The notion of isolation as a consequence of social network use has been given the lie in the latest Pew Internet and American Life Project publication — Social Isolation and New Technology. While it’s US research, I imagine the findings very much extend to Australia and other Western countries.

The report is a really interesting read, providing some interesting insight into the level of reliance and importance we are all placing on our online lives in an increasingly busy world. We’re more connected, more engaged in participation in our networks and communities, more diverse in our discussion of views and extent to which we discus them.

Most importantly, the research gives the lie to the notion that being involved in social networks makes us more isolated and less inclined to engage in the physical world. Quite the reverse is true!

For me, there’s much that resonates in the report. Relationships that we initially broker online are very much extending into the physical world. For someone like me, online and physical world relationships are the same thing. I discern no difference. In fact, I feel that for people like me — who can struggle meeting and engaging with new people — the online world offers us a chance to overcome the introduction and small talk hurdles we might otherwise fall at.

More isolated by spending time online? Far from it!

Tagged: community, participation, research, social networking

Has she not connected the change in her own activities with parallels amongst those she writes for?

Lyndal, did you not read Here Comes Everybody? Or at least read or watched some of my doppelganger, Clay Shirky’s public speaking? Do you not check the Pew Internet and American Life Project? Maybe even read some of danah boyd’s work on the rich online lives of teens?

For an established and respected journalist like Lyndal, that suggests lazy research. There’s more than enough research — from here, Asia, the US and Europe -  to prove beyond doubt that society in the West, and increasingly in Asia and Africa (where the greatest growth is) is moving a large chunk of its collective lives online.

Busy lives and families? Just look at Mommy-bloggers as an example. The mums with babies demographic is considered, rightly, to be one of the most powerful groups online. You don’t cross them or annoy them unless you want to invite massive backlash. Online is where these people live, coordinating their meetups, commenting and criticising the organisations they deal with from P&G, to J&J to Starbucks and McDonalds.

It is the foolish men in grey suits who believe their lives are too important to “use that social media stuff — I don’t understand it anyway” who are making themselves irrelevant and redundant in a world that increasingly ignores their viewpoints anyway.

The ones not online are now the dispossessed, the disenfranchised and the those who are being left behind in a digital divide of their own making and ignorance. For most of us, the divide is no longer a matter of not having (we can be connected almost anywhere on the planet) but a matter of choice.

And that choice means were making big changes — we’re online, connecting with our communities more and seeking meaning in our own search for information while we give up activities like mindless time in front of the box, or listening to radio, or reading newspapers made by smearing poison on dead trees.

Lyndal, you must be witness to this change in yourself, surely with a little research and some extrapolation, you can see what we’re all up to?

Tagged: change, community, social media, society

In fact, telling my tale inspired me to start getting fit again and to deal openly with a number of issues in my life. That journey is being progressively chronicled on my personal blog.

The other tales in the book are inspiring, troubling, thoughtful and go to show that dealing with being a man and all that means in a society like Australia that is often reticent to discuss personal issues is a universal issue.

And today, the telling of those tales comes to fruition, as we have published The Perfect Gift for a Man, in eBook and paperback form. You can buy the printed book from Blurb.com or you can purchase the eBook version from The Perfect Gift for a Man website. ALL the profits from the book are being donated to The Inspire Foundation.

If you’re keen to get a quick snapshot of what it’s all about, take a look at the social media release.

Please buy a copy and give it to a man in your life, especially if he is dealing with issues that may be troubling. Our stories may just help him to know he’s not alone.

Tagged: community, manweek, personal

On top of the pretty open consultation model they’re already using; stories, regular written submissions, polling and the like, the addition of video to the model drops yet another barrier to participation in the activity of government by Australians. For this, I think the folks at YourHealth deserve some congratulations. I know a few of the people involved, so I’m not at all surprised by the progress they’re making.

Australian governments, like those in other constituencies, are still learning all this Government 2.0 stuff. As such, the YourHealth model isn’t perfect. There’s a few things they could be doing better or more openly, but I’m certain that any gap between what could be and what is could be remedied with a little more consideration and big thinking on the part of departmental senior management.

Here’s where I think they have room for improvement:

• why do I have to send YourHealth my video? Why can’t I just post it online somewhere like YouTube, Vimeo or any of the hundreds of other services available and tell them where it is? The statements on the site about editing submissions are a little telling — there’s potential for censorship or blurring of the message in submissions.
• of course, they’re moderating. That’s reasonable. But exactly what are they moderating for? Views they don’t agree with? Harsh criticism? Something the Minister or the Secretary won’t like to hear? The moderation guidelines don’t make it completely clear and I think they’re more than a little heavy handed. They feel like they’re justifying preemptive censorship of inconvenient viewpoints.
• where are all the submissions? One of the great opportunities of this consultation model is to openly and immediately share the contributions from the community. Why isn’t everything being published immediately so we can all benefit from it and contribute additional value to it? Or is it all being published? If we don’t know what’s been contributed, how can we tell? Whether we agree with any particular viewpoint or not is irrelevant, the value is in the sharing and openness.

So, to the folk at YourHealth, well done for having a go. You’re doing well, but you could be doing better.

I hope your senior management reads my views and lets you act (there may be others, read those too). The immediacy and availability of materials from contributors, no matter what the viewpoint expressed, has been one of the most valuable parts of the consultation the Government 2.0 Taskforce has undertaken. It’s all there — the good, bad, and ugly — for everyone to see. I’d like to see YourHealth do the same.

Tagged: australia, community, government 2.0, participation