On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 7:15 AM, Roland Perry <lists@internetpolicyagency.com
wrote:
In article <4A50ACB7.6070901@airwire.ie>, Martin List-Petersen < martin@airwire.ie> writes
Calling it a lame web 2.0 is pretty much off, when it's actually used for something sensible.
I seem to be trying to find the middle ground between members of the public who think "The Internet isn't appropriate because they didn't teach it to me in college 20 years ago" and those who say "Web 2.0 isn't appropriate because they didn't teach it to me in college 5 years ago".
Shouldn't we at least be giving it the benefit of the doubt?
Well, I'm no social media expert, and I don't spend a whole lot of time on any of the social networking sites (I particularly dislike Facebook, actually). (And yet, I'm probably about as qualified for the SME title as 90% of those who claim to be...) However, I was a student fairly recently, and so maybe my perspective will hold some value. I really like the Posterous+Twitter+Facebook+etc. combo. To manage the Fb side, you could probably tap a trusted student to make the School an Fb page. A lot of the students will check there. Parents will probably check the Posterous or Twitter pages. Some of the more tech-savvy students and parents will sign up for Twitter and get SMS notifications. And then, additionally, there are plenty of ways to grab that data and copy it onto the school website as well (at least until it crumbles under the load), and you could broadcast it over a mailing list to people's email address. The idea, I think, is to deliver your message to as much of your audience as you can. By delivering your message over multiple mediums, you're making it easy for your audience to hear the message, since they can do it in the way that's most comfortable to them. And the redundancy doesn't hurt.