Power in Numbers

I love the connection that Anne Driscoll (contributor to Mashable.com) makes in her article “5 Tips for Sparking a Grassroots Movement Online.” She says that social action is easy for those who understand the value of service and helping others. They already devote themselves to making the world a better place and overcoming the odds. What Driscoll says the real trick is “turning that personal motivation into a widespread and impactful movement.” This is where in 2012, social media comes into play big time. Grassroots communities are a way to get actionable success even with limited budgets and resources. If you can make these communities go viral, on a global level, you can increase the power of the movement exponentially.

If we take a look at the recent Occupy Movement, it is apparent that the powerful tool of social media is no secret to grassroots movements. The Occupy group did a fabulous job utilizing social networks like Facebook, Twitter, Foursquare, and Google to rally Americans across the nation to congregate in large cities (and smaller ones) and to fight Wall Street, the wealthy “top 1%” – in other words, “The Man.” There is no question that the effort made an impact from a numbers standpoint. Thousands of people gathered in public parks or other locations in major metropolitan areas like San Francisco, New York, Boston, Miami, and Los Angeles to make their voices heard. Social media played many roles here: gathering people to one location in their region, encouraging a rigorous dialogue, and grabbing the attention of members of the media – both traditional and new.

According to Twitter, “over 100K different hashtags have been used to discuss the Occupy Wall Street movement and similar ‘occupy’ tactics.” Twitter reported the following (sample stats for Occupy Movement):
• Top occupy-related hashtags: #occupywallstreet #ows #occupywallst #occupy #occupyboston
• Up to 330K total hashtags /day, 17K different hashtags daily
• Top cities tweeting occupy hashtags, in order: NYC, LA, DC, SF, Boston,
• Top cities outside US: London, Cairo, Toronto

In my opinion, these high numbers are so absurd, but at the same time very exciting. This shows the power of social media to give momentum to a movement. The following question arises…if the movement was this popular and powerful, why was there so much controversy over media coverage? People argue that the movement got too much, too little, and not the right kind of coverage. They make every argument under the sun. I happen to agree with Capital New York’s Joe Pompeo in his article stating that the movement has received its fair share of publicity. Despite the back and forth quarrel about whether the Occupy movement deserves “top story” status, the fact remains that Google News indexed over 2,000 articles and news stories in the first 10 days of the movement. The A.P. published 30 photos, a half-dozen stories and at least one video in that same time period. Finally, CNN broadcast the story on Newsroom, The Situation Room, Piers Morgan Tonight, and CNN International. If that’s not coverage, I don’t know what is.

The real question here is why the controversy in the first place? What makes the media uncertain about the Occupy story? This boils down to the fundamental elements to a grassroots movement and leveraging the social media tool properly. Like any media story, the Occupy movement needed to have substance, meaning: authenticity, a clear message, and it needed to tell a story – not simply raise an issue (according to Driscoll). Perhaps this final item is what was lacking. Although the Occupy movement did tell a story (it told many, actually) it did not always do so in a clear manner. Facts were not always accurate and the stories did not present one, united message. Much of the time, the movement appeared disorganized and lacking leadership. Without a clear communications team working the front lines, reporters in the media got caught up in many of the smaller side stories and the message was mixed. Of course the average story was important; the entire movement was centered around every day people. However, these people needed to understand why they were doing what they were doing—they needed some guidance. The lack of organization also put the movement at a disadvantage when countering negative PR. I don’t believe that there was manipulation of the media coming from the movement itself, but I do think that there was a bit of anarchy and chaos within the movement that resulted in a lack of control or strategy from a PR perspective. I believe that the media can only be “manipulated” as much as it allows itself to be.

There are many success stories and examples of grassroots movements embracing social media in the world of healthcare. One very interesting example is the interactive healthcare movement led by physicians, themselves. “Interactive Health is transitioning clinical care from real-world, costly encounters to virtual, inexpensive, cloud-based care.” This means that the patient/doctor conversation happens virtually, in a safe online space like HealthTap, instead of in-person as health care delivery has traditionally be done. Ron Gutman points out that when looking at this movement, interactive healthcare is supported by three pillars: quality, access, and care. If these can be sustained at a low cost to provider and patient through an online social movement, all the more reason to move forward. There is great potential for social media to support health movements such as these, especially in areas like global health where access to care can be a great obstacle. I would predict that the challenges here would be the human inclination to resist change, as we move away from traditional care, as well as the legal risks affiliated with Patient Health Information (PIH) and HIPAA laws.

This article is the part of a series of posts that I will make throughout my graduate studies in Marketing and Communications. With a focus on both healthcare and interactive marketing, I hope to gain a better understanding for effective health messaging--which I think plays a key role in a happy, healthy society. Please leave your comments or write to me: camorous@gmail.com.

Sources:
http://mashable.com/2011/08/26/grassroots-online-tips/
http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/is_occupy_wall_street_getting.php?page=all
http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/09/29/occupy-wall-street-12-days-and-little-sign-of-slowing-down/#ixzz1ZLnzPK5c
http://thenextweb.com/twitter/2011/10/21/over-100k-different-hashtags-have-been-used-to-discuss-occupy-wall-street/
http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/media/2011/09/3533389/occupy-wall-street-media-blackout-myth-plenty-stories-none-them-big http://thehealthcareblog.com/blog/2012/02/21/a-new-grassroots-movement-by-doctors/

Understanding Cookies

What are cookies?

Let's be frank. You hear people talk about cookies all the time --no, not the chocolate chip kind, the internet kind. Everyone pretends to know what they are, cause who wants to look like an idiot? But let's face it - do you really understand them? Honestly, I'm not sure I'm there myself. But, I just wrote a short piece on them for class and I thought I'd share this batch : )

Cookies are small data stores that live on a computer's web browser. The browser will use cookies to store data about that user's web activity. According to the BBC's Webwise Blog:

When you visit a site that uses cookies for the first time, a cookie is downloaded onto your PC. The next time you visit that site, your PC checks to see if it has a cookie that is relevant (that is, one containing the site name) and sends the information contained in that cookie back to the site. The site then "knows" that you have been there before, and in some cases, tailors what pops up on screen to take account of that fact. [1]

This means that cookies can store info about the number of times you have visited a page, the length of time that you spent there, what links you clicked, and what types of browsers you prefer to use. This information can help make your user experience easy and more enjoyable by removing duplicate information, remembering favorite info, or giving you the content that you requested in a search.

Benefits

Cookies have enabled online shopping to expand through the use of a shopping cart feature that "remembers" desired items and "holds" those items for you, even if you exit the site. With a login feature that references info in your computer's cookies, you can return to that site and keep browsing with the same contents in your shopping cart.

The information captured through cookies can also provide key intelligence to inform brand-marketing strategy. By understanding what sites a user frequents, how often they visit, and where user's general interests lie, a company can effectively place ads. Ideally, the brand can target the user with ads for a product or item of interest and there is a higher probability that the user will actually click on the ad and generate revenue for the site host and the brand (if the user purchases the product).

This method of targeted advertising can be very cost-effective, as it matches marketing efforts with the targeted audience: an engaged population that is actually seeking the product and looking to fill a need. Cookies also give the brand a great advantage and insight into understanding user behavior. Cookies allow the brand to capture real time research data on the users interest, which can influence their entire strategy, constantly keeping an approach fresh and relevant.

Controversy

There is a downside to cookies, however, which is that users are often skeptical of the idea that information is being stored about them. Many feel that their privacy is infringed upon and this unease can affect a user's trust in a brand. Despite the fact noted by Larisa Thomason from NetMechanic that "Cookies cannot store any personal information about the user that the user doesn't voluntarily supply to the Web site,"[2]  people are still uneasy about the presence of cookies.

Some users dislike the idea of being targeted by marketing campaigns or having their web browser ads tailored to their interests. There has been some controversy over the legality of cookie use.  In the Guardian, Joanna Geary makes the "sneaky" function of a cookie clear:

The cookies that appear to cause the most controversy... are for managing the advertising you see on a website. This is particularly the case when websites set a cookie from a separate advertising delivery company. This cookie can record when and where you saw an advert, where in the world you might have been when it happened and whether you clicked on it. The cookie will send this information to the cookie owner, who records this data and uses it to make sure you don't see the same advert too many times.[3]

The consensus seems to be that cookies are harmless. For users that dislike the idea, there is always the option of blocking cookies-- which may make the web experience less fluid, as many sites do not operate well without cookies. Most sites have a cause within their "Terms and Conditions" that states that by using the site, you are agreeing to download the site cookies. A good site will also take the time to explain how the brand uses cookies and why they do so.

---

[1] http://www.bbc.co.uk/webwise/guides/about-cookies

[2] http://www.netmechanic.com/news/vol3/beginner_no5.htm

[3] http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/apr/23/cookies-and-web-tracking-intro


This article is the part of a series of posts that I will make throughout my graduate studies in Marketing and Communications. With a focus on both healthcare and interactive marketing, I hope to gain a better understanding for effective health messaging--which I think plays a key role in a happy, healthy society. Please leave your comments or write to me: camorous@gmail.com.