Last week, I attended a conference in Egypt all about the uses and abuses of social media in a changing world. One of the questions that kept cropping up during discussions was on the variable nature of the online network, and the implications this will have on our social behaviour.

Now, you may want to argue that the online world isn’t changing, or even that online is all about change, and therefore it doesn’t make sense to talk about about ‘changes in the online world’ – in fact, these are many of the arguments that surfaced during the discussion. But all of our protestations were swiftly silenced when communications expert Mark Comerford gave us all one very simple task: to define the word ‘digital’ in a tweetable summary of 140 characters or less.

Here are two of the definitions from participants @kuebra and @Der_Maverick:

What is interesting about these two definitions (and indeed, each of the 24 definitions our group produced) is that they were all different. Some were so different as to be mutually incompatible. According to Mark, it is this divergence of meanings that, ultimately, makes digital a meaningless word.

‘To me digital is a word that has no meaning. The word is so over-used that it becomes more of a problem to use it than a solution – because for everybody it means so many different things. In many ways it’s a lazy way to talk about the world as it looks right now.’

Not only that, but Mark also maintains that it is nonsensical to talk about our ‘online’ and ‘offline’ lives as if they were two separate entities.

‘Your life is your life is your life. There is no such thing as an unreal life.’

So what do you think? Is this the death of digital? Is it no longer useful, or accurate, to distinguish between our online and offline selves?

So why did I do it? He was leaving his old school, upset about losing touch with his friends, and wanting to make new ones easily.  I wanted to ease the transition for him and so agreed as long as I could be his friend.  I now monitor his usage and trawl through his friends making sure I know (or at least he knows) them all. I don’t feel good about it, but at least I have so far resisted the demand for a Smart Phone, which the vast majority of his friends already have.

The issue of underage use of Facebook was raised again in the press last week. It crops up every now and then, as one of several ritual ‘bash the parents’ themes.

The problem is simple. Parents have long memories; most of us remember only too well the pain of being left out by peers at school if you didn’t quite fit in (my mum refused to let me watch sitcoms in the 1970’s. I didn’t get to play the Liver Bird game recreated in the playground. I am still getting over it…).  We give in because we fear the alternative; isolation.

So we need help. Yes, we can be responsible parents and monitor kids’ usage, but in the same way that I pleaded for manufacturers (if not the Government) of video games to take more responsibility, we also need mobile phone or ISP providers to back a campaign aimed at kids – by flipping the situation and educating kids about social networking from a young age, the incessant nagging and guilt that parents are subjected to may never happen. By and large, tween kids have yet to find their individuality. If something is perceived by the majority as ‘not done’, then it’s ’not done’.

Persuade BBH to provide the ads at cost and Jessie J and Tiny Tempah to front it. These are not new ideas. They are tried and tested, (they worked to simultaneously persuade kids to drink both more milk and less alcohol).  Hey, they could even throw in the dangers of cyber bullying too – yet another issue only just round the corner for me.

Parenting is a tough job, never more so than today.  Am I wrong to be asking for help?

This blog was first published on The Wall. 

I’d like to share a story with you about two unlikely companies that have both received a surge of interest and positive publicity because of the way they handled a tricky situation.

Earlier this year, Santam, an insurance company in South Africa released the following TV commercial:

Being the playful brand it is…Nando’s, a fast food chain, decided to poke a little fun at the serious insurer and add yet another sterling response to its hilarious history of marketing case studies:

Now, this is the point where the tides turn and an insurance company rose to the challenge! Santam responded to Nando’s spoof ad and not only did so in a timely fashion, but managed to do this in such a way that strengthened its brand reputation and challenged Nando’s to do a little social good at the same time. Alistair King from the ad agency responsible for the Santam adverts said that he felt the Nando’s spoof was in good nature, but “no one ever spoofs the spoofer, so we did.”

Below is the final video response from Nando’s, and brings me to my conclusion…

I love that Nando’s has encouraged this kind of response from Santam, who I believe saw the situation as an opportunity rather than a threat, showing the power of using a creative response rather than a serious one (or none at all for that matter).

The best approach to dealing with a bad situation is to acknowledge that it has happened and to take the time out to structure your response rather than acting rashly. A little time to let the creative juices flow may just result in a wonderful turn of events.

While the decision to become a donor is a very personal one, sharing it seems natural. Why wouldn’t we want others to know we’ve signed up, especially if it might motivate them to do the same? Considering the psychology behind sharing, broadcasting donor status is a classic act of public altruism – and one we’ll only be held accountable to after death.

But when does sharing become TMI?

Health can be a minefield. Know anyone who makes known their diabetes, epilepsy or heart condition on their Timeline? In theory this would be a sensible step, so that family, friends and colleagues can be prepared in the case of a medical emergency.

But there’s something about that which still feels odd. It’s too personal, too private. Anything that hints of weakness or vulnerability is hard to share with the world. But how many people would it take to start sharing this information before it lost its stigma?

And what about politics? Only a few years ago admitting which party and candidates you supported felt like an open invitation to attack. But in the recent London elections Twitter was awash with #voteken and #voteboris messages, our allegiances – once hidden by the curtain of the ballot booth – on full display. When everyone is naming their chosen candidate, not joining in can feel like copping out of your public duty.

Sometimes we share and sometimes we don’t, and we all have different comfort zones – but the personal stakes seem to be getting higher. The technology behind Facebook’s much trumpeted frictionless sharing is pretty uninteresting compared to the question: what sort of opinions and information will be sharing three years from now?

Will our need to follow the crowd keep pushing our sharing limits? Where would you draw the line?

It happens all too often, in agencies and brands alike: the same old people get to globetrot their way around conferences, while everyone else has to make do with an ‘event debrief’ afterwards, back in the office.

We wanted to change that. It’s exactly those people who are too busy, or considered too junior to attend these events, who are likely to get the most out of them. Everyone in the agency has the right to have their voice publicly heard and to bring insight back to their teams.

So we decided to give someone different the opportunity to go to Like Minds this year and represent 1000heads as a true ‘challenger’.

Welcome to the ‘Like Minds Challenge’. Here’s how it worked:

1. Everyone in the agency was invited to identify something they thought needed to be challenged, changed or improved; a process we currently work to that needs improving, an approach that should be changed outright, or an opportunity we haven’t yet recognised

2. To enter they simply had to explain their challenge and set out their suggested solution – in whatever format they felt conveyed it best

The numbers and quality of the entries, which came in from every direction – client services and creative to insights and analysis – seriously impressed us. 1000heads was positively challenged on everything from its environmental approach and philosophy on team motivation, to the way it handles client briefs and its use of technology to deliver better internal communication.

After much deliberation we realise we had two winners on our hands, not one. Data manager Andy Stretton and senior account manager Meg Grogan come from two very different parts of 1000heads – analytics and client services – yet both showed great understanding and passion for our business, an ability to challenge our thinking, and the acuity to suggest practical solutions that could effect real change.

But it’s not just about winning. The 1000heads Like Minds Challenge leaves us with an enthused and engaged team and a whole series of ideas that warrant further exploration. Each entrant is working with a Like Minds Mentor from our senior team, so they have the support and guidance to make their suggestion actually happen.

In short, we want the spirit of this year’s conference – ‘Why What You Do Matters’ – to become a long term, living, breathing process within our organisation – not an elitist jolly or a rhetorical pose.

What are you doing to give your people an opportunity to challenge your organisation in a constructive way?

Or does a culture of openness and innovation mean too many opportunities to upset the equilibrium?

There, I’ve said it. Few of my colleagues or acquaintances would believe it. My job as Social Business Director at 1000heads demands some of the most ‘extroverted’ activities you can imagine – speaking at international conferences, running training programmes for clients, internal evangelism – activities that demand constant sociability and public gregariousness. And I love it. I absolutely love it.

But those who know me well also know that I regularly retreat into ‘Molly zone’, craving time alone to think and work. I will book out meeting rooms to escape open plan intrusion. After a long day of interaction, I will more often than not run away to spend time with a book rather than join others for beers.

How does this square with the ‘always on’ social approach that I am encouraging businesses to adopt? In a world – not to mention an industry – where collaborating and speaking out have become moral dictates, how do those of us who get our energy from within not only survive but thrive?

These are questions I’m fascinated with right now. I’m putting a lot of energy into helping clients create environments and strategies that nurture their introverts too. Being social is not the same thing as being an extrovert, but many companies are making exactly that equation, and as a result it’s the people who shout the loudest and longest, not those with the best ideas or execution, who are getting their voices heard.

I saw Susan Cain talk about her new book Quiet: The Power of Introverts In A World That Can’t Stop Talking at Oxford Literary Festival. It’s a fantastic read; at the very least I’d recommend taking twenty minutes to watch her TED Talk below.

I’m writing a longer piece on this for my social communications column in AdMap this month and I’m gathering as many perspectives as I can. So are you an introvert who struggles with social? Do you have ideas for how reaching out can be balanced with reaching in? Do you feel that your company culture is failing to value your unique contribution in creating a truly social environment, just because you do things differently?

I’d love to hear your thoughts below…

Interested? Follow the instructions.

UPDATE – the grad scheme is now closed.

We recently supported the Nokia US  launch of the Nokia Lumia 900. The brand and international rap superstar Nicki Minaj teamed up to host a launch of epic proportions, live from Times Square. Local New Yorkers and tourists from around the world witnessed an exclusive visual and musical takeover, using nine immense CGI screens, crowned by a show-stopping performance from Minaj.

She performed a medley of songs from her brand-new album and then introduced the exclusive Nokia remix of her latest single ‘Starships’, featuring London-based DJ Doorly. Lucky fans in the audience were also filmed to appear in the official video for the Nokia ‘Starships’ remix.

And what was our role in all of this?

Prior to the takeover we invited  bloggers from the worlds of music and technology to join us for the event. The bloggers, as well as New Yorkers in and around Times Square, had no idea what was planned. Aside from a few hints, everything about the event was secret. The only real clue was a giant blue box that had been planted in the middle of Times Square the day before the launch. The box was unbranded but for a distinctive clock that was counting down.

To add even more intrigue and mystery, on launch day we gave each blogger a scaled-down version of the blue box; inside was a pair of Monster headphones and a miniature countdown timer, synced with the main box.

To support the activity online we created a Facebook tab on the Nokia US page called ‘Lumia 900 Live’. The tab mirrored all activity leading up to the event on the ground, still giving nothing away. Then, post-launch, we ran a Facebook competition giving fans the opportunity to win a Lumia 900 signed by Minaj herself. The tab was also the home for the official video for the Nokia ‘Starships’ remix.

The trip was a blast for lots of reasons, the main one being getting to meet our bloggers face to face, and giving them an experience they’d never forget.

So a big thank you goes out to the guys and girls who came along (and gave us such great feedback afterwards); @Couchon, @hyde13, @MissVersatile, @THE_TRUTH34, @CamilleBacker, @popbytes, @blue42richman, @arjanwrites and @mikemacias.

xkcd.com

Not many people have picked up on this study from US researcher Sarah Moore, but to me it’s much more interesting than ’5 ways to boost your Pinterest traffic’. Moore investigates how talking about our experiences affects the way we feel about them and how we act in the future. In summary, she has found that:

1) Talking about negative experiences is good, because it is cathartic and helps reduce our feelings of anger and frustration – the principle behind psychotherapy.

2) But talking about our positive experiences can actually have a negative effect on our advocacy, as analysing and rationalising those feelings takes away from their instinctive, emotional shine.

3) However, talking about utilitarian experiences – filing your tax return, say – reinforces whatever you’re feeling, amplifying that rational experience.

My favourite takeaway? Maybe brands should be focusing on listening to advocacy and then *recreating* great experiences rather than getting fans to talk about them. As Moore puts it:

“There’s a saying that you should never ask anyone why they love you. This is true — don’t do it. You shouldn’t be rationalizing or analyzing that feeling because the more you do, the more it fades. If you have a positive emotion that you’d like to preserve, don’t think about ‘why’. Just relive it.”

So should brands focus on amplifying positive feelings rather than words? What do you think?

Rules

First up, if this then that has the potential to revolutionise your online life, giving you the means to create actions based on pre-defined triggers. For example, set up a rule to automatically save every new Instagram photo you take in a specific Dropbox folder, without you having to do a thing.

The options are limitless, meaning a little time investment up front could dramatically change the way you use channels, services and devices together. And even better, you can export each rule ‘recipe’ to share with friends, letting them tap into your newfound efficiency.

Robots

The desktop robots mooted by the designers of reaDIYmate work on a similar premise, but this time the action that results from an online trigger happens in the real world.

Construct your robot, and set him any type of task. This could be to sound the alarm every time your boss sends you an email, but wolf-whistle when your beloved does. Sounds and movement can be combined, giving your robot friend the ability to be a physical manifestation of what’s happening in the virtual world.

Anything that builds a bridge between the online and offline worlds is a winner in our book, and colour it in right and it’s cute bot to boot.

Rapping

And strictly for fun, Incredibox turns even the most musically challenged into an artist extraordinaire – a simple drag-an-drop interface, blending layer upon layer of melodies, beats and voices. The results are (arguably) as catchy as anything in the Top 40. Could this be the end of pop as we know it?

So, cool or not cool?