Dave Bourgeois' shared items in Google Reader

Facebook Updates Groups: What’s New

(author unknown) — Wed, 27 Apr 2011 10:27:02 PDT

Shared by Dave Bourgeois
Facebook's new "groups" feature could be just the thing for small group ministries.

Facebook announced Monday updates to its Group feature that aim to make the platform a better place to share content within small networks.

Since private photo sharing platform Path and a host of group messaging companies have highlighted the importance of sharing within small groups, it seems Facebook is taking selective sharing more seriously as well.

In October, one month before Path launched, Facebook unveiled a new Groups feature that creates shared spaces where members can participate in communal group chats, email lists, document sharing and photo tagging.

Now the platform is improving this feature, as well as launching a “Send” button that creates a more specific sharing alternative to the all-friends “Like” button.

You can expect to see these updates on Group pages starting Monday.

Admin Control: The Group admin now has an option to maintain new member approval power.
Questions: You can now use Facebook’s new poll-like Questions feature within groups.
Photo Albums: Members of Groups can already share photos with each other easily. Now they can share entire albums the same way.
Group Search: Like Gmail, you can now search through the posts in a Facebook Group to easily find content. This feature will roll out slowly throughout the next week.

What do you think of Facebook’s new Group features? Are there any other features you would like to see? Let us know in the comments.

More About: facebook, Facebook groups

For more Social Media coverage:

Follow Mashable Social Media on Twitter
Become a Fan on Facebook
Subscribe to the Social Media channel
Download our free apps for Android, Mac, iPhone and iPad

10 Ways To Leverage Mobile Technology For Marketing

(author unknown) — Wed, 27 Apr 2011 10:26:03 PDT

Shared by Dave Bourgeois
Here is a good summary of ways to use mobile technologies. It's not just mobile websites and apps!

Mobile websites and apps, of course. But what oher ways can you incorporate mobile technology into your marketing strategy? Here are 10 ideas from the VP of Internet Strategy at Web design and development firm SteadyRain.

Let’s Figure out the Value / ROI (Return-on-Investment) of Social Media

(author unknown) — Wed, 27 Apr 2011 10:23:45 PDT

Shared by Dave Bourgeois
Is social media worth the effort? Check out the poll here.

Social media is all about branding, relationships, and engagement… until you have to justify your use of it.

Let’s get one thing straight: social media is not free.

Even if you’re not spending any money on it, it is costing you your most precious resource: time.

If you’ve got a boss, chances are at some point she’s going to ask you how much time you’re spending on Facebook, Twitter, and blogging, and what you’re producing with that time. If you are the boss, you ought to be asking yourself…

With all the millions of things I could be doing right now, is social media the best use of my time?

When it comes to social media return on investment, or ROI, there are two schools of thought.

Relators. Relators say you can’t put a dollar value on relationships. You can’t put a dollar value on a happy customer who tweets good things about your organization worth. You can’t put a dollar value on a relationship with someone in a complimentary field that could lead to a partnership.

The problem with the relator’s perspective, though, is somebody has to pay the bills. Somebody has to decide how much time and money is going to be invested in social media. How are they to make that decision?

Bottom-liners. Bottom-liners say you can and must determine the dollar value of social media. They figure if you track the source of all sales and determine the dollar value of sales from people who came from social media, you’ve got a hard number you can use for making decisions.

There are lots of problems with the bottom-liner’s perspective though, including:

It’s nearly impossible to accurately track the source of all sales
A person often experiences multiple “touch points” (places where they experiences your brand) on the way to the sale. How do you track them all and determine the relative weight of each?
Social media and blogging affect search rankings. For those customers who find your organization through search, it’s hard to know how much of your search rankings to attribute to blogging and social media.
For churches and non-profits, it can be even more difficult since your bottom line may not be the bottom line.

The million dollar question

The best approach is probably some sort of hybrid approach, where you do your best to calculate the dollar value of social media and then recognize that there is some additional non-monetary value above that. How much, though is hard to say.

That’s where I am, and where I think a lot of both for-profit and non-profit organizations are. We know there is value to social media, but we’re having the darnedest time figuring out how much.

POLL: Take a moment to answer the poll question about social media ROI in the right sidebar. –>

Discussion

Where are you in determining the ROI of your social media efforts? Just experimenting with social media and not worried about ROI? Working to determine ROI? Convinced social media is necessary regardless of ROI?
Do you have any insights or good resources on social media ROI?

The Curation Economy And The 3Cs Of Information Commerce

(author unknown) — Wed, 27 Apr 2011 10:21:13 PDT

Shared by Dave Bourgeois
Are you a content consumer, curator, or creator? Or maybe even one of the elite?

Social networks and the exchanges that take place after sharing a social object set the stage for a new genre of information commerce. These interactions essentially change how we communicate and connect. They also change how we find and share information. And herein lies both the significance of social media and its opportunity.

For Students, What Is the “Facebook Effect” on Grades?

(author unknown) — Wed, 27 Apr 2011 10:18:04 PDT

Shared by Dave Bourgeois
Interesting study on how the use of Facebook affects grades. Students want to collaborate, but they need discipline and direction.

Social media has several effects on academic work — some more positive than others. But what is social networking’s overall impact on college students’ performance?

According to data gathered from several sources by OnlineEducation.net, Facebook and Twitter are used to great benefit — sometimes. Students welcome online engagement and resources; around 75% of student respondents said they’d like to do some online collaboration for class, in fact.

Also, social media may have a positive impact on students’ sense of themselves in the community. Social media-using students were twice as likely as other students to feel well-liked by their peers and to participate in extracurricular activities. And 20% more of Facebook-using students (as compared to students who didn’t use Facebook) said they felt connected to their school and community.

However, negative effects abound. Students who use Facebook and hit the books simultaneously found their multitasking led to 20% lower grades than those of their more focused peers. Facebook-using students also made less money during school from part-time work, putting in around five hours per week as opposed to 16 hours per week for a typical, unplugged counterpart.

Not only do grades and finances suffer, but students might actually end up feeling more depressed or lonely. Almost half of students believe they are sadder than their friends on Facebook, and 25% of college students have shown signs of severe depression in their status updates at one time or another.

In a word, the results are inconclusive. But with around 96% of all college students on Facebook, only the most dedicated academics would consider giving up social media for a slightly better GPA.

In the comments, we’d like to know what impact social media had or has on your academic work. And if your college career pre-dates social media, how do you think college is better or worse because of Facebook?

Click to see larger image.

Lead image based on a photo from iStockphoto, EricHood

More About: education, facebook, infographic, students

Facebook Community Pages and Church Social Media Strategy, part 1

(author unknown) — Mon, 24 May 2010 10:11:55 PDT

Shared by Dave Bourgeois
Good post from Kevin on the problems with Facebook's new "Community Pages".

In April, Facebook quietly introduced “Community Pages“, a new feature that creates common pages for interests, activities, and entities. According to the Facebook blog:

Community Pages are a new type of Facebook Page dedicated to a topic or experience that is owned collectively by the community connected to it. Just like official Pages for businesses, organizations and public figures, Community Pages let you connect with others who share similar interests and experiences.

Amid the outcries against Facebook’s aggressive push to allow public access to all profile data (including personal private information), the introduction of Community Pages has not received much attention. However, this move by Facebook has significant implications for churches and their social media strategy.

Facebook’s Community Page strategy is aimed at creating more content and pages against which Facebook can serve advertisements. How Facebook does this is by automatically aggregating content on new Community Pages by scraping users status updates and importing content from existing Wikipedia pages and the result is a centralized page around a specific topic. As you can see for the new Unconventional Method Community Page (pictured above), statuses that contain the phrase “unconventional method” are being automatically displayed regardless of their relevance.

Community for bots

However, despite Facebook’s claim that these topical pages are “owned collectively by the community connected to it“, there is currently no way (as far as I can tell) for anyone outside of Facebook to influence or control what content is displayed on the page. In fact, individual Facebook users are often unaware that their private status updates are publicly visible on these Community Pages. A (hilarious) example of this is the “My Stupid Boss” Community Page which displays status updates that contain the words “my”, “stupid”, and “boss” in them. Now your private Facebook rants may be visible to everyone without your knowledge or consent.

What does this mean for churches?

What little control you have on Facebook is being further eroded.

Facebook has shown consistent disregard for privacy and control over information and is aggressively pushing forward with feature updates with the end goal of being the information currency system of the entire web. Will Facebook succeed and become the central hub for all personal activity online? Probably not, but it’s clear that because of Facebook’s popularity and its “it’s better to ask forgiveness than permission” approach Facebook will access and use information about you and your church for it’s own purposes, without your permission, and with little recourse available for what they do.

You have no control over your church’s Community Page

It appears that every aspect of the creation and updating of a Community Page is entirely automated by Facebook. Currently, neither your church nor your community of supporters has any ability to influence the page directly.

The way Facebook is creating these Community Pages can only be described as “sneaky“. Instead of having users initiate page creation, Facebook introduced a process by which users can inadvertently and unknowingly initiate a page’s creation. Recently, logged-in users have been redirected to a page which asks them which pages they would like to link to their profile. The choices appear to be generated from the user’s profile information (e.g. employment and education) and are all selected when the page appears.

Facebook does state that linking to certain pages “may also create additional Pages“, but it is not immediately obvious what this means. I believe Facebook is hoping users will not pay much attention to what’s happening, resulting in the creation of more Community Pages. Since this confirmation page loads automatically, disrupting the user’s activities on the site, it is very likely that users will simply click “Save Changes” to return to what they were previously doing. Additionally, the options that are presented correspond with existing information that the user has provided, so a natural assumption is that linking will just confirm what is already in place.

Once created, Facebook is posting a message to visitors of each page which imply that some level of influence will given to Facebook users in the future. The message asks you to indicate your interest by signing up but no indication is given of when users will be invited to contribute nor the level of influence they will have.

Platform changes are frequent and unpredictable

Moves like this one and Facebook’s recent half-step that restricted the ability to set up custom landing tabs, show that Facebook’s drive for profitability has the company barreling forward with platform changes with little to no regard for organizations that rely on the social network. We can expect this to be the norm moving forward. The challenge becomes that just when you think you’ve got Facebook figured out and are starting to achieve real ministry impact and ROI, Facebook is likely to change the rules on you. Churches will need to be agile if they expect to keep up.

Should churches abandon Facebook?

I’ve argued in the past that Facebook is important because it is where people are. Does the fact that Facebook keeps changing the rules of the game mean that churches should abandon the platform entirely?

No. But churches need to have realistic expectations of how Facebook will work with them. Churches should not expect for Facebook to be aligned with their interests. Despite being the world’s largest “social” network, Facebook is and always be a business. We should not expect Facebook’s profit motive to ever be subordinate to our churches’ people-motives.

For that reason, a church should also never find ourselves in a position where it is completely reliant on Facebook for it’s social media strategy. Churches and ministries that are seeking to change lives and serve the common good must always be thinking “beyond web”. Because of it’s popularity and prevalence in our society, it is easy for churches to make Facebook the only platform for their web strategy. This is a short-sighted strategy and will ultimately leave churches at the mercy of Facebook’s business plan. An effective church social media strategy engages through diverse social media platforms.

How to best use Facebook

Understanding the true nature of the organization is Facebook will tp define the real opportunities for churches and will shape church social media strategies. In Part 2 I will dig into the implications of these changes for churches and point out some strategies for making sure taking advantage of new opportunities that are being created.

Related posts:

Quitting Facebook is pointless; challenging them to do better is not

(author unknown) — Mon, 24 May 2010 10:07:46 PDT

Shared by Dave Bourgeois
danah makes some great points abut Facebook. Interesting...and long!

I’ve been critiquing moves made by Facebook for a long time and I’m pretty used to them being misinterpreted. When I lamented the development of the News Feed, many people believed that I thought that the technology was a failure and that it wouldn’t be popular. This was patently untrue. I was bothered by it precisely because I knew that it would be popular, precisely because people love to gossip and learn about others, often to their own detriment. It was hugely disruptive and, when it launched, users lacked the controls necessary to really manage the situation effectively. Facebook responded with controls and people were able to find a way of engaging with Facebook with the News Feed as a given. But people were harmed in the transition.

Last week, I offered two different critiques of the moves made by Facebook, following up on my SXSW talk. Both have been misinterpreted in fascinating ways. Even news agencies are publishing statements like: “Microsoft wants Facebook to be regulated as a utility.” WTF? Seriously? Le sigh. (For the record, I’m not speaking on behalf of my employer nor do I want regulation; I think that it’s inevitable and I think that we need to contend with it. Oh, and I don’t think that the regulation that we’ll see will at all resemble the ways in which utilities are regulated. I was talking about utilities because that’s how Facebook frames itself. But clearly, most folks missed that.) Misinterpretations are frustrating because they make me feel as though I’m doing a bad job of communicating what I think is important. For this, I apologize to all of you. I will try to do better.

With this backdrop in mind, I want to enumerate six beliefs that I have that I want to flesh out in this post in light of discussions about how “everyone” is leaving Facebook:

I do not believe that people will (or should) leave Facebook because of privacy issues.
I do not believe that the tech elites who are publicly leaving Facebook will affect on the company’s numbers; they are unrepresentative and were not central users in the first place.
I do not believe that an alternative will emerge in the next 2-5 years that will “replace” Facebook in any meaningful sense.
I believe that Facebook will get regulated and I would like to see an open discussion of what this means and what form this takes.
I believe that a significant minority of users are at risk because of decisions Facebook has made and I think that those of us who aren’t owe it to those who are to work through these issues.
I believe that Facebook needs to start a public dialogue with users and those who are concerned ASAP (and Elliot Schrage’s Q&A doesn’t count).

As I stated in my last post, I think that Facebook plays a central role in the lives of many and I think that it is unreasonable for anyone to argue that they should “just leave” if they’re not happy. This is like saying that people should just leave their apartments if they’re not happy with their landlord or just leave their spouse because they’re not happy with a decision or just leave their job if they’re not happy with their boss. Life is more complicated than a series of simplified choices and we are always making calculated decisions, balancing costs and benefits. We stay with our jobs, apartments, and spouses even when things get messy because we hope to rectify problems. And those with the most to gain from Facebook are the least likely to leave, even if they also have the most to lose.

In the last few weeks, a handful of well known digerati have proudly announced that they’ve departed from Facebook. Most of these individuals weren’t that engaged in Facebook as users in the first place. I say this as someone who would lose very little (outside of research knowledge) from leaving. I am not a representative user. I barely share on the site for a whole host of personal and professional reasons. (And because I don’t have a life.) None of my friends would miss me if I did leave. In fact, they’d probably be grateful for the disappearance of my tweets. That means that me deciding to leave will have pretty much no impact on the network. This is true for many of the people who I’ve watched depart. At best, they’re content broadcasters. But people have other ways of consuming their broadcasting. So their departure is meaningless. These are not the people that Facebook is worried about losing.

People will not leave Facebook en masse, even if a new site were to emerge. Realistically, if that were enough, they could go to MySpace or Orkut or Friendster or Tribe. But they won’t. And not just because those sites are no longer “cool.” They won’t because they’ve invested in Facebook and they’re still hoping that Facebook will get its act together. Changing services is costly, just like moving apartments or changing jobs or breaking up in general. The deeper the relationship, the harder it is to simply walk away. And the relationship that Facebook has built with many of its users is very very very deep. When transition costs are high, people work hard to change the situation so that they don’t have to transition. This is why people are complaining, this is why they are speaking up. And it’s really important that those in power listen to what it is that people are upset about. The worst thing that those in power can do is ignore what’s going on, waiting for it to go away. This is a bad idea, not because people will walk away, but because they will look to greater authorities of power to push back. This is why Facebook’s failure to address what’s going on invites regulation.

Facebook has gotten quite accustomed to upset users. In “The Facebook Effect,” David Kirkpatrick outlines how Facebook came to expect that every little tweak would set off an internal rebellion. He documented how most of the members of the group “I AUTOMATICALLY HATE THE NEW FACEBOOK HOME PAGE” were employees of Facebook whose frustration with user rebellion was summed up by the group’s description: “I HATE CHANGE AND EVERYTHING ASSOCIATED WITH IT. I WANT EVERYTHING TO REMAIN STATIC THROUGHOUT MY ENTIRE LIFE.” Kirkpatrick quotes Zuckerberg as saying, “The biggest thing is going to be leading the user base through the changes that need to continue to happen… Whenever we roll out any major product there’s some sort of backlash.” Unfortunately, Facebook has become so numb to user complaints that it doesn’t see the different flavors of them any longer.

What’s happening around privacy is not simply user backlash. In fact, users are far less upset about what’s going on than most of us privileged techno-elites. Why? Because even with the New York Times writing article after article, most users have no idea what’s happening. I’m reminded of this every time that I sit down with someone who doesn’t run in my tech circles. And I’m reminded that they care every time I sit down and walk them through their privacy settings. The disconnect between average users and the elite is what makes this situation different, what makes this issue messier. Because the issue comes down to corporate transparency, informed consent, and choice. As long as users believe that their content is private and have no idea how public it is, they won’t take to the streets. A disappearance of publicity for these issues is to Facebook’s advantage. But it’s not to user’s advantage. Which is precisely why I think that it’s important that the techno-elite and the bloggers and the journalists keep covering this topic. Because it’s important that more people are aware of what’s going on. Unfortunately, of course, we also have to contend with the fact that most people being screwed don’t speak English and have no idea this conversation is even happening. Especially when privacy features are only explained in English.

In documenting Zuckerberg’s attitudes about transparency, Kirkpatrick sheds light on one of the weaknesses of his philosophy: Zuckerberg doesn’t know how to resolve the positive (and in his head inevitable) outcomes of transparency with the possible challenges of surveillance. As is typical in the American tech world, most of the conversation about surveillance centers on the government. But Kirkpatrick highlights another outcome of surveillance with a throwaway example that sends shivers down my spine: “When a father in Saudi Arabia caught his daughter interacting with men on Facebook, he killed her.” This is precisely the kind of unintended consequence that motivates me to speak loudly even though I’m privileged enough to not face these risks. Statistically, death is an unlikely outcome of surveillance. But there are many other kinds of side effects that are more common and also disturbing: losing one’s job, losing one’s health insurance, losing one’s parental rights, losing one’s relationships, etc. Sometimes, these losses will be because visibility makes someone more accountable. But sometimes this will occur because of misinterpretation and/or overreaction. And the examples keep on coming.

I am all in favor of people building what they believe to be alternatives to Facebook. I even invested in Diaspora because I’m curious what will come of that system. But I don’t believe that Diaspora is a Facebook killer. I do believe that there is a potential for Diaspora to do something interesting that will play a different role in the ecosystem and I look forward to seeing what they develop. I’m also curious about the future of peer-to-peer systems in light of the move towards the cloud, but I’m not convinced that decentralization is a panacea to all of our contemporary woes. Realistically, I don’t think that most users around the globe will find a peer-to-peer solution worth the hassle. The cost/benefit analysis isn’t in their favor. I’m also patently afraid that a system like Diaspora will be quickly leveraged for child pornography and other more problematic uses that tend to emerge when there isn’t a centralized control system. But innovation is important and I’m excited that a group of deeply passionate developers are being given a chance to see what they can pull off. And maybe it’ll be even more fabulous than we can possibly imagine, but I’d bet a lot of money that it won’t put a dent into Facebook. Alternatives aren’t the point.

Facebook has embedded itself pretty deeply into the ecosystem, into the hearts and minds of average people. They love the technology, but they’re not necessarily prepared for where the company is taking them. And while I’m all in favor of giving users the choice to embrace the opportunities and potential of being highly visible, of being a part of a transparent society, I’m not OK with throwing them off the boat just to see if they can swim. Fundamentally, my disagreement with Facebook’s approach to these matters is a philosophical one. Do I want to create more empathy, more tolerance in a global era? Of course. But I’m not convinced that sudden exposure to the world at large gets people there and I genuinely fear that possible backlash that can emerge. I’m not convinced that this won’t enhance a type of extremism that is manifesting around the globe as we speak.

Screaming about the end of Facebook is futile. And I think that folks are wasting a lot of energy telling others to quit or boycott to send a message. Doing so will do no such thing. It’ll just make us technophiles look like we’re living on a different planet. Which we are. Instead, I think that we should all be working to help people understand what’s going on. I love using Reclaim Privacy to walk through privacy settings with people. While you’re helping your family and friends understand their settings, talk to them and record their stories. I want to hear average people’s stories, their fears, their passions. I want to hear what privacy means to them and why they care about it. I want to hear about the upside and downside of visibility and the challenges introduced by exposure. And I want folks inside Facebook to listen. Not because this is another user rebellion, but because Facebook’s decisions shape the dynamics of so many people’s lives. And we need to help make those voices heard.

I also want us techno-elites to think hard and deep about the role that regulation may play and what the consequences may be for all of us. In thinking about regulation, always keep Larry Lessig’s arguments in “Code” in mind. Larry argued that there are four points of regulation for all change: the market, the law, social norms, and architecture (or code). Facebook’s argument is that social norms have changed so dramatically that what they’re doing with code aligns with the people (and conveniently the market). I would argue that they’re misreading social norms but there’s no doubt that the market and code work in their favor. This is precisely why I think that law will get involved and I believe that legal regulators don’t share Facebook’s attitudes about social norms. This is not a question of if but a question of when, in what form, and at what cost. And I think that all of us who are living and breathing this space should speak up about how we think this should play out because if we just pretend like it won’t happen, not only are we fooling ourselves, but we’re missing an opportunity to shape the future.

I realize that Elliot Schrage attempted to communicate with the public through his NYTimes responses. And I believe that he failed. But I’m still confused about why Zuckerberg isn’t engaging publicly about these issues. (A letter to Robert Scoble doesn’t count.) In each major shitstorm, we eventually got a blog post from Zuckerberg outlining his views. Why haven’t we received one of those? Why is the company so silent on these matters? In inviting the users to vote on the changes to the Terms of Service, Facebook mapped out the possibility of networked engagement, of inviting passionate users to speak back and actively listening. This was a huge success for Facebook. Why aren’t they doing this now? I find the silence to be quite eerie. I cannot imagine that Facebook isn’t listening. So, Facebook, if you are listening, please start a dialogue with the public. Please be transparent if you’re asking us to be. And please start now, not when you’ve got a new set of features ready.

Regardless of how the digerati feel about Facebook, millions of average people are deeply wedded to the site. They won’t leave because the cost/benefit ratio is still in their favor. But that doesn’t mean that they aren’t suffering because of decisions being made about them and for them. What’s at stake now is not whether or not Facebook will become passe, but whether or not Facebook will become evil. I think that we owe it to the users to challenge Facebook to live up to a higher standard, regardless of what we as individuals may gain or lose from their choices. And we owe it to ourselves to make sure that everyone is informed and actively engaged in a discussion about the future of privacy. Zuckerberg is right: “Given that the world is moving towards more sharing of information, making sure that it happens in a bottom-up way, with people inputting their information themselves and having control over how their information interacts with the system, as opposed to a centralized way, through it being tracked in some surveillance system. I think it’s critical for the world.” Now, let’s hold him to it.

Update: Let me be clear… Anyone who wants to leave Facebook is more than welcome to do so. Participation is about choice. But to assume that there will be a mass departure is naive. And to assume that a personal boycott will have a huge impact is also naive. But if it’s not working for you personally, leave. And if you don’t think it’s healthy for your friends to participate, encourage them to do so too. Just do expect a mass exodus to fix the problems that we’re facing.

Update: Mark Zuckerberg wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post reiterating their goals and saying that changes will be coming. I wish he would’ve apologized for December or made any allusions to the fact that people were exposed or that they simply can’t turn off all that is now public. It’s not just about simplifying the available controls.

How Non-Profits are Using Social Media for Real Results

(author unknown) — Mon, 03 May 2010 17:17:14 PDT

Shared by Dave Bourgeois
Some good insight into using social media by non-profits.

The Real Results series is supported by Gist, an online service that helps you build stronger relationships. By connecting your inbox to the web, you get business-critical information about key people and companies. See how it works here.

While non-profits may not allocate extra funds to stakeholders, charitable organizations still have a bottom line — to spread their message and accomplish their mission. To do this, strategic planning, which includes digital outreach, is involved. That’s why a growing number of non-profits are using social media to draw attention to their goals.

We talked to successful non-profit leaders about how they’re using social media to achieve real results for their cause. From spreading awareness about the issues to connecting with other non-profits and sharing the stories of their constituents, non-profits are finding that social media can be a huge help in achieving their objectives.

Increasing Brand Awareness

The word non-profit isn’t the sexiest term on the street, but some activists and advocates are changing that by associating with well-known brands. The team at the non-profit Enchanted Makeovers, which reinvents shelters for women and children, leveraged the Martha Stewart label — a name synonymous with peaceful domesticity — to build their own brand. Enchanted Makeovers president and founder Terry Grahl used Martha Stewart’s Dreamers into Doers social networking site to connect with inspired women from around the country.

The Enchanted Makeovers staff, which was formed entirely through communicating via social media, reaches out to crafters and artists from all over the world to lend their creativity and talent in transforming shelters. Grahl says they’ve also used social media tools to inspire and mentor others, in places as far away as Singapore and Australia, to make a difference at their local shelters.

Inspiring others to pursue their dreams in spite of any obstacles is the primary mission of the Life Rolls On Foundation (LRO), founded in 1999 by Jesse Billauer and his brother Josh Billauer. In 1996, Surfer Magazine named Jesse one of the top up-and-coming wave riders in the world. That same year, he had a surfing accident, which rendered him quadriplegic. Determined to live his life to the fullest and to encourage others to do the same, Jesse became a motivational speaker after he was injured, while he and Josh established LRO to advocate for youth with spinal chord injury.

Through the power of online video, LRO’s small staff of three people and numerous volunteers around the world have built a brand famous within the surfing community and beyond.

In 2006, LRO produced an Emmy-nominated PSA, attracting recognition from the entertainment industry and raking in more support.

Life Rolls On CEO Kris Nakamura says the foundation grew its grass-roots supporter base “entirely through MySpace and online video.” By cultivating its online presence and communicating consistently with its volunteers around the world, LRO has inspired people from coast to coast to host LRO events, such as They Will Surf Again.

Disclosure: The author of this piece has volunteered with Life Rolls On.

Connecting with the Broader Non-profit Community

Because non-profits with similar causes are often in competition for the same funds, many times organizations are less likely to collaborate with one another. Fortunately, some groups are bridging the gap and joining forces for the greater good through social media.

Working to find a cure for paralysis, LRO merged with the Christopher and Dana Reeve Foundation in 2009, extending the reach of both organizations. The Southern California-based non-profit Free Arts is following suit, and using social networking to partner with groups who share similar messages. Free Arts Development Director Annie D. Armbrust says she always has her eye out for what other organizations are doing with their social media campaigns. “We especially rely on the insight and partnership of First 5 LA, the Free Arts affiliates in other cities, and many other groups for new ideas,” said Armbrust.

Armbrust explained that setting up social media accounts triggered an easy flow of communication. “By creating a Facebook persona representing our organization, we were able to connect with many of our volunteers via a site they already accessed on a regular basis,” said Armbrust. “For several months, we encouraged volunteers to join a Google Group, but this venture was unsuccessful because we were asking members of our community to engage in a site that they wouldn’t have gone to otherwise.”

Angela Shelton, founder of the Angela Shelton Foundation, an advocate for survivors of sexual abuse and domestic violence, met non-profits across the country that all had the same mission. While promoting her documentary “Searching for Angela Shelton,” Shelton saw a number of survivors of sexual abuse come together through social media.

“About 175 to 500 supporters of mine from around the country took social media and ran with it when they formed the Army of Angels, a community of women who support and raise money for my foundation and for other groups, such as Darkness to Light. While I was traveling I met so many non-profits that were combating sexual abuse, but they weren’t working together.”

By connecting with like-minded non-profits, Shelton’s group is seeing positive results. Through developing relationships with other non-profits and activists with the same cause and putting on 24-hour vlogathons, Shelton’s Army of Angels surpassed their fundraising goals, for example.

Knowing Your Audience

Getting to know an audience is important for any non-profit. The San Francisco Symphony, the first major American orchestra to build and launch its own social network, is taking that imperative to a deeper level using social media platforms.

The symphony hired Jean Shirk to integrate social media in the organization’s overall marketing plan. She says the biggest reason she’s embracing social media is because “traditional media have changed so much. “One big benefit is the fact that social media tools are readily available and inexpensive,” said Shirk. “We can promote and use our own content, and understand our audience more deeply as a result.”

In 2009, for example, the SF Symphony held an online contest for members of the community to win tickets to the group’s 2009-2010 opening gala with pianist Lang Lang. To enter the contest, more than 70 people wrote stories and created videos that conveyed their passion for classical music. In addition to eliciting engagement among the community, the competition sparked conversation about the importance of music in people’s lives.

Grahl agrees that sharing stories and insight is one of the best uses of social media in the non-profit arena. “Social media for me is not about the numbers,” Grahl asserted. “It’s about how you can engage the other person to feel they are personally on the journey with you.”

Shelton also feels that social media has allow her to connect better with her constituents and allowed them to connect with each other.

“For me, social Media has been an outstanding success,” she said. “Through my live Sunday shows, I have taught women who were scared of the Internet how to Twitter. They are now in Twitter mania and have now surpassed simply retweeting me. They’re engaging with each other and reaching out to the world at large. Many of them have started blogs and are sharing their own stories. The myth that social media does not build real relationships is totally that – a myth. Being engaged has helped myself and these women begin real relationships and helped them with their healing tremendously.”

Conclusion

While many non-profits still have a long way to go, the implementation of social media in their campaigns is helping these organizations meet and exceed many different goals. While some groups may measure their social media success based on how much money they raise online, other non-profits may assess their wins according to how many new volunteers they recruit, or how much more dialogue is shared among the community.

Of course, social media tools are not magic wands that will transform a non-profit or any business overnight. Social media platforms are simply additional channels, which non-profits can use to market their messages and their needs. Any magic that transpires is an act of the people who listen and learn from the stories of non-profits and their supporters via the Internet and beyond.

Series supported by Gist

Gist helps you build stronger professional relationships by bringing together information from across the web for all your contacts and their companies giving you the right information at the right moment to get a first meeting, deliver an amazing pitch, or just find a better way to make a connection. Gist does all the work for you, assembling a dynamic collection of all your contacts and their companies from your email inbox, your social networks, or even your CRM system automatically building and updating their profiles as new content is published – by them or about them.

For more social media coverage, follow Mashable Social Media on Twitter or become a fan on Facebook

Image courtesy of iStockphoto, hidesy

Reviews: Australia, Facebook, Internet, MySpace, Twitter, iStockphoto

Tags: non-profit, non-profits, real results, social good, social media

5 Reasons Google and Search Won’t Dominate The Next Decade

(author unknown) — Sat, 01 May 2010 17:32:03 PDT

Shared by Dave Bourgeois
Another article about the demise of search...

Yuli Ziv is the founder & CEO of Style Coalition, a network of independent online publishers in the fashion and lifestyle vertical, based in NYC. She blogs on social media, entrepreneurship and tech at YuliZiv.com. Follow her on Twitter @yuliz.

Over the past few years, there has been an underlying shift in the way we use technology in our lives. This could be simply described as moving from user-initiated (search) to auto-serving (suggestions) technologies, and it’s about to change the way we live, communicate, make money, shop, collaborate and more. Instead of actively searching for things, we will be presented with them, as we live our lives.

Facebook’s new “instant personalization” is just the beginning of an era in which we will slowly allow more and more technologies to shape our discovery and decision processes. As they become more integral to our lives, search as an activity will become less relevant. Here is why.

1. The Search Process is Inefficient

Most of the technologies and platforms we use these days require our action. In order to achieve anything, we have to acknowledge the need, make a decision, and then follow through.

Example: You need a new swimsuit for the summer and you decide to find one that best matches your search criteria: Color, style, size, etc. You use Google, ShopStyle, TheFind, or any other smart shopping engine. This simple task requires a bit of thought and effort on your part.

What if you could skip this process and let technology offer you the perfect swimsuit once the summer season arrives, without asking you to take any action?

2. Mobile GPS Eliminates the Need for Location-Based Search

Let’s look at location searches and the hottest startup of the moment –- Foursquare. In order to enjoy the rewards and badges of this location-based game, users are required to manually “check-in” at various places via GPS-enabled phones. All it requires is our confirmation, though this is likely to become automated in the future as geo-location technology becomes more precise.

Once Foursquare overcomes the user-initiation block, it will be able to offer you places on the go, according to your preferences. Are you on the corner of 44th street and 6th avenue? There is a nice coffee place on the block, and according to your last 10 check-ins, you must love coffee.

We already see some mobile applications changing these behavior patterns. Dating is one of the first verticals killing the search function. By using GPS technology, mobile startups such as Urban Signals connect strangers on the go, as they live their lives and walk on the streets of their neighborhoods. Right now, they are powered by instant human connection –- when you see someone you like, you send a signal and connect. But what if the device was actually signaling you when you walk by someone who could be a good match?

3. Social Matching Could Create Valuable Connections

Beyond dating, the same principles could be applied to the ways we do business, shop, and consume information. Instead of initiating the actions, we could simply receive opportunities based on our preferences and lifestyle.

Imagine a mobile app created for networking events which allows you to skip useless intros and irrelevant pitches, and instead connect directly with people who match your business goals (a natural evolution for LinkedIn). Or consider a web service that automatically matches people on the same mission, which would be great for social organizations and non-profits.

For example, one of your friends is very passionate about sustainability and another is an organic clothes designer. Professionally, they are only separated by few degrees, and their social data shows that they live in the same neighborhood. Combined, they could do a world of social good, but unless you think about introducing them, they might never connect.

By allowing technologies to make auto-matches from the group pool of social networks, we could create a more networked and efficient society by connecting like-minded people.

4. Content Recommendations to Replace Search

The same approach could be used for consuming content. Instead of scanning newspapers, magazines, RSS feeds, blogs and Twitter streams, only to find a fraction of the content matching our interests, we could have the best matches delivered to us, as it’s created, and filtered by our relevant social data.

It’s already happening on social platforms like Facebook and Twitter, where we get content recommendations from our friends and followers. Last week, Facebook’s Open Graph launch took the next step and opened a two-way street between the network itself and the larger web. In addition to providing an “instant personalization,” it is turning all of us to “instant curators.”

Assuming you’ve built a network of people with similar interests, you may never have to search for content again. You can simply rely on your network to deliver the top news to you, or point you in the right direction when visiting your favorite destinations.

Of course, this system still requires someone to discover and share content in the first place, and search is one of the ways to do so. But it’s only a matter of time until new technologies fill in the gaps left by your network, and ensure you receive every piece of relevant content from across the web, prioritized accordingly.

5. Suggestions Will Be the Core of Our Shopping Experience

Shopping is the best space to adopt suggestion technologies. If you’ve ever tried searching for an item of clothing or a gadget, you probably got lost in thousands of product choices, only a fraction of which would suit your needs.

What if new gadgets were selectively offered to you, based on your characteristics as they come out to the market? What if new clothes came to your inbox every season according to your taste and budget?

Even today, universal social platforms like Facebook are able to provide enough personal data for a variety of technologies to automate these common processes, essentially replacing our need to search.

Will Google Catch Up?

It’s not a coincidence that Facebook has begun to surpass Google as the most visited site in the U.S. The shift will continue as we change our behavior from searching for things to discovering things through our social networks and geo-location services.

Although Google does try to make its search more social by adding results from the major networks, much of their focus still rests in “people searching for things.” If this behavior changes, it might put a big question mark on the future of this empire.

At this point, Google still has a chance to adapt to the new decade. After all, they do index nearly all online content, products, businesses and even locations via Google Maps. The question is how they use the data they collect. The faster they understand this shift in human behavior, the more chance they have to stay in the game when search becomes a far less important task.

For more social media coverage, follow Mashable Social Media on Twitter or become a fan on Facebook

More social media resources from Mashable:

- Facebook vs. Google: The Billion Dollar Battle to Be Your Default Social Profile
- Why Schools are Turning to Google Apps
- Nobody Can Stop Facebook Because Nobody Understands Facebook
- Facebook Open Graph: What it Means for Privacy
- How Social Media Can Effect Real Social and Governmental Change

Reviews: Facebook, Foursquare, Google, Google Maps, LinkedIn, Twitter

Tags: facebook, foursquare, Google, location-based, Mobile 2.0, Search, shopping, social media, social networks, suggestions, twitter

Google’s Nightmare: Facebook “Like” Replaces Links

(author unknown) — Sat, 01 May 2010 17:30:05 PDT

Shared by Dave Bourgeois
Something to be thinking about...will SEO be replaced by FLO ("Facebook Like Optimization")?

Facebook this week announced that 50,000+ sites have implemented its “social plugins” in the week since launch.

With “like” buttons permeating the web, and Facebook’s intent to connect everything online using this new form of “social link”, should Google be concerned?

After all, if “liking” surpasses linking as the way to express interest in a piece of content, surely Google loses access to the best source of what’s good online? Is this the beginning of the end for Google’s PageRank algorithm?

That’s the topic of my CNN column this week.

Check out the column at CNN.com >>

Reviews: Facebook, Google

Tags: cnn, facebook, mashable

YouTube’s First Video Uploaded Five Years Ago Today

(author unknown) — Wed, 28 Apr 2010 15:51:23 PDT

Shared by Dave Bourgeois
Can you believe YouTube is only five years old?

Although YouTube’s birthday is officially February 14, 2005, the first video was actually uploaded to the site exactly five years ago, on April 23, 2005.

The video is titled “Me at the zoo.” It was shot by Yakov Lapitsky and it’s only 19 seconds long, showing one of YouTube’s founders, Jawed Karim, at the San Diego Zoo.

The video doesn’t look like much, but it sparked a revolution; by July 2006, more than 65,000 videos were uploaded to the site every day. In October that same year Google acquired YouTube for $1.65 billion — a reminder of how fast things move in the age of the Internet.

See the first ever YouTube video below.

For more social media coverage, follow Mashable Social Media on Twitter or become a fan on Facebook

Reviews: Facebook, Google, Twitter, YouTube

Tags: trending, video, youtube

More Than Half of Mobile Internet Time Is Spent on Social Networks [STATS]

(author unknown) — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 10:17:42 PDT

Shared by Dave Bourgeois
More stats to support the trend: mobile and social is where it is at.

A recent study by Ground Truth, a mobile measurement firm, revealed that approximately 60% of the time spent on the mobile Internet is spent on social networking sites and apps. Users spent only about 14% of mobile Internet time on portals, the second most popular category.

“The disparity of time spent between social networking and the next category, portals, which account for 59.83 and 13.65 percent of time spent respectively, is a vivid illustration of the impact social networking has on Mobile Internet traffic in a given week,” observed Vice President of Marketing Evan Neufeld.

The data was gathered over a one-week period, March 28 to April 4, from 3.05 million mobile phone users in the U.S.

The study also revealed that social networking platforms designed for mobile, like MocoSpace and AirG, have higher engagement levels than platforms geared primarily for PC access, like Facebook and MySpace. Users of MocoSpace and AirG spent nearly three times as many minutes on those platforms than users of Facebook, and more than double the amount of time users interacted with MySpace on their mobile devices.

The latter suggests that there are opportunities for much greater engagement on both Facebook and MySpace via mobile. AirG and MocoSpace are chat-based platforms. Given the amount of time users spend engaging with those services each week, Facebook and MySpace may want to look into including greater chat functionality with their apps.

What do you think of the results? How else do you think major social networking sites like Facebook and MySpace can improve their mobile offerings?

For more mobile coverage, follow Mashable Mobile on Twitter or become a fan on Facebook

Reviews: Facebook, MySpace, Twitter

Tags: airg, facebook, Mobile 2.0, mocospace, myspace, social media, social networking, stats

3 Ways for Your Ministry to Generate Income via Live Broadcasts

(author unknown) — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 09:35:16 PDT

Shared by Dave Bourgeois
Have you thought about live streaming different parts of your ministries? Here some good reasons to think about it.

This might sound a bit strange for a second but just stay with me.

As I recently covered here on 3 Reasons Your Ministry Should Consider Live Streaming, there’s definitely a value-proposition to having this feature and technology as a part of your ministry.

But somehow the lights have to stay on, right?

For most ministries a live broadcast won’t be “self-sustaining” for a long time. What I mean specifically by self-sustaining is that the live broadcast itself and monies brought in directly from it keep the lights on without help from other parts of the larger ministry.

Many ministries will probably never get there, and that’s ok. You’re not doing it for a revenue stream anyways, right?

But here are 3 things to think about in terms of “income” when it comes to live broadcasts:

1. Online Giving

This one’s obvious. People who engage with your live broadcasts should have an opportunity to give, both guests/visitors and members of the congregation.

Make it easy and inoffensive. Don’t force it down people’s throats and definitely make it opt-in.

2. Movement Toward a Local Institution

This one is powerful as well. Many ministry’s have it as a goal to bring online viewers into local bodies and churches. I personally believe that every online ministry should encourage people to get offline at some point (if physically possible) and to join a local gathering.

Obviously this will increase your attendance and hopefully, God willing, your giving. The point here is that online/live broadcasts can reach a wider audience and through strategic initiatives and guidance bring them to your church (or others).

3. Content, Media, and Products

Some ministries have the blessed opportunity to promote products and media either through rich multimedia (DVD Series) and/or books by authors and/or the pastors/staff.

By setting up a simple ecommerce engine a ministry could promote products that’ll enrich people’s lives.

This is obviously another possible income stream through live broadcasting.

It might be “weird” thinking about making money through online channels but it’s within reason and within your power to do so.

Just remember to do it wisely, not to look like you’re selling something or being a salesman, and always seek to give more than you take.

Any thoughts?

We are powered by Media Temple.

Want to Advertise Here? Contact Us!

HOW TO: Boost Your SEO with a YouTube Channel

(author unknown) — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 18:24:44 PDT

Shared by Dave Bourgeois
Great insights into how to use YouTube as a way to boost your search engine results.

Mitchell Harper is co-founder of BigCommerce, a leading provider of shopping cart software used by more than 40,000 organizations worldwide. Mitchell has written and published over 300 articles relating to software development, marketing, business, social media and entrepreneurship.

While many companies are still focusing SEO efforts on their websites, there are many other ways to boost search results, especially since results are now comprised of all kinds of content, including videos, images, maps, business listings, tweets and even Facebook Page posts.

So how do you expand your efforts without breaking the bank? To boost SEO, consider creating a YouTube channel. Every video you post to your channel can be tagged and indexed, increasing the odds your brand name will appear in natural searches for keywords associated with your business.

Creating your own channel is pretty simple — here are four easy steps to kick things off right.

Step 1: Choose Your Topics

You might be thinking “Who would want to watch a video about what I sell?” Well, the answer is probably a lot of people, but they won’t want to watch “commercials” about your products on YouTube. Instead, people will appreciate informative or entertaining videos about your products that illustrate how to choose the ones for their needs, how to use or fix them, and what special features are available.

But don’t stop there. Consider what other expertise you can offer beyond your products. Whatever business you’re in, you’re probably an expert at what you do, so share your knowledge. For example:

If you sell women’s apparel, record videos showing how you choose your merchandise, interview local designers or even create how-to videos on coordinating outfits.
If you sell specialty cookies, record a few different videos about where you source your ingredients, how you bake your cookies, and how you package them for shipping.
If you sell wine, record videos of yourself opening, tasting and critiquing the different products you sell. Or, help viewers pair featured wines with seasonal meals.

With a bit of creative thinking, you can come up with some really interesting ideas that would be a perfect fit for a regular or even semi-regular video series.

Though it doesn’t specifically use YouTube, take a look at Gary Veynerchuck’s WineLibrary.tv for an excellent example of using video to sell your products. WineLibrary pulled in $60 million last year.

Step 2: Record Your Videos

Once you come up with ideas, you’re ready to record. You can use any high-quality consumer-level camera, and you don’t need to hire a professional videographer. In fact, it’s great if your videos look “home made,” as that just increases the viral appeal and makes them look less like commercials.

Before you record your video, make a bullet list of 5-10 points you’ll talk about and keep the edited recording under two minutes. At both the start and end of the video, it’s OK to plug your website or business. Make sure to always include a link to your website in the video, which will deliver viewers from YouTube to your product pages.

I record the videos for our YouTube channel using a $600 Sony HD video camera, and edit with the free iMovie software that came with my MacBook Pro laptop. At the beginning and end of each video, I include a five-second promo for software and also a link to learn more on our blog, which gets people to come to our website for more educational content.

Step 3: Optimize for VSEO

After you’ve uploaded your video to YouTube, you’ll be asked to enter a title, description and tags. This is where VSEO begins.

Let’s say your company sells shoes and you just recorded and uploaded a video about “casual sneakers.” You want to use the phrase in the title twice to maximize SEO impact –- once at the front and once at the end, like this: “Casual Sneakers — How to Choose Casual Sneakers 101.”

Next up is the description. Always include a link at the front of the description back to your website, followed by a carefully crafted paragraph around your key phrase, like this:

“http://www.casual-sneakers-101.com — In this video, Casual Sneakers 101 coach Jim Smith explains how to choose casual sneakers that best suit your needs. Casual sneakers, when chosen correctly, will make it easier to jog and play low-impact sports. Jim gives clear advice in choosing casual sneakers for men of all ages.”

The video description is shown in the search results on Google and is also used to determine which keywords or phrases your video should show for. Lastly, remember to use a lot of supporting words that give context to your video. Words such as “jog,” “sports” and “men” help Google figure out exactly what the video is about.

Finally, for tags, repeat your key phrase and common variants. Similar to website SEO, stick to 10-15 phrases. For phrases with more than one word, make sure you enclose them in double quotes, like this:

“casual sneakers,” sneakers, shoes, “jogging shoes,” “walking shoes,” “men’s shoes,” casual-sneakers.

Step 4: Build a Base of Viewers

There are a few creative ways you can begin to “seed” your video beyond posting links on Facebook and Twitter.

One idea is to post your content as a “video reply” to other related videos. This gives YouTube context as to what your video is about and starts a steady flow of traffic. To do this, search YouTube for the exact phrase you want to rank for (in this example, “casual sneakers”). Click on each video that comes up and post your new video as a “video reply” to those.

Next, start building links back to your video. The more websites that link back to your video on YouTube, the more relevant that video will appear in searches. The best way to do this is simply to find out who is linking back to the most popular videos in your category, searching for that URL in Google to see where it appears, and then reaching out to these sites to ask them to link to your videos.

Once your video has had a few hundred views (which doesn’t take all that long), it should start appearing on Google for your key phrase.

For more social media coverage, follow Mashable Social Media on Twitter or become a fan on Facebook

More social media resources from Mashable:

- How Web Video SEO is Finally Coming of Age
- HOW TO: Add Captions To Your YouTube Videos
- 5 Ways Non-Profits Can Increase Engagement With YouTube
- HOW TO: Create Custom Backgrounds for Twitter, YouTube, & MySpace

Tags: business, Google, how to, MARKETING, Search, SEO, small business, social media, web video, youtube

Global Media Outreach Hosts Webinar on Internet Impact, Mission Outreach Potential

(author unknown) — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 18:23:04 PDT

Shared by Dave Bourgeois
Global Media Outreach is one of the leaders in online evangelism. Join them on Wednesday for a webinar on how to use the Internet for evangelism.

With more than 1.7 billion Internet users in the world today, mission opportunities are opening up – online.

In observance of Internet Evangelism Day on Sunday, April 25, technology ministry Global Media Outreach (GMO) will host an online seminar to share the tremendous impact of the Internet and its potential for online missions outreach.

Michelle Diedrich, Global Media Outreach Communications Director, will host the Webinar from 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. Pacific Daylight Time Wednesday, April 21, 2010.

Webinar attendees will learn:

How people use the Internet today to get spiritual help
What churches are doing to engage people online
Usable tools to share the Gospel online
How churches can begin an online missions program

The goal of the Webinar is to help individuals participate in not only Internet Evangelism Day, but to learn how to use the Internet to share the Gospel year-round. By providing articles and Gospel widgets for blogs, Facebook pages or other social networking sites, GMO’s available resources can help one independently share the Gospel online, as well as introduce an online missions program to one’s church.

Special guest, Rob Jackson, Senior Pastor Forestville Baptist

Rob Jackson, Senior Pastor of Foresville Baptist Church, Greenville, S.C. will be on hand to talk about his church’s experience with online missions. Forestville has been partnering with GMO in its GMO Always Ready program since 2008.

“We are a very mission-minded church,” said Jackson. “This program has continued to cause us to expand our vision and excitement for the privilege of answering the Great Commission. The GMO Always Ready program only takes a little time and a computer and can even be done from your living room chair. My seven-year-old daughter sits on my lap and gets a burden and a passion for the world as we pray together over these requests.”

About 70 people from Forestville Baptist Church’s congregation of 1,050 are serving as online missionaries.

“While evangelizing can intimidate some people, there’s not a lot of fear that comes with being an online missionary,” Jackson said. “Volunteers may talk with people dealing with real-life issues, but GMO provides resources for how to answer tough questions. This builds the confidence of our volunteers and allows them to share their faith more openly in their community. About 60 to 80 people a week go out from our church now to share the Gospel with visitors, and I attribute part of the continued expansion of this vision at our church directly to the participation in the GMO Always Ready program.”

Global Media Outreach

Through one of GMO’s 102 Web sites, such as www.GMOReachtheWorld.com, GMO freely offers a wide range of information available for Christians and churches to share Jesus online. GMO also ensures that seekers get a personal response from their trained responder base – online missionaries – who answer e-mails coming from one of these sites.

You can learn more about how to open the door to people seeking Jesus at www.OpentheDoorGMO.com.

From seeking to shepherding to connecting, as millions search for spiritual help online, GMO online missionaries meet them at their point of need. The GMO vision is to provide every person on earth multiple opportunities to accept Jesus, build them in their faith and connect them to Christian churches.

These cost-effective online strategies provide ways for individuals to connect with people from all over the world as they seek to learn more about Christ, while churches can more readily embrace online missions programs.

Since its inception in 2004, GMO has seen the number of people indicating a decision for Christ grow from 21,066 people annually to more than 10 million people in 2009, while more than 4,200 Christians have become online missionaries.

Teaming up with GMO is one the most exciting things I have ever been a part of in my 26 years of Christian media ministry. It would be great if you could participate in the Webinar. Let me know if you’re already registered. I’d love to get your thoughts and ideas about online missions after the meeting.

If you would like to attend, leave a comment or email me and I’ll make sure you get registration info.

10 SEO Myths Ministries Need to Avoid Like the Plague

(author unknown) — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 18:16:50 PDT

Shared by Dave Bourgeois
Great set of SEO myths - which ones do you believe?

I’ve been working with a number of ministries and organizations in terms of Search Engine Optimization lately and it’s quite apparent that there is a general ignorance that exists out there about what SEO really is.

In addition to the general lack of knowledge (which isn’t anyone’s fault, by the way), there’s always a number of myths that come up as well that I typically need to correct. I don’t mind this process and it makes for some great conversation, and in the end the organization or SEO manager is better suited for future success.

But, for the rest of you I’ve decided to list out 10 SEO Myths that ministries need to avoid. Here they are:

1. The Better Your Content the Better Your Rankings

Unfortunately this is a myth but it’s rampant everywhere. And most people, when they give themselves a second, really know it’s a myth but it just sounds too good and it’s too easy to believe.

You see, SEO is a complicated mix of a number of different factors, and content is just one of many factors. Content alone will not produce better ratings but it can certainly help. Some of the best stuff out there is never read and yet some of the “stupidest” stuff out there get’s a billion hits.

Go figure.

2. Church Domain Names with Dashes are Awesome for SEO

No.

I have no idea where you were told that there is nothing better than a domain like www.Grace-Community-Baptist-Fellowship-of-Spokane.com.

Heresy.

3. Clicking on Your SERPs Increases Your Church’s SEO

Again, I have no idea who came up with this idea.

Essentially someone told someone who was sold the idea that clicking on your Search Engine Results will “tell” Google that that specific site is “better” than the rest. How this played out was that a lay leader suggested to a Pastor that he should tell the congregation to go click on search results for a week (or two) so they could rank “higher.”

No. Please stop. You’re hurting the internet.

4. Tons of Keywords on the Church Home Page

No. This isn’t even funny and it makes your front page look like poo. Keyword “density,” as it’s professionally called is not a strategy at all – it’s poor design.

5. Jesus Cares About Our Home Page PageRank

No, He doesn’t, and neither does Google.

Organizations are mislead all the time with the idea that if their home page has a high Google PR rating then the rest of their site doesn’t really matter (or that it carries the same weight internally). This is, at best, a cruel joke from whomever told you that.

You’re effort needs to be put in just as much on the home page as the internal pages too. Strategic linking inside is also very important too.

6. Paying to Register Your Church Site to 1,000 “Other” Sites

This is categorically untrue for too many reasons to really mention.

Don’t waste your time, money, or resources paying someone to submit and/or “register” your site in listings of any kind. If anything it’ll probably reduce your SEO.

7. We Shouldn’t Have a Search Page or Box

It’s been a known fact that since about 2008 Google has been able to crawl and submit queries into search boxes for indexing, so who ever told you that you shouldn’t have a Search feature is lame.

In addition, having a search feature is just plain smart and respectful to your visitors. Make it easy for them!

8. Leave Old Ministry Pages Up is Good

Wrong. Try again. Orphaned pages can hurt you, so take them down. If the event or pot luck dinner is over then please take down the page.

This is also a simple courtesy to your congregation and visitors who still think you’re having those potlucks in the movie theater you rented 5 years ago when you launched…

9. We’ve Already SEO’d Our Ministry Site

Nope.

SEO is a spiritual endeavor. It’s a marathon race, and a long one. In fact, you can never really be done with optimization. It’s a process, not an end.

If a business promises to ‘SEO’ your ministry site make sure they have a continual check-up associate with it too!

10. We Need A Lot of Social Media

Nah.

Some ministries have been told that they need to sign up for tons and tons of social media sites and networks so they can get all this “link juice” from those sites.

Untrue. In fact, it’s just a waste of time and could dilute your results (and sap your energy). Social Media can help in terms of SEO but make sure it’s a targeted approach rather than a shotgun.

We are powered by Media Temple.

Want to Advertise Here? Contact Us!

What’s the Difference? Facebook Profiles, Groups and Pages

(author unknown) — Fri, 16 Apr 2010 13:03:53 PDT

Shared by Dave Bourgeois
Nice article that clearly defines the differences between profiles, groups, and pages. If you created a profile for something that should be a group or a page, now is the time to change it!

One of the most frequent points of confusion people arrive at when trying to launch into Facebook is what the functional and strategic differences are between the personal Profile, a Group and a Page. Here is my quick run down!

Facebook Profile

The Facebook Profile is an individual’s identity inside of Facebook. If you have an account at Facebook you sign into your Profile (email and password). Profiles can connect with other Profiles, that is what is referred to as “Friending.” Sending a Friend request or accepting a Friend request creates a Two Way passive connection. Passive because anything that new Friend you’ve connected to does from Tagging a Photo, Liking a News Link, Leveling up in Farmville or getting Tagged by someone else in a Photo will be pushed to your News Feed on your Facebook home page. Two way because anything you do, or activity that happens around you can get pushed to their News Feed. You are also able to access your Friends through the Chat feature in the bottom right of the page and send each other Messages. Facebook Profiles can have vanity urls. (i.e. http://facebook.com/tonysteward)

Facebook Group

The Facebook Group is the ability for Profiles to gather and interact. The Group itself has NO IDENTITY when it comes to publishing updates, sending messages or any connections to someone who joins the group. What does this mean? Even though there are Admins for groups, when they “Send a Message to All Members” the message is sent to the Members from the Admin’s Profile, not from the Group. When something is shared on the Groups Wall, it is Posted by an individual that is a part of the Group, Not by the Group itself. Wall Posts in a Group will show up in your home News Feed, versus just at the Group itself, but ONLY if you’re already a Friend of that Profile. So, the Group facilitates a gathering point for Profiles but are primarily a One Way connection as the Admin of the Group can message you even if your Profiles aren’t Friends. The advantage of Groups is that they can be Closed or even completely hidden inside of Facebook.

Facebook Pages

Facebook Pages are newer in the Facebook Environment and for many strategies they present a better option than a Group. Facebook Pages have a Voice and an Identity of sorts. Facebook Pages, unlike Profiles or Groups, have all their information viewable publicly on the web whether someone is logged out or doesn’t have a Facebook Account at all. Facebook Pages are a One Way connection with Profiles that becomes Fans. Any thing shared by a Facebook Page is automatically pushed to Fan’s News Feeds on their Profile’s home page. So, a Fan never has to go to the Page itself to receive it’s updates. This functions exactly in the same way your Profile receive updates from the other Profiles you have Friended. But the Page doesn’t get any updates from its Fans unless they come to the Page itself and post on its Wall.

Facebook Pages have the ability to run Ads to Facebook Proper, to their Fans, the Friends of their Fans, and even to the Friends of their Fans who live in Chicago and listen to Foo Fighters and don’t listen Justin Beiber. Even the numerical count that Facebook gives you when building those kind of ads is helpful information. Facebook Pages also have a social measurement package built in called Insights.

Insights give you two measurements; Social Interactions and Demographic. Social Interaction will tell you how many Comments, Wall Posts, Likes, Media Views, Percentage of Fans that created that Interaction and a Post Quality Score. This helps you know how healthy the interaction is on your Page versus other Pages of like size. Demographics gives you the number of your fans that are Male / Female, the numbers and percentages of where you Fans fall into specified age ranges, and what city, country and Languages they speak. {Ever wanted to know that information about your community but they never fill our your surveys? Leveraging a Facebook page can get that information to you hot and fresh.} :)

Finally, Facebook Pages can have a vanity url (i.e. http://facebook.com/lifechurchtv) and can have custom applications or tabs integrated (i.e. http://www.facebook.com/LifeChurchOKC).

So, very simply. Profiles are for real people, Groups are for a place for those people to gather and Pages are for Brands / Organizations / Personalities or Larger Groups that need a voice into the Facebook garden with professional tools built in.

Got it?

New Study Shows the Mobile Web Will Rule by 2015 [STATS]

(author unknown) — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 14:51:34 PDT

Shared by Dave Bourgeois
More data to backup the move to a post-web site world.

In a dense, 87-page report, Morgan Stanley analysts have charted the most important online trends and predicted the future of the Internet. In addition to forecasting more online shopping and showing the geographical distribution of Internet users, the study also shows a dramatic shift toward mobile web use.

Including devices such as the Kindle, the iPhone and other smartphones, web-enabled tablets, GPS systems, video games and wireless home appliances, the growth of the mobile web has been exponential — and we’re still just at the beginning of this cycle. Morgan Stanley’s analysts believe that, based on the current rate of change and adoption, the mobile web will be bigger than desktop Internet use by 2015.

The mobile wealth creation/destruction cycle is in its earliest stages. The proliferation of better devices and the availability of better data coverage are two trends driving growth; having better services and smaller, cheaper devices has led to a huge explosion in mobile technology that far outpaces the growth of any other computing cycle.

And speaking of coverage, global 3G penetration is expected to hit 21% this year. In Japan, where the U.S. looks to find its mobile roadmap for the future, 96% of mobile subscribers already have 3G coverage. In Western Europe, the penetration is around 54%, just slightly above 46% in the U.S. In developing and/or economically depressed areas, including the Middle East, Africa, parts of Asia, Eastern Europe and South America, 3G penetration is still in the single digits. Morgan Stanley identifies 3G access as a key point in the success of the mobile web.

Finally, mobile e-commerce is ramping up faster than online e-commerce, now making up 4% of total retail sales. In certain categories, such as computers, consumer electronics, music, movies, tickets, video games and books, online sales account for between 45% and 20% of the total retail market. Japan’s Rakuten shows how the mobile share of e-commerce is growing as well, from 10% of e-commerce in 2006 to nearly 20% now.

Notes on the Social Web

Social network use has already eclipsed e-mail use. People started spending more time on sites such as Facebook, Twitter and MySpace back in 2007; in 2009, there were more users on social networks than users of e-mail.

In the past three years, two sites have gained a huge amount of mindshare around the world. The number of minutes spent online from a global audience was dominated by Yahoo and MSN in 2006. Today, Facebook is the website that gets by far the most attention, minute for minute, with YouTube holding a steady second position.

Other Stats of Interest

48% of all Internet users come from just five countries (Brazil, Russia, China, India and the U.S.).
Video accounts for 69% of mobile data traffic.
Facebook is the single largest repository for user-generated content such as pics, videos, links and comments.
Apple and Android platforms are gaining in the mobile OS market, while Windows Mobile, RIM and Palm decline.
More and more, we are expecting to have access to our “stuff,” i.e. music, documents and applications, in the cloud.
The overlap between mobile users and social web users continues to grow; more and more users are accessing the social web from a mobile device.
If Skype were a telecommunications carrier, it would be the largest carrier in the world, with 521 million registered users.
Games are bigger than any other app category — both for the social web and for mobile devices.
Real-time technology and location-based services are expected to drive mobile retail.
Online ad sales are growing, but virtual goods, premium content and other models are big business, especially for the mobile web.
The average iPhone user only spends 45% of his on-device time making voice calls.

For more mobile coverage, follow Mashable Mobile on Twitter or become a fan on Facebook

Reviews: Android, Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, YouTube, iPhone, video

Tags: Mobile 2.0, mobile web, stats

Non-Profit and Ministry Basic Training for Facebook Pages

(author unknown) — Fri, 09 Apr 2010 14:11:01 PDT

Shared by Dave Bourgeois
Another great resource for those wanting to create Facebook pages for their ministry.

As I mentioned yesterday LifeChurch.tv is launching a whole new strategy to leverage Facebook Pages globally for local ministry. Above is one of nine training videos you can find at Open (Free Church Resources).

Free Webinar: Developing a Social Media Strategy for Your Church

(author unknown) — Thu, 08 Apr 2010 11:54:55 PDT

Shared by Dave Bourgeois
Live webinar on social media strategy April 14th @ 11AM EDT.

John Saddington, creative director of North Point Community Church and blogger at ChurchCrunch, will be presenting a live webinar on April 14th @ 11:00am EDT that will cover the development of a social media strategy for your ministry and/or church.

John is doing this in conjunction with M2LIVE (formerly Ministry 2.0).

John is full of insight when it comes to social networking and communications strategy, and I’m interested to hear how he approaches the development of a social media strategy. I’ve put it on my calendar. How about you?

You can read the full announcement here.