Archives for November 7, 2007

TRUTH: That’s the funniest thing I’ll hear all day..!
HONESTY: That’s the funniest thing I’ll hear all day, if I’m five years old.

Both statements are true. One is a little more honest.

“Honey, do these jeans make me look fat?”
TRUTH: No, those jeans don’t make you look fat.
HONESTY: It’s your genes that make you look fat!

I bring these as examples to get at the heart of an ongoing debate about online communities. This is the era of openness and transparency in communications. The Internet is democratizing communications, and we should all be empowered to say exactly what we mean, right? Well, not exactly.

The implications are huge. Total openness makes for a wonderful platitude, but do you really want your e-mails to be on open pages for all to see? For that matter, what about your innermost thoughts? Something can be “the Truth” and nothing but “the Truth”, and still leave out some key details. There are things I can say to a friend directly, and there are some things I ought to pass along anonymously, so as not to injure the friendship.

A Fork in the Road

There are many who will disagree with me here, but let me explain what this has to do with “Social Media.” There is a time and a place for anonymity, and there is a time and a place for transparency. Knowing the difference between the two is crucial for any business that wants to be genuine in building and creating communities for its clients and stakeholders. Ignoring this reality is detrimental to any group moving into this terrain – naivety at best, and communications suicide at worst.

I have been a member of an online journalism forum for nearly a decade. I’ve seen it go through several iterations, and have seen first-hand how changes in the rules and the expectations altered the baseline of behavior. With several thousand registered users, and hundreds of active users, we have a fairly representative sample of personality types. It might surprise you at first to hear that for a profession that is steeped in the quest for the Truth and Facts, that only a handful of people write under their own names. Most use handles.

For some, there was a sense of self-importance – that a viewer might stumble on a political rant written under the journalist’s name, and it would then be used as “proof” of some sort of bias in coverage. In this case, most would understand that expressing true feelings and tendencies is done under the cover of an assumed name. Less transparency, a little more honesty.

Ideas at Face Value

Here’s where it gets interesting. The vast majority of those on this media forum were not on-air personalities. They were behind the scenes, either in production, or as writers and editors. And they didn’t want to use their names either. Why? Because their ideas became stronger when offered in a “faceless” manner.

Here’s a personal example. I helped dozens of young up-and-comers with writing and career advice. What they didn’t know is that I was not a gray-bearded grizzled veteran of the Ron Burgundy days. I was a few years their senior, and willing to share my advice. Had I been writing under my own name, there are many who would have discounted the advice from the outset because:

• I’m not as old as they thought.
• I didn’t work in a top-5 media market.
• I work in the southeastern United States.

Add all of those up, and that is the ad hominem kiss of death. Why would you pay attention to anyone with that crappy resume? Yet when my ideas and advice were shared under an assumed name, they were applauded and lauded. To this day, I remain a respected member of that forum – because it became a “meritocracy” – a place where positive contributions matter. There is a time and a place for anonymity online.

Takeaways

Not every online community is a meritocracy. And there are many, many instances where not disclosing who you are is an unpardonable sin. But you have to go in with an open mind and a willingness to learn. Mastering Social Media takes time. As my good friend Kami says, there is an “anthropology” to this stuff, and we’re still learning the basics. You have two ears and one mouth for a reason – because you should listen twice before speaking once.

Essentially, these communities and forums provide a litmus test for personal integrity. How you conduct yourself in Social Media reveals a lot about your character. The questions to ask: are your actions designed to shore up the truth, or to limit honesty? “Harobed” from the Whole Foods/Yahoo business forums had an agenda, and withholding that identity was designed to harm. Not every anonymous contributor has the same nefarious agenda in mind. Are you building up? Or tearing down?