Category: Uncategorized

When I talk about why government agencies need to be on social media, there’s always a discussion of what to do when mean people invade. You know the ones: the YouTube commenters, the Redditors, the newspaper article commenters. Titans of government service, folks who’ve had books written about them, quivering in the face of “pajama-clad basement dwellers.” “What do we do when people say something bad about us?” There are two ways I can respond. The first is the easiest, and what I usually say: it’s an opportunity to correct wrong information and potentially convert a disbeliever. The second is not so nice, but no less true: it’s probably your fault.

Let’s start with the easy one first. Every time someone interacts with you, positive, negative or otherwise, it’s an opportunity. One of your citizens, residents or visitors thinks that you are worth their time. Make no mistake, this is a big win. Especially given the level of relevancy government has in most people’s lives. If they’re in agreement, shout it from the mountaintops; that right there is a community-generated positive review of your services. (Do you know how much some businesses will pay for that? Tons.) If they disagree or are otherwise disputing you, this is your big chance to start to set the record straight. Our friends in Canada give this advice:

Keep these few bullets handy when writing a response to negative commentary:

• Give facts, be transparent – don’t twist the response, most will catch on. If they don’t, someone else online will.
• Polite – thank the user for their comment/feedback.
• Positive – don’t use a negative tone. THAT, will definitely fuel the fire.
• Solution – where you can, provide a solution to a problem or credible information.
• Public – respond publicly, if you must take things to a private message to resolve, then do so as you seem fit.
• Never, ever delete – don’t delete a comment. It makes it seem like you have something to hide.
• Avoid arguments – makes you seem like you don’t know how to listen.
• Have someone else take a look – it’s always good to get a second opinion on the structure of tone of your response where you can.

In fact, the US Air Force has this amazing diagram with how to deal with the online commentariot:

(And I point people there ALL THE TIME. Great resource.)

The second way of attacking this particular problem is not so nice and not something that I’ve said to many executives (okay, none of them, really). The reason that you’ve got problems in your comments is because of you. Because you’ve neglected your audience, taken them for granted, ignored their requests and concerns and generally been a government bureaucrat. When people are treated that way, they tend to react negatively. Want another example? Look at every government toppled by unhappy citizens. But that might be taking this a bit too far. Instead, let’s look to Anil Dash, one of the absolute web 2.0 heroes of the world, for his, ahem, rather salty exhortation:

How many times have you seen a website say “We’re not responsible for the content of our comments.”? I know that when you webmasters put that up on your sites, you’re trying to address your legal obligation. Well, let me tell you about your moral obligation: Hell yes, you are responsible. You absolutely are. When people are saying ruinously cruel things about each other, and you’re the person who made it possible, it’s 100% your fault. If you aren’t willing to be a grown-up about that, then that’s okay, but you’re not ready to have a web business. Businesses that run cruise ships have to buy life preservers. Companies that sell alcohol have to keep it away from kids. And people who make communities on the web have to moderate them.

The people we direct to our website and our social media platforms aren’t just anyone. They’re a community. A community that we built. Our community. As the community managers, it’s up to us to make sure that all are welcome to a free, useful, informative, positive experience. To do any less is to ensure that they continue to be ignored, taken for granted and otherwise neglected. Just like every other government experience they’ve had.

I get such a kick out of the mobile app, Vine. I’m certainly not the world’s biggest user of the service, but I love how easy it is to point, click and publish moving images that loop and loop. I like it so much, I wanted to talk about it during one of my recent #sm4ph Twitterchats. The chatters had some trouble figuring out how anyone could reliably use a six-second looping video to do anything that was teachable and interesting. So I wanted to take a blog post and expand on that idea a bit.

My first thought was that we, as government communicators, need to be on Vine for when this type of video gets posted on there:

But really, you could say that about any social media service and it’d be true. But what about creating? What about using it positively, proactively?

Well, first, let’s look at the business case. A friend recently posted a link to this article on why video is so important today:

As a form of content, video is a multi-sensory experience. Movement, images, colors, words, emotions. It would seem only logical that we would find it more appealing than just the written word. But would you be surprised to know that there is real science as to why we are drawn to video?  Susan Weinschenk, Ph.D. — also known as The “Brain Lady”—has uncovered four core, very human reasons we are drawn to video:

1. We focus on the face.
2. Voice makes more meaning.
3. Seeing is believing!
4. It’s all about the movement.

The fact of the matter is that video is a key facet of what our communication should look like moving forward. The problem is that we’re probably going to attack it like we attack all other communication pathways—boringly.

Take a look at this amazing compilation of Vine videos. Someone took a ton of time to put together this amazing video of some of the best content that’s been published this year. And sure, some most of it is silly or a pratfall, but how much of it blows your mind? How much opens your eyes to all that can be done with a phone and six seconds of your time? (Also, sorry about the cover image, and yes, there is a bit of language in there.)

And the federal government is getting ahead of this, having already reviewed and approved the terms of use for Vine, according to GovDelivery. They go on to show their favorite government Vine (how a Congressional bill is submitted), point you to some public healthy ones and offer six types of content that could be interested when Vined:

1. Introductions
2. Ceremonies and events
3. Introducing a new product
4. How-to videos
5. Promoting initiatives and events
6. Engage with citizens

So what do you think? Do you have six seconds and a story to tell?

I’ve talked a number of times about humanizing your Commissioner. About pulling away the veil of Government. All in the name of helping the public realize that the work you do is done by real people. If you’re a real person, then you’re not a faceless automaton. (Which, in case you weren’t sure, is a good thing.) This is key in establishing empathy, which seems to be pretty important these days.

While there’s a huge upswing in people who are interested in the return on investment of empathy, there are also good theoretical models that demonstrate how critical empathy is during your emergency communications. Dr. Vincent Covello is famous for his wonderful saying, “People don’t care what you know, until they know that you care.” (And just to review, faceless automatons don’t care.)

So, I’d argue that there are two reasons we need, as government communicators, to be concerned with being empathetic. First, for our day-to-day jobs, and second, for our emergencies. Which ends up being just about everything.

When I hear consultants and presenters talk about how government communicators should demonstrate empathy in an emergency, inevitably the question comes up, “How do I demonstrate empathy in an emergency?” Dr. Barbara Reynolds, during her CERC trainings, always answers this with a question, “Are you a sociopath?” Invariably, the person denies it, and Dr. Reynolds points out that the only people who cannot express empathy are sociopaths. (Point, set, match.) The class then proceeds with examples of how famous politicians demonstrated empathy after disasters like 9/11, the Murrah Federal Building bombing, etc.

But a better question would be, how do I express empathy TODAY? How do I build that goodwill meter now, before an emergency? And my answer today, among many, many examples, is stairs and bears. Let me explain.

Long-time readers will remember this post about a British local government agency that scored an amazing hit with a Facebook post about a deluge. One of their communications staff went outside in the downpour and took a 16-second video of the rain cascading down a set of steps. That’s it. Why did it resonate? Because their readers–their public–found it cool. It demonstrated that they were real people who were impressed by the amazing amount of rain. (Tim Clark? Not a faceless automaton. Real person.)

The other example, bears, is more recent. And it comes to us via BoingBoing. It’s a two-minute video of a remote wildlife camera, set to some banjo music (<– I'm obviously a city kid calling it banjo music). The video doesn't espouse anything. It wasn't crafted or honed or pilot tested. It was Glenn Naylor, of the Alberta Parks Department, posting the cutest little video of what bears do when you’re not around. And as of yesterday, it’s racked up nearly 750,000 views.

I find it an instructive video not only because it gives us insight into what a ranger might have to deal with in Alberta, but because it gives a glimpse into the behind-the-scenes, the inside scoop. The public is being treated to something that none of them will ever see, unless they become an Albertan Park Ranger. The public is gaining an affinity for the Park System. They are learning that it’s peopled not by faceless automatons who only seek to restrict their fishing and hunting, but by Glenn.

And his funny bear family.