A Fresh Look at Social Media

I’m in Orlando today for a presentation to FSHPRM, which is the public relations and marketing group affiliated with the Florida Hospital Association. I’ve spoken to this group a couple of times previously, the last time being in February 2009. It’s fun to look back at what I was saying then, and how far we have progressed.

Here are my slides for this morning’s presentation:

I’m organizing this presentation a little differently from what I’ve done in the last couple of years, and also adding some new material. What do you think?

Social Media in Health Care: More than Just Marketing

The Los Angeles Times had a nice article on social media in health care on Saturday, entitled “The doctor’s in, on Twitter.” I had participated in an interview some time ago, so was surprised when I got the Google alert linking to the article, which began…

Twitter. A popular online social network? Yes. A vital tool for medical research? Maybe.

“Until now, healthcare providers have primarily used online networks as a promotional tool,” says Lee Aase, director of the Mayo Clinic Center for Social Media. “We think they can be much more.”

I think it’s an important message to get across: that if we see social media primarily being about marketing we will miss some of the most important benefits. In fact, we created the Mayo Clinic Center for Social Media and the Social Media Health Network to help encourage use of these tools throughout the health care system, in clinical practice, research and education as well as administration. So I was really glad to see something of this emphasis come through in the Times.

And personally, it’s kind of a kick to be the first person quoted. Not gonna lie. 😉

Read the whole article.

 

Martin Luther, The Economist, me and you

On October 31, 2009 I published my 35 Social Media Theses, subtitled “The Disputation of Chancellor Lee Aase on the Power and Efficacy of Social Media,” on the 492nd anniversary of Martin Luther posting his disputation on indulgences on the church door in Wittenburg.

Since then, I’ve delivered well over 100 presentations in 7 countries, and in almost every one I’ve used my 35 Theses (get a PDF) as the organizing principle, beginning with the story of how a technological innovation, the Gutenberg movable type printing press, helped make Luther’s theses the first massively viral communication, spreading throughout Germany in two weeks and reaching the rest of Europe in two months.

It all ties to my first two theses:

  1. Social media are as old as human speech, with air being the medium through which sound waves propagated.
  2. Electronic tools merely facilitate broader and more efficient transmission by overcoming inertia and friction.

So it was interesting when Dr. Victor Montori, our former medical director for the Mayo Clinic Center for Social Media, sent me a link to an article in the current issue of The Economist, “How Luther went viral.” I’m sure it was unintentional imitation, but I’m sincerely flattered anyway. Here’s an excerpt:

Although they were written in Latin, the “95 Theses” caused an immediate stir, first within academic circles in Wittenberg and then farther afield. In December 1517 printed editions of the theses, in the form of pamphlets and broadsheets, appeared simultaneously in Leipzig, Nuremberg and Basel, paid for by Luther’s friends to whom he had sent copies. German translations, which could be read by a wider public than Latin-speaking academics and clergy, soon followed and quickly spread throughout the German-speaking lands. Luther’s friend Friedrich Myconius later wrote that “hardly 14 days had passed when these propositions were known throughout Germany and within four weeks almost all of Christendom was familiar with them.”

The unintentional but rapid spread of the “95 Theses” alerted Luther to the way in which media passed from one person to another could quickly reach a wide audience. “They are printed and circulated far beyond my expectation,” he wrote in March 1518 to a publisher in Nuremberg who had published a German translation of the theses.

This is required reading for SMUGgles. The article does a great job of analyzing at length what I can only briefly introduce in 90 seconds or so in my presentations. It applies network theory to describe how technology enabled such rapid spread, and does a great job of explaining how and why it happened.

I read lots because I enjoy learning, but one of the extra pleasures it provides is validation. I certainly have gotten new and helpful ideas from Guy Kawasaki, Seth Godin, Gary Vaynerchuk and others, but it’s especially encouraging when they affirm what I’m already doing.

For example, if you’ve heard one of my presentations you know that I typically introduce my family, including my grandchildren. After I had been doing that for a while, I ran across presentation advice from Guy Kawasaki in which he suggested including pictures of your kids to build empathy and rapport with audiences. I didn’t start introducing Evie, Judah and Aletta because Guy suggested it, but his guidance validated what had seemed like a good approach, and was just naturally who I am. (For my latest family news, see my Holiday Greetings.)

In some ways, this Economist article serves that same validation function. In my presentations I usually cite Wikipedia as the source for my assertion on the rapid dissemination of the 95 Theses. Because of this article, I now know that Friedrich Myconius is the original source of the quote. And if a writer for The Economist sees the same historical analogy that I have, we can’t both be crazy.

Since you’re here at SMUG, you likely are interested in social media. You “just see” that it makes sense to harness revolutionary tools for the reformation of your industry. But maybe that insight isn’t shared by all in your workplace.

I hope SMUG can provide validation and encouragement for you. My purpose with the 35 Theses is to give you arguments you can use to make the case for social applying social media in your work.

If you work in a health-related field, you also should check out our Mayo Clinic Center for Social Media and consider having your organization join our Social Media Health Network. The Network goes beyond validating your intuition; our aim is to learn together and share best practices so we can harness these revolutionary tools to improve health care, promote health and fight disease.

As The Economist concludes:

Modern digital networks may be able to do it more quickly, but even 500 years ago the sharing of media could play a supporting role in precipitating a revolution. Today’s social-media systems do not just connect us to each other: they also link us to the past.

My first two theses all over again.

 

How NOT to Handle Social Media Critics

The governor of Kansas has realized (although belatedly) that his staff mishandled the case of a teen constituent and her disrespectful tweet.

TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) — When a high school senior tweeted that Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback “sucked,” among other invectives, reaction at the state Capitol led her principal to demand an apology. Instead, it was the Republican governor offering a mea culpa Monday, forced to admit to a self-described overreaction by his staff that subjected him to ridicule for efforts to police a teenager’s Internet musings.

A few basic lessons and observations I take from this story:

As Stephen Covey says, “Begin with the end in mind.” In this case the gubernatorial (one of the great words in U.S. English) staffers saw the offending tweet and started the chain of events that led to this outcome without really thinking ahead to what they wanted to accomplish. They contacted the Youth in Government program director, who contacted the principal, and the confrontation ensued. What was the best possible outcome the staffers hoped to achieve? Even if everything turned out exactly “right,” what did they think they would get? I doubt they took time to consider this.

Most social media conversations are more social than media. When Emma Sullivan tweeted her comment, she was mainly talking with friends. It didn’t seem she meant it as a profound political statement. This is the kind of conversation that has happened about politicians since the days of the Roman Senate. When comments are posted online, they obviously can be found by anyone. But especially in Twitter, where the half-life of a tweet is about 30 minutes, most are lost to the ether, just as the spoken word was for previous millennia. That’s why…

Sometimes the best response is no response. The original tweet from Emma Sullivan went to her 65 (or so) followers. A lot of them probably missed it. As of this writing she has 12,700 followers, and there have been more than 800 online stories.

Stick to correcting factual errors. Ms. Sullivan had expressed an opinion about Gov. Brownback that is not subject to verification. If she had made a statement that was clearly factually inaccurate (as opposed to being her personal opinion), his staff may have had a basis for requesting a retraction. Again, they would need to decide if the end they were trying to achieve was worthwhile, but at least it would not have been a guaranteed loser.

Social media can create the political equivalent of fibromyalgia. To be successful in politics, candidates need to develop what is often called a “thick skin.” They can’t get too upset at criticism. Having just spent three days watching way more TV than I would have preferred, because of a nasty bout of intestinal flu, I’ve learned more about fibromyalgia through seemingly endless direct-to-consumer ads. According to my friends at MayoClinic.com, fibromyalgia seems to have something to do with increased sensitivity of the brain to pain signals. It seems the increased listening ability afforded by social media also can make politicians (or companies) hypersensitive to the “pain” of criticism.

It’s good to listen through social media, and these tools give unprecedented ability to hear what constituents or customers have to say. Listening is a great place to start in your involvement, but the power of the tools makes it all the more important to consider carefully when you should be informed by what you hear, and when and how it is advisable to respond.