as a group in distinction to everyone else. "We are this and they are not this, so we can trust each other more" which encourages more dialogue and sharing for the greater common good.
Or if you want a pop-culture reference, the survivors in Lost wouldn't have survived as well if they hadn't had the threat of The Others bringing them together as a unit. It's all very Sartre.
So, what have we got here? A rapidly growing community of people based around the advocacy of new conversational tools, tools which encourage people to come together in groups, form trust-based communities and share knowledge and experiences. I would posit that you cannot have a tight and functioning community without those outside the community feeling alienated from it. If the community was genuinely open to all (not just officially but psychologically and socially) then it wouldn't be any use to those who were members.
It's funny, but the generally despicable system of the Private Members Club where you have to be invited by a member and approved by all, is really just a calculated and blatant version of what happens anyway. We don't blatantly do invitations or approvals but we imply them through out actions, no matter how much we say otherwise.
And it's not just a problem for those gathering around emerging stuff. Stick me in a room with a bunch of Birmingham Forward people and my brain will start screaming "clique!" because they all know each other and speak a group language which I don't know. Put one of them in a room with me and my digi-nerd chums and I'm sure it'd be the same. And I'm guessing Creative Republic is going to have the same problems as it grows.
So should be take steps to neuter that which makes us seen as a clique? I'd say no for the reasons above. What makes this a good thing also makes it a bad thing. So by getting rid of the bad stuff you'll also get rid of the good stuff too, which would be silly.
What we could do is temper the branding. "Brumbloggers" should become "Some People In Brum Who Blog". Posts like "50+ Birmingham Twitter users you need to follow" should be rephrased as "Here's my Twitter community. It might overlap with yours. If so, this list might be useful." And, of course, aggressively insulting local radio personalities who show an interest should be avoided at all costs.
Alongside this there should be a realisation that if we achieve our goals (loosely to have as many people using these tools as possible) then whatever we've created will be but a tiny sub-set of that.
Finally, look at the history of the social Internet as adoption has grown. Actually, lets narrow down on blogging.
When I started it was possible to follow all the UK blogs and a few American ones. Yes, ALL of them. This soon became unsustainable as more people discovered it and overlapping groups of blogs started emerging. This was healthy but as more groups developed and niches started to form different ideas of What Blogging Is emerged. On the whole it hasn't been that problematic. Folk soon realised that the medium was bigger than them and settled into their little communities and the notion of a Blogosphere became more abstract and less about a global community.
We're at the point where social media in Birmingham is about to explode. I predict there'll be 10,000 active Twitter users in the city by the summer. Most of them will never have heard of us and the work we've done and that's a good thing.
My 2p. Will probably turn this into a blog post later.
Actually, I can boil it down. We need to build our personal irrelevance into everything we do.
Or, to break it down even further, Social Media Don't Scale.
I think we (the Brum bloggers group) need more specific feedback than just that we're a clique (I feel that is a bit of a cop out). If someone was to say "I felt excluded because of X" then we might be able to tackle it?
>Social Media Don't Scale.
Indeed, but if people feeling excluded genuinely want to not feel that way - what can we practically do to help?
@Catnip. I don't think "X" would be of any use. It's most likely someone trying to rationalize an irrational (but perfectly understandable) feeling.
For example, one I heard was "They have meetings and everything". The person was threatened by us having meetings. Should we stop having meetings? No.
What re they really feeling? Theatended by the unknown. The best way to deal with that is to bring them in. Worked for me on numerous occasions. I have very good friends who I once attacked for being elitist clique-mongers. ;)
Steve Chapman
I think there are two different things going on here, the social media 'scene' where people are using blogs, twitter etc as a form of journalism and running commentary on life and the world. These are the people whose blogs and twitter feeds I follow because they are interesting, informative and entertaining. Are they a clique? I don't think so. I do think they are quite close-knit and mutually self supporting though. The second thing is people using social media for their own non-web interests and I guess that includes myself. For example, photographers getting together using Flickr, film fans using Meetup to watch films together, book clubs, sports fans and so on. This is the growth area and will be the vast majority of the 10,000 Twitter users that Pete predicts.
I think Birmingham is blessed with a large number of Bloggers and Twitterers (Tweeple/Folks wot use Twitter) who are intelligent, witty and, seemingly, largely involved in creative industries.
For people who do not fall within those descriptions it can be a daunting prospect to throw yourself into the permanent conversation that is Twitter and other social media.
I consider myself to be intelligent. I am not, however, creative and am not involved in anything even vaguely creative (I work as a tax Consultant for heaven's sake). I can, at times, feel I have little to bring to the table.
I'm sure my wife won't mind me saying that when I introduced her to Twitter she was, initially, extremely daunted by the level of wit and intelligence on display. However, once she had found her place (mainly because I coerced into continued Twittering) she has found it a very likable place with welcoming people who value whatever contribution you wish to bring.
The strong social side of B-ham bloggers can be both an asset and a liability. It clearly strengthens the relationships between those who attend. However, it can make it feel a little harder to "break in" to that group if you haven't attended. I personally am not good at attending meetings where I don't know anyone, even if I've talked to them online. I've found the thought of attending Brum Bloggers of the SMC a little daunting to date. However, now my wife is also Twittering we are planning on attending BrumTwestival together.
This post was originally intended to be simply the first 2 paragraphs and I've kind of lost track of where I was going with the rest..... However, as someone who is relatively new to the "group" I thought I'd pass on my experience of the last 6 or so months.
@urbanfly has already pre-empted my post and @peteashton has covered the main points above but i'll post anyway. Part of the problem is a lot of Brum blog/soc-med' types have known each other for a while already so online their interaction can appear to be a 'clique'(eg, most people on @stefs 50+ Twitter list were already known to each other so if you were a noob to Twitter and followed a handful of them you could sometimes feel as if you were on the edge of a private conversation). But as stated this just comes with the territory of developing communities and groups, i don't see the need for anybody to beat themselves up about it?. blogmeets and Tweetups (and #twitpantos)are certainly a step in the right direction to address the problem
@midge_uk
Honestly it's not bad whence you get to a meet - i think the twestival might be a really nice one to come to for the first time.
(& not creative? i've seen your DJ-ing tweets mr @theaardvark ;) )
@bounder "Indeed, but if people feeling excluded genuinely want to not feel that way - what can we practically do to help?"
Separate the tools from the community? Stop trying to represent all bloggers, etc under one banner? ("Brumbloggers" for example and "blogmeets".) Above all, start promoting a multiplicity of overlapping communities?
We have a social community of friends (of varying degrees) with our own injokes, language, etc. This is healthy. But if we're serious about promoting this stuff to a much wider audience we should not push that community as the primary source. Its importance and relevance should be minimized within the larger scale of things.
There is no Birmingham Twitter Commiunity. There is no Birmingham Flickr Comminity. There is no Birmingham Blogging Community. There are, however, loads and loads of CommunitIES which overlap forming a greater whole. Social media allows for that overlapping to be much more flexible and fluid (sometimes to the point where you can't see the boundaries) which is great, but no community is dominant.
(Really have to go get lunch now. Keep it coming!)
@peteashton Separate the tools from the community?
That's something that i'd hope would inevitably happen - when only a few people have phones you end up calling them up even if you don't have anything to say.
The Brum bloggers thing is for people interested in the tech/process/culture isn't it? SMCs even more so.
@catnip i don't think people feel 'excluded' as such it's
just that it can be daunting walking into a roomful of 'strangers' that you only know through blogger/twitter who obviously know already each other , then it's easy to think 'clique'. I was lucky in that @getgood persuaded me to go so i had an 'in' . But having said that it's the same with most social situations, it's not just peculiar to Soc'med' circles.
@bounder I think the SMC's are certainly more for tech/process/culture discussions. I find the Blogmeets are a lot more free n' easy.
Steve Chapman
My advice (for what it's worth) to the Brum bloggers people is to keep on doing what you're doing in helping to spread the social media tools. I learned to blog at one of Pete's CF sessions and he also introduced me to twitter. I'm really grateful for that. I also think the Social Media Surgeries are a fantastic idea and worthy of support.
The answer lies in being actively welcoming and inclusive. Encouraging new people to join in conversations and engaging with them no matter how stuttering and self conscious their initial attempts are.
For those who clearly don't "get it", such as those who use Twitter solely as an RSS feed or those who type in all caps, gentle encouragement and advice on how to best make use of the platforms.
It will soon become apparent whether these people will become people you wish to interact with. If not, hopefully by that point they will have found their own group. They will either become part of Brum Bloggers, SMCs and/or any of the other groupings/collectives or they will move on. However, both groups can be satisfied that they have helped to encourage new participants in Social Media.
@midge - i'd hope so too, SMC is much more "professional usage" - but i wouldn't expect people to come to loads of bloggers meets unless they
a) cared about blogging (whatever that may be) and wanted to hang around with othere that did. or
b) come once and found it fun, so want to come again.
that said, i'd like to make it as easy as possible for anyone to come to and see if they like it - whether anything to do with that is in my power (apart from being nice to people) i have no idea . I'm willing to be pointed in the right direction tho'
Agreeing with Julia & Pete: I'm not sure what more the Brum bloggers group can do in terms of breaking down perceived barriers as, as Pete states, more often than not the barriers are the irrational fears of the unknown within the 'outsiders' own heads.
It's human nature, at the end of the day. You walk into a room of people you don't know; and if there's a gang of them that already know each other; talking in a little circle, you naturally assume it's a clique. What may happen is that you go up to them and they're very friendly and nice and welcome you into the circle, but still at the back of your mind you're thinking: "These people all know each other already and I don't." Welcome to the playground. It many be an adult one; it may be a virtual one, but the rules are still the same...
I'm not sure how much of a question of 'bringing people in' it is either - social media is open to all already. I think people should bring themselves in and just not be afraid.
You'll never get away from 'clubs'. As Steve rightly mentions; people will always naturally form groups with other people with similar interests. We can't be friends with everyone and we can't constantly communicate with everyone all the time.
In terms of specifics that might help (your 'X's, Julia!) there's already good welcoming practice in place: people will often welcome newbies to Twitter and get other people to say 'hello'. There's lots of cross-referencing in terms of blogs, which is nice; people giving each other a big-up. The Bloggers meets are completely open to all and everyone is very friendly.
In terms of 'negative' specifics: a couple of things spring to mind: firstly there are a number of 'ratings' that go on - 'Top 50 blogs', 'best people to follow on Twitter', 'influential people to follow on Twitter', '50 best people as introduction to social media' etc; which promote a hierarchy that some newbies have found intimidating. Your name's not on the list - you're not in the popular gang, you're not as important as x,y,z.
I understand that people have mentioned these 'lists' actually as a way of helping newbies - directing them to social media 'old-hands' to introduce them into the weird and wonderful world of soc.med. So, with the best intentions. But it can, unfortunately, have an adverse effect on people. However, it is, of course, impossible to control everyone's reactions to everything. And people who don't think that the world is out to get them have found these lists useful as a way of getting a grip on some kind of network.
Secondly, to be fair, there probably just IS a hierarchy - in terms of expertise and experience- and that's OK. Basically, there are a number of people who have been doing this for a long time, who are experienced, knowledgeable and, frankly, just good at what they do. And good for them. Anyone that's good at what they do generally gets recognition for it, and fair enough. I think the B'Ham Soc. Med. 'illuminati' aren't as arrogant as to think that their 'expertise' is a) exclusive or b) not to be shared with the plebs who haven't made it to 'the list'. Which is what counts.
You will always have your social media 'celebrities': I often refer to my own 'Birmingham 5' (not online though - for reasons mentioned above!). And that's not cos they're a superior exclusive clique. It's because they're good at what they do.
Ben had an interesting point about people moving into areas and not knowing what's there http://beninbrum.blog.co.uk/2009/01/15/does-birmingham-need-a-welcome-wagon-5382591/
Maybe a good thing would be some kind of Brum Social Media 'welcome waggon' - no hand complied lists, but some things like location search links for "bloggers/twitters/flickers' near you. And a little encouragement to hop in there.
Something like this for twitter - so you can see that there are other people out there - http://search.twitter.com/search?q=&ands=&phrase=&ors=¬s=&tag=&lang=all&from=&to=&ref=&near=birmingham%2C+uk&within=15&units=mi&since=&until=&rpp=15 ?
@Fiona There's also the flipside to the lists in that they're only really relevant to the person who made the list. To take Stef's (since it's the most high profile) I suspect that a number people reading it won't find me a useful or relevant person to follow, especially given the way I use Twitter. It's not a big thing but I'm not sure I want people to start following me because they think I'm some bigwig or (god help us) celebrity. I know Stef simply filtered and added context to http://twitter.com/stef/friends but the way he did it (and this is not a criticism of Stef, merely an example) put a big flag over those names and stuck them on a pedestal.
Interestingly, I wouldn't have a problem if he'd linked to ash10.com as that's my serious educational site. Twitter, for me, is more like a social space. If I'm honest I think knowing I have 500+ followers is a bit weird and I try to pretend they're not there else I start broadcasting and ruin it for myself, turning into one of those people at parties who think they're like Oscar Wilde. That would be bad.
Anyway, I'm probably making too big a deal of this. Will digest everything and return later today.
As Fiona says, it is a bit like the playground, as are most groups that get called cliques (art scenes, music scenes, etc). Still, as I learnt there, most people want to get to know new people, and if you get excluded from somewhere, they're not people you'd want to be friends with anyway.
I was a bit nervous of getting involved in Blogger's events, as I'm neither a professional writer or Social Media expert, but these perceived barriers weren't a problem at all. I think the biggest hurdle I've heard about from friends of mine, is that they don't really have the desire to use something like Twitter, they can't see how it could be useful to them as I'm their only friend who uses it. It's not a resistance to online communication, as they use MSN and Facebook, but very much about having a 'way in', someone or something to create that need to be part of the group.
I don't know how much that's up to us to provide, but so long as we continue being open and transparent, welcoming newcomers, and sharing the benefits, people will keep joining in the conversation.
elbunglio
Your traditional online communities will, like 'networking' meetings, have someone to introduce you to people in the space/room, and rituals to introduce you to the crowd. Online you have added advantages of status ratings and profiles so it's a lot easier to network and identify like-minded people. Maybe that's all you lack (although you might have this already, or some people like mutual friend getgood might be doing it). The top 50 lists are a step towards that, I'd guess.
But - speaking of recent experience - it doesn't half help when you're new to be able to reference a person who can guide you through the 'welcome' bit. Will attend twestival, it sounds good. And if there's anyone there looking lost (apart from myself - does the bar have mirrors?) I'll go up and say hi.
You lot are very good at this blogging, you know, it's open and honest and should be celebrated. Even though i know not much of it all, as everyone has at least five blogs, i think a chapter in the big city plan is required!
Rob
@ana Most of my mates are the same, Very IT literate, some in teaching profession some on FB but their eyes mist over when i mention Blogging/Twitter/Social-med. I don't think there's a huge deal you can do to turn them on to it, if they're not interested they're not interested.
@peteashton You're one of the B'ham social media big-wigs (sorry, 'celebrity' is a scary word, you're right - I was being tongue-in-cheek really) by virtue of being one of the most experienced bloggers etc. That's OK - it just means that you're good at what you do and people have heard of you. Or people who get into the soc.med. group will hear your name mentioned a lot. That's all.
I don't think that people follow other Top Ten type folks just cos they're soc.med. slebs, but cos they've been in some way 'signposted' to you either by word-of-mouth or by lists etc as someone who knows about stuff that they're obviously trying to get into; so it makes sense. That's OK innit? If I was a botany expert I would expect people who wanted to get into botany to want to hear what I have to say/ try and get into my networks/ try and learn from me etc.
And don't have a go at me calling you an 'expert' ... Read 'experienced' instead, if you like.
I don't reject the lists altogether, and I think they can be useful if people want to learn from experienced people - that seems sensible to me. It's just that there's a negative flipside that I've seen too, unfortunately.
Steve Chapman
Many communities who could really benefit from Soc Med tools are not getting them. At Deaffest last October most of the audience had never used twitter, video chat or video blogging. I'm now working with a deaf media company to put together a 4iP project proposal to help build a deaf social media community.
@Steve: Funnily enough, I was just thinking about the Deaf community and social media! (Actually, this whole thing started cos I realised that at the last Brum Bloggers meet there wasn't a single non-White face in the room, and wondered why. And then started thinking about potential barriers to people joining in .. )
Anyway, I was very surprised that there also didn't seem to be many Deaf folk prominent in social media circles (my other half is a BSL interpreter as a profession so we get to hang out with Deaf folk a lot). From my experience; the sense of community in DEaf culture tends to be very tight; as well as a good sense of being aware of others - and liking gadgets! Particularly those involving visual communication... Maybe that's just the Deaf folk I know, but I would have thought a Deaf social media community would massively take off.
Just out of interest, which media company is it that you're working with?
Steve Chapman
@Fiona: There seems to be a good use of FB and texting amongst the Deaf community. I think they will get there in the end, but just slow to adopt because many deaf people are physically isolated and also find it difficult to learn from the 'hearing' community.
Working with Zebra Uno in Wolverhampton http://www.zebra-uno.com/new/. They help organise Deaffest.
daveharte
Am I in the clique? I just want to know. I don't go to Brum bloggers meets (wrong time for me, am pretending to be good Dad by bathing the kids) and I've only been to a couple of the Social Media Cafe events. I also live in the deeply unfashionable Bournville. Yet I do know a decent amount of people in the social media scene and I was once described as a "usual suspect". Actually I kind of like that as I rarely get to penetrate any kind of clique (in my running club I'm just on the verge of the we-take-it-very-seriously clique, so close, yet...)
There's a widening participation discussion emerging here as if somehow those early adopters will be the ones to shape how social media is used and who will use it in this city. They won't - communities always shape technology use for their own means, they'll create their own groups within which I have no doubt elements will seem as cliquey as the Birmingham SMC can seem.
Jonathon Ross will probably do more to shape social media use on his show tonight than any of us lot. Good luck to him. If it means that I don't have to carry on doing a terrible job of explaining twitter to people then I welcome that. I hope that Pete's right in his usage figures as outside of you lot I'm fed up as being seen as the wierdo blogging/tweeting guy by my friends/family/work colleagues (yeah I know, strange that last one isn't it). I do recognise though that within the SMC I am the wierdo running/gardening guy - you're all welcome to join those cliques anytime you like.
m4rc
I have a feeling that some people might feel that a comment I made on twitter was aimed at them, it didn't. Twitter is a very cliquey system, I have a few accounts and I get a variety of responses from various people. I am relatively new to the West Mids, although I have now been up here for 2 and half years I have only been living here full time for a few months and am from and spent most of the time in the south.
I find people in the west mids nicer all round, much easier to talk to, and I enjoy their company a lot more than my southern colleagues. So much so that I would never move back to the south coast or London (I have lived for many years in both areas). You should understand firstly, not that this group IS cliquey, but being a cliquey group is not such a bad thing, there are worse crimes you can be accused of. Secondly, having a group without a cliquey element is virtually impossible, I might even go as far as saying totally impossible. If the group is a bit cliquey at times then you should go and spend time with other groups around the country, many are simply awful and you will need to be involved for a very long time before you feel part of the group.
I'm not a blogger, I have tried but I am truly awful and in fact I deleted everything from my blog last week with the intention of starting from scratch. I want to blog, but I always worry its not interesting for others, so I just stop mid flow! I would like to spend some time with some bloggers getting some tips, and I am keen to join in some of the activities that go on in the area. The issues start when people don't really understand what its all about. A bit like me really, I'm sort of into the whole social networking thing half interested, I will be honest and say I do it to further my business rather than purely for fun. I reckon thats the case for the majority, just the majority of the majority will deny it, at least I'm upfront about it! Looking in a lot of it seems a bit strange. Strange doesn't equal cliquey, but it would be easy for other luddites like myself, trying to drag ourselves into this century, to see it as a closed group not all-embracing and encouraging us to take part.
Again, I'm not saying that is the case (I'm trying very hard not to offend or upset anyone here), but it could look that way and thats where you have to be careful. So, if I come along to one of your meets (I gather they are indeed open to al) would there be someone to meet me outside the venue, maybe even bring me in, show me around, introduce me to people, make me feel like I belong? Or, would I be told where and when and as I enter lots of people look over and smile before carrying on with their conversations? Is the ethos more 'introduce yourself and get stuck in'? If it is it really shouldn't be.
Yes many of not most groups work like that, so be different, different is good and it seems that from the messages before mine people are keen to reach out and welcome people. Do so then, really reach out and don't just give out the day time and venue, ease your new friends in.
As Steve Chapman said lots of people would love to join a group of people like you and learn all these new skills. Nobody was born knowing how to use twitter, facebook (sorry it's 'faycebook' round here isn't it!), how to blog and all the jargon and terminology that comes with it. We all start somewhere, so why not welcome people who are keen to find out? I'm sure between you you could produce an amazing introduction to social media page on a site somewhere that explains everything, helps people to get started, shows them where to go for each system and people could mentor others through the early days - it really wouldn't take long, probably a coffee break for some of the systems. Of course the idea is for people who know a bit about it all and are actively involved, but you might find people who use one or more service but have no idea how to use twitter, for example, so its not JUST for us luddites!
I enjoy the fun side of the internet (to me blogging and social networking are not really fun but I can understand why others would think so), my businesses are web based, but there is a real world product or service. I like to make my money easily, and the internet helps with that, but its a tool to the real money I make in the real world. I find people I want to meet on the internet, for business, friendship (heck I met my current partner on the net in 1999 so I'm not THAT out of touch with it al!) and developing ideas for various groups - I am developing a network of groups to help Dads of autistic kids. Its all made easier by the net, but ultimately its the real world contacts I want, I want to meet them, shale their hand and let them by me a coffee - yes I'm tight! I keep in touch with the help of the net, but generally I need to meet them, I have tried all sorts of collaboration systems like 37Signals' basecamp but you can't beat a proper meeting. And when I meet I don't generally want to talk about the internet as a tool, I want to talk about our reason for meeting. Thats not really what your groups about I would guess, as you want to talk about the tools as much as anything. Is there a place for people like me then? I don't mind if its the wrong type of group, I'm no longer welcome at the local dog club either since they found out I have never owned a dog.... ;)
Lastly, you are a group based around the internet and the powerful tools available to us all, you do have real world meetings but the two really don't have to work in synergy the whole time. You could try meeting and not discussing any of your social networking tools for 1 hour, would be a very tough hour for some, but don't forget many of you are in business, you are out to develop opportunities, business worked well before the internet existed. For those whose entire business is the internet (bogging for example) you might find new skills, new opportunities and new areas that you had never thought of. I meet people on my travels who live for the internet, it feeds them and they feed it, without the net they would simply die, their real word survival skills are non-existent and they know nothing about traditional business. Ask some very successful internet personalities to produce a P&L forecast and they will look at you with a blank stare, sure the net isn't going to vanish but there isn't any reason why people can't make money and survive off line as well as on.
Ultimately its your group and you do what you want with it, there is no magic answer to making people feel welcome, though you could learn from some of the twitter, friendfeed, facebook et al users who have 10's of thousands of followers and friends, most of them don't know how to talk to them, its as if they have become something special and basic social etiquette no longer applies. I doubt it will be long before we hear of people being attacked because they offended a follower on twitter. Don't go in that direction people, you are never too big to be polite and welcome new friends.
Just my thoughts from 'an outsider' point of view.
Marc
You must log in to post.
