The first event here in Toronto was a PART (Practice and Research Together) Council meeting. The Council is made up of around 12 Executive Directors of various children’s services from throughout Ontario. After their regular business I gave a presentation on what social media is and how it can be used for a range activities from personal professional development to internal communications to engagement with client groups. The thrust of the talk is there is no ‘one big thing’ out there called ‘social media’, Rather what we call ‘social media’ is the natural development of the World Wide Web as a communication, rather then a broadcast medium.
New ways of doing things do tend to scare some people. The World Wide Web has disrupted several business models – newspapers, banking, travel agents, booksellers to name a few. Some fear the risks that arise from being able to communicate instantly and easily. But if we focus on the underlying human processes and behaviours as well as existing professional codes of conduct we will be better able to rationally assess and manage risk. It is useful to consider existing risks and ask whether new web-based methods introduce new risks. It’s quite possible that they do not: in fact they may reduce risk. The greater risk is not allowing people to participate, as by participating we gain confidence and a more intuitive feel for the medium. It’s a bit like driving a car. Once you’ve passed the test you then start to learn the how to apply – and bend – the rules. Whether you become a bad or good driver depends on you, not the road or the car.
The Council members were generally receptive but some wondered whether a using a four minute video the engage professionals wasn’t ‘dumbing down’ the message. My view is that the medium of itself doesn’t dumb down the message. If we wish to engage practitioners in embedding evidence-informed practice we should choose whatever media are most appropriate. A message, or story, can be poorly presented in any medium: written, audio or visual.
Since delivering that talk a rather interesting take on this subject has appeared in the Guardian, The media has two tribes, but there’s only one winner.
In the beginning was the word. And it was spoken. It’s an easy technology to master, speaking. Then it was written: memories shrank and trees were felled. Then printed – simple enough, if messy. Now, words shift in complicated ways. They can be filtered by algorithms, untouched by human tongue; they can be rendered graphical and made to dance. They can be tweeted and texted, liked and shared. Technology has always dictated how stories are told – but the current breadth of opportunity for spreading the word is as complicating as it is exciting.
The article goes on to lament that those who can write beautifully and creatively are hampered by being unable to grasp modern communications technology. As the journalist in this case sees it:
The tribe to which I belong knows how to tell a story, but can’t grasp the digital possibilities. Being a technically illiterate journalist in today’s multimedia world is like being a pilot who’s a bit shaky on landings.
My only quibble is that I’m not sure you do in fact need to be all that technically literate. It might help, but most social media tools and services are really quite easy to use. In fact my closing argument to my Canadian hosts was that social media is about people, not technology. Grasping the ‘digital possibilities’ is possible. But I think what we’re talking about is digital literacy.
Here are two Prezi presentations I used:
http://prezi.com/rrtlzqap5hx-/introduction-to-social-media/
http://prezi.com/t9go9_hxqkin/the-iriss-journey-with-evidence-informed-practice/