Catching criminals with social media

Modern police are to be taught on the use of social networking sites such as Twitter and Facebook to catch criminals. As if we needed any further evidence that the old school concept of seeing bobbies on the beat was fast fading away.

Deputy Chief Constable Nick Gargin – acting head of the National Policing Improvement Agency – told the BBC that the move is “exactly what detectives need to tackle the challenges and complexities of modern policing effectively”.

Will such training courses include modules on “How to friend a felon” or “How to search Facebook users for people who list murder, paedophilia and drug dealing amongst their hobbies”. Will police detectives be sending out tweets or status updates along the lines of “If you know who murdered [insert victim's name here] please get in touch”. I wait with bated breath.

I’m obviously being tongue in cheek. Or am I? Does life imitate art, or art imitate life? Maybe this concept will finally put that question quietly to bed. If you’re an avid Daily Mail reader, you will no doubt have been brainwashed into believing that all of the world’s ills stem from the Internet, and that all social networking sites are inhabited solely by child abusers. The first thing I would say is – start reading another newspaper. The second thing I would say is – while I may be joking about the concept of police officers using social networking sites, I do believe that there is a strong case for its use.

In August 2010 Ian Green set up 11 Facebook accounts to distribute up to 100,000 indecent images of children.

In September 2010 Michael Williams – a postman form Cornwall - was jailed for eight and a half years after he admitted 27 charges of using Facebook and Bebo to abuse hundreds of children.

So while the idea of using social networking sites may not on the face of it seem to have any direct relevance to catching criminals, a closer inspection reveals that in fact it most certainly does.

To put all those Daily Mail readers straight – not all social networking users are child abusers – despite what you might have read to the contrary. Social networking sites are simply the new, modern means for such people to target , groom and abuse their victims.

If this idea is successful and results in the capture of criminals, then maybe it deserves to be “Liked” and Retweeted!

Hiring and firing with social media

Many thanks to Vicky Perry for helping me to research, write and proof read this blog.

All opinions expressed within this blog are those of the authors and do not represent those of our employers.

Using Social Media in the recruitment process
Social media has crept into most areas of the modern business, and Human Resources is no exception. The long reach of social media has impacted the recruitment process from all sides: the recruiter, the candidate and the employer.

A good example of how a social media channel can be used in the recruitment process comes in the form of LinkedIn. This is a popular social media tool for professional networking. By building a profile of your qualifications, experience, skills and so on, you can meet other like-minded individuals within your industry sector. It also attracts recruitment agencies keen to place individuals into new career posts.

LinkedIn has been offering recruitment services for some time, since around 2008 in Europe, and it is keen to extend these services as they become increasingly more popular. And it is easy to see why. From the perspective of a recruiter, what could be better than having millions of online CVs at your disposal. This is one of the key attractions of LinkedIn – the fact that is has such a large user base. While traditional recruitment channels are filled by those who are actively looking for a new career, LinkedIn contains a much wider user base where not everyone is necessarily looking for a new career. This allows recruiters to find those with the skills and/or experience they are looking for, and head hunt them directly.

According to Ariel Eckstein – Managing Director of LinkedIn’s Hiring Solutions service, “Only 10% to 20% of LinkedIn members are actively looking for work, but businesses that are looking want access to 100% of members”. So for a recruiter, LinkedIn provides a much larger pool of talent in the selection process.

I have been contacted by several recruiters on LinkedIn myself, and am connected to them too. If a job comes up for which I have the necessary skills and experience, it would be good to find out about it even if I wasn’t actively looking. Until you see what’s being offered, you can’t turn it down, and it’s a far better situation where you are having offers put your way where you can consider them.

It also much cheaper to use LinkedIn because there are no associated recruitment costs as there are using more traditional recruitment channels. Microsoft says that it saved £60,000 on recruitment costs when it was looking for software developers.

Some LinkedIn statistics:
· Four million UK members
· 15 million European members
· 500,000 LinkedIn groups
· One new member every second
· 25% of FTSE 100 companies hire through LinkedIn
· 50% of Fortune 100 companies hire through LinkedIn

LinkedIn is not the only social media channel that can be used in the recruitment process. From the perspective of a candidate looking for a job, web applications such as Facebook and Twitter can be useful. Using Facebook you can enter your professional details, and then let your friends know that you are job hunting. It may also be worthwhile finding out if there are any groups that are associated with the particular career you are looking for. If so, you could join and become an active member. This will get you noticed by others in the group. Many organisations and businesses also have a public Facebook page, and this can be a great way to find out what they are up to.

The microblogging site Twitter doesn’t have any direct job search tools, but it will allow you to connect and network with people in your industry or career sector. Start by ensuring your profile contains an accurate description of what you do, with a link to your online web site or blog. Create a professional looking background, ensuring it contains all your contact information should a prospective employer try to contact you. Leave your Twitter profile public, and post topics related to the industry sector you wish to work for. So if you are a software developer, find interesting topics and articles that are relevant to that industry and post them. You could also try to locate the Twitter accounts of local businesses and organisations.

Linkedin has a specific role to play due to its professional networking ability, huge user base and recruitment tools, but Facebook and Twitter can also be useful.

Searching a candidate’s history
In addition to formal services such as the use of LinkeIn above, employers often use Google, Facebook and other applications to determine a candidate’s personality. Strange or unusual incidents, cursing / swearing, personal attacks and other negative comments can really hurt someone’s ability to successfully integrate into a culture or organisation, especially if those searches become public knowledge within the organisation.

This is a more controversial use of social media within the recruitment process. While social media channels such as LinkedIn are open and transparent, what about when social media is used in a less than transparent manner? It is common practice for a company to do an Internet search before looking to interview a prospective candidate. If the candidate in question uses social media channels, then information relating to them will be surrendered in the search results. This may or may not be relevant to their interview, and some of it may even place the candidate in a less than flattering light. If their social media footprint demonstrates that the candidate’s personality or character is at odds with the interviewer’s, is it right that this is taken into account without the candidate being aware of it? A search result may surrender activities including affiliations to political or religious movements or militant behaviour. Or it may just be the case that the interviewer objects to their personal life on any number of grounds.

On the other hand, the candidate’s social media footprint may work in their favour. If they have a well written blog on the subject on which they are due to be interviewed, then this would rightly impress the interviewer. If they are well connected and conduct themselves in a positive way, then this too would count in their favour.

Three quarters of graduate recruiters are concerned about whether using a candidate’s public profile obtained from their social media channels could obstruct a “fair and measurable” recruitment process. Despite these concerns however, 41% of organisations in the UK have rejected candidates using this method.

Only 5% of organisations have a clear policy on using a candidate’s online social media profile as part of their recruitment process. Philip Lane, head of research at Penna Barkers “We found that most organisations didn’t have a policy in place to explain to line managers whether they can go on Facebook before interviewing the candidates”.

Reputation management
There is a surprising lack of confidence among organisations when it comes to managing their online reputation. Although 90% think that doing so is important, only 38% actually felt they did were doing it well. Managing their online social media reputation becomes increasingly important for an organisation or business who must be ready to cope with disgruntled former employees, that may use blogs and other social media channels to criticise their former employer. Examples of how an organisation can quickly garner a negative online reputation in this way, consider how the rapper Jay-Z's Las Vegas club earned a reputation for abusing its employees. Another example is how Shell Oil treated its North Sea workers.

Organisations need to have the tools to monitor for such attacks, and to be able to respond quickly, and in an appropriate manner. Although legal action may be the obvious course of action, you may not always know who your online attacker is. A blog author may be anonymous. The person who leaves a negative comment on the organisation’s blog may also do so anonymously. The latter may be dealt with by the introduction of a captcha screen, or by simply removing anonymous comments from the blog. If an organisation has a blog, it can use this to tell its own side of a story, and to clarify their message.

Summary
It’s clear that social media has a role to play in the future of the recruitment process. As they become more popular and gain larger user bases, so they are also attracting the attention of the recruitment organisations who are looking to exploit such a wide and diverse spread of online talent. It’s easy to see why, when Facebook, LinkedIn and other social media channels have such huge numbers of users.

There needs to be clear policies in place for when someone’s social media profile has been used as part of the selection process, what information was extracted and whether this was deemed to be negative. Everyone is entitled to have a private life, and many people make a clear distinction between their online private and professional lives. Indeed, many people have social media profiles that deliberately exclude their work colleagues for just this reason. I certainly wouldn’t want to miss the opportunity to work for a sought after organisation because I posted an inappropriate comment on my online private profile.

Socially connected beings

I enjoy using social media for all sorts of different reasons, many of which I have described in previous articles, so I won’t repeat them here. I would like to pick up on the positive benefits of using social media to stay connected. Before I receive floods of complaints (chance would be a fine thing), I am not advocating replacing the more traditional means by which we stay connected. I am however stating that social media is a great complement to traditional social connections.

I have been using Twitter and Facebook for some time now, and connect with a huge variety of people from across the globe, from all manner of backgrounds, ethnic backgrounds, countries and so on. This brings me closer to people who I would perhaps not normally get to connect with using more traditional methods.

Connecting with people who may be geographically distant, or have a different background to you can be invigorating. I personally don’t see it as a problem connecting with people whom I may never actually meet. That doesn’t stop me sharing opinions and points of view with them.

Of course, not everyone uses social media in this way. Most teenagers spend their time using social media to connect with the very same people they have just moments ago been speaking to at the school gate. I am always keen to connect with people I know in person, as well as those I may never meet too. This can make for interesting discussions, open your eyes and mind to different points of view, and provide some much needed colour in your attitude and perspective.

I have connected and shared opinions and points of view with some absolutely fantastic people using social media. Long may it continue!

Things social media cannot do

Introduction
Social media channels pervade our lives, we use them all the time for networking, socialising, marketing and so on. It’s easy to get drawn into the positive spin that surrounds them. With so much media attention, and with so many advocates (every marketer seems to have the inside info on how to use them to promote your business), it’s easy to see how many business have come to regard social media as the magic bullet for increasing their sales and brand. They have become seduced by the increasingly pervasive influence of social media.

The harsh reality of course is that social media cannot solve every business problem, no matter what the pundits may have you believe. Nor is it a quick fire solution for achieving rapid marketing or business objectives.

Social media should instead be regarded as an enabler to change, rather than the change itself. It is the catalyst for change. It cannot create what does not already exist.

To manage expectations, it is as important to know what social media cannot do, as to know what it can do.

So what sorts of things can social media NOT do:

• Social media cannot replace a marketing strategy
• Social media cannot change the intrinsic appeal or success of your brand
• Social media cannot be a success factor without a realistic level of investment

Social media cannot replace a marketing strategy
Many businesses think that having a Facebook page, a Twitter account or a Youtube channel is social media marketing. Understanding the opportunities within social media, and how your marketing strategy can be executed is what makes for real marketing – not the vehicles themselves.

Without a clear marketing strategy, you are prone to quantifying simple metrics such as number of fans, followers or friends as benchmarks of success. These numbers are often taken without any context, and without any relevance to how they impact on the business.

Social media cannot change the intrinsic appeal or success of your brand
Nothing can save a bad product or service, no matter how much it is dressed up by social media. You still need to have a product or service that adds value to the customer. Unless your brand gives the customer some tangible business benefit, no amount of marketing will save it.

Social media cannot be a success factor without a realistic level of investment
Setting up a Facebook page, a Twitter account or a Youtube channel are inexpensive, and so are often referred to as “earned media”, meaning that they are free or cheap. It’s true, setting up these things is cheap. However, a well developed, integrated, ongoing social media strategy will incorporate a host of tools, technologies, applications, design and so on. You will also probably require monitoring and analysis tools, not to mention the time and effort to maintain all these elements on an ongoing basis.

Summary
Social media is not a silver bullet. It is not the solution by itself. It requires planning, investment and creativity to make it work. You still need to have a valuable service or product. You still require a strategy for marketing that service / product. You still require investment to ensure you can maintain an adequate level of marketing across your chosen social media channels.

Are you stifling your staff's creativity?

While most sensible folks appreciate the need for an organisation to be safe and secure, this should not be at the expense of giving your staff access to information and technology. Frequently blocked sources of information includes the following:

• - Webmail
• - Blogs
• - Forums
• - Social media

I fail to understand why any organisation would block access to information. Blocking access to blogs and forums does not make any sense to me. I would even question the need to block access to social media and webmail. If people wish to check their webmail or update their Facebook page during their lunch time, then that is their business.

My main means of keeping my knowledge up to date in terms of technology is to use Web 2.0 applications such as blogs, forums and social media. For example, I follow many people on Twitter for their views and opinions on the latest technologies. Often, they may link to their latest blog, where they have written an article giving their thoughts on a specific technology. This is now how I keep up to date. I can access more information in a shorter time.

As a software developer, I need access to this sort of information. I also need access to the latest technologies as they come out, so that I can play with them, evaluate them, see what they can and cannot do. We have seen applications such as Google Wave and Google Buzz coming online, and the only way to see what they are about and what benefits they may offer an organisation is to start using them. You just never know, an innovative use for them may come about as a result.

This is where a different mind set comes into play. Some people demand to be shown a clear business case for granting access to particular technologies, tools and information, and some people do not. For these latter people, the benefits are obvious enough. Their staff have access to information. By being allowed to use the latest tools, they gain a competitive edge and increase their skills and knowledge.

If you give your staff access to information, tools and technology, then you are empowering them. As someone who works in the field of software, it's vitally important that I have access to this information and tools. Denying your staff the tools they need to do their jobs - not just today but tomorrow - is misguided. If you don't use these yourself, then that's not a valid reason for denying them to those that do. Find out what they are why they are important to your staff.

A sensible compromise needs to be found, where the enterprise is secure, but also where your staff have access to the information and tools they need. Otherwise, you may be stifling their creativity!

A word of caution using third party social media tools

Third party social media tools can be a double edged sword. On the one hand they get you up and running quickly, with little or zero up front expenses, and little if any technical knowledge. On the other hand, you are placing your content in the hands of a third party supplier without the benefit of a contract to safe guard yourself.

Google's blogging tool Blogger (used by me on this very blog) recently closed down several music sites without warning, and thus not giving the user any time to backup their blog. All the blogs that Google closed were operating legitimately under Blogger's own Terms and Conditions.

Google is not alone in closing down sites in this way. Yahoo closed down its photo hosting service back in July 2007, giving its users only three months to claim their photos before Yahoo purged the site.

While these sorts of actions may be rare, they still cause a great deal of frustration and inconvenience when they do. So it is worth asking yourself the question "How would I recreate my online social media presence if my social media supplier withdrew its services?"

Whether you host your own social media applications or not, your social media content should be backed up. In the event of a disaster, you should be able to recover your content back to its previous state, whether you do this using the original social media tool or not.

If you are using the Google Blogger tool (like I do), then you can export your blog directly from within the blog editor (once logged in, go to Settings and the option for exporting your blog is at the top). Most blog editors will have a similar feature.

Also, you can save the raw XML feed from your blog. To save the latest 1000 feeds for my own blog I would need to enter http://www.domburf.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?max-results=1000 into my browser.

So it's worth investigating what facilities your social media tool has for allowing you to backup your content.

And don't delay, do it today!

Social media staff guidelines

There continues to be a lot of discussion surrounding the issue relating to how staff should engage with others on social networks in their official capacity as an employee of an organisation. This usually involves having policies in place that employees need to adhere to. This is particularly true of local government (local and central). Employees want policies that set out the ground rules for social media engagement, that give clear guidance on how employees can and should use social networks to engage with others.

Issues that any policy needs to address could included the following:

· What is acceptable when an employee replies to a blog or forum comment?
· What is considered confidential?
· What can and cannot be discussed or revealed?

For anyone working within government (myself included) there are already a set of guidelines under the online participation guidance for civil servants, which were developed by the Minister for Digital Engagement. These guidelines are broad enough that they can and should form the basis for any social media policy, whether it be for the public or private sector.

Laurel Papworth has also created a list of 40 social media staff guidelines, so there should be enough material between these two links to create your own organisational social media policy.

The development of any policy needs to be conducted with the buy in from key representatives, including upper management, communications and anyone else who will be actively or indirectly involved. What you don’t want is your policy being created by small, very keen and possibly unrepresentative group of employees. While they may be acting with the best of intentions, any social media policy needs acceptance and buy in from upper management. This at least ensures that they have read and understood the policy, and are happy with its contents. It is best to get this the policy formally signed off as an official work policy.

Once the policy has been formally signed off, then it needs to be circulated to those employees who will be responsible for engaging with social media on the organisation’s behalf. Presumably, some of these employees will have been involved in the creation of the policy, but depending on the size of organisation, maybe not everyone will have been involved in this process.

It’s important for any organisation that wishes to engage with social media that its employees have clear and concise guidelines defining what constitutes acceptable engagement.

The positive benefits of social media

Media distortion of the negatives
I am sure we've all heard the negative news stories relating to social media, especially within the workplace. No matter how unfounded or untrue some of these accusations may be, they have been widely circulated by a media that has little grasp of Web 2.0 or social media.

In an attempt to redress the balance, I thought I'd outline just a few of the positive benefits of social media, giving some examples of how I use it.

Staying up to date
First of all, as a professional software developer, I use it to stay in touch with the latest technological developments, be they related to software, social media, applications, architectures and so on. On Twitter, I follow many technologists, from a diverse range of technical backgrounds. Some are published authors and speakers. All are interesting and worth following if you have an interest in technology.

Often, I have sent a message or question to one of them, and more importantly, received a reply. This is a great way to engage with someone on a particular topic. Not only do I get to read the reply, but so does anyone else who has access to their social media channels too, so the information is circulated to a much wider audience.

Promotion
Social media can be used to promote yourself, your business or your campaigns and causes. This is something I do regularly. My Facebook and Twitter channels are full of links to my blogs, campaign and charity groups or causes I want to champion (such as PETA). I may simply link to an article which criticises some element of government legislation, I may ask a question to get others to think about the issue, I may link to a video showing animal abuse, or anything else I want to draw people's attention to.

This is a very powerful tool, and can be very effective. If you run a business or charity, you will be much more effective if you incorporate social media channels into your overall marketing and promotion strategy. Just to be clear, I am not advocating replacing your current marketing and promotion channels, but suggesting you add social media to complement your existing channels.

Spread the word
With real time social media channels such as Twitter, news and information can be spread instantly. Agencies such as BBC News and Downing Street use Twitter to great effect, to get the news out quickly, and usually before the more traditional news channels can. After all, it is quicker to type a brief message into Twitter and hit send, than put out the same story on the radio or television, which requires much more co-ordination and organisation.

The downside to this of course, is that it is just as quick to spread dis-information, whether deliberately or otherwise. This is not a fair criticism of the technology though, rather its mis-use by disingenuous people.

Power to the people!
During the Iran election protests earlier this year, many Iranian citizens were able to share their experiences to the Western world via social media channels. These were spread quickly around the Internet, and reported by Western news agencies. To spread information so quickly like this would have been almost impossible before. As long as you have Internet access, you have a voice, and more importantly, you have an audience.

And finally...
While certain sections of the media may indulge themselves by concentrating on the more negative aspects of social media, practically all of which are not related to the technologies themselves but their mis-use by human beings, we should not focus too heavily on them. With a little common sense, we can all use social media safely and sensibly.

Blocking web sites does not stop time wasters

Many companies and organisations cite the reason of reduced levels of productivity as a driver for blocking web sites, particularly social media sites such as Facebook, Twitter and the like.

It should be obvious to anyone who has given this more than a moments thought, that blocking access to certain web sites will not stop a time waster from wasting their time - they will simply waste their time in other ways.

As I have said before in previous articles, the issue of dealing with people spending too much time on social media sites during working hours should be dealt with by measuring their performance against set targets i.e. by measuring their performance indicators. Time wasting should NOT be dealt with by technological intervention. Using technology is a very blunt instrument which does not adequately deal with the problem.

There are many reasons why an individual may waste their time. They may be lacking in motivation, suffering from stress, a personal issue or any number of other reasons. What is important is to get to the bottom of the underlying problem, not simply tackle its after effects. Using technology to deal with a potential lack of motivation, does not deal with the lack of motivation.

The reason there is an appetite for blocking social media sites, is that many people simply do not understand it. I think I can safely predict than over the next few years, social media will be as ingrained into our collective technological consciousness as email and the Internet currently is.

Governance using social media in the work place

The debate
There is currently a great deal of debate, not to mention dispute, surrounding the use of social media within the work place. From outright banning of all social media sites, to an open policy allowing their use, or somewhere in between.

The general reason given by employers who ban social media sites is that they lead to a decrease in productivity. Employees who have access to social media sites such as Facebook or Twitter, will allegedly waste valuable time on such sites, rather than their day job.

Employers need to be forward thinking
Many organisations are adopting social media sites as part of their long term marketing strategies, so it does seem rather short sighted to ban their use. How are employees going to learn to use such sites effectively, and build the necessary relationships if they are banned from using them in the workplace. If you are networking through social media sites, then you really need to be using them during working hours.

To quote David Wilde, Chief Information Officer at the London Borough of Waltham Forest 'For managers it can be difficult to know what exactly their employees are doing. But the organisation needs to be outcome-based, and I don't think we should be using technology to prevent access to social networking sites. If there are staff performance issues, we should address them directly'.

The solution
The solution then is to address performance issues as they arise. There are many reasons why an employee may not be productive, and placing the blame on their use of social media sites may be to miss a more fundamental issue. Blaming social media usage for a loss of productivity is a very blunt instrument to find what may be a complex problem. Lack of training, lack of confidence, bullying and domestic problems can all have a negative impact on an employee's productivity. Compared to these, social media usage seems trivial.

Social media boosts productivity
However, contradictory to the popular conception of social media sites lowering productivity, recent research has revealed that in fact they can increase productivity. Studies have ranged from suggesting that merely surfing the Internet can boost productivity, to suggesting that the specific use of social media can boost productivity.

Conclusion
With appropriate staff performance policies in place, there is no reason why an employer cannot allow their employees access to social media sites. If an employer is using social media as part of their networking or marketing strategies, there is far less of an excuse to banning such sites. What is needed is an open-minded and progressive attitude to their use, rather than the blunt instrument that is banning.

Developing a Web 2.0 strategy for local government

Following on from my earlier post about local government and Web 2.0, I would like to discuss in more detail about forming a strategy for implementing Web 2.0 in local government.

The two main factors to be discussed and agreed upon are what channels you will use, and what you intend to use them for.

However, more importantly, there needs to be a clear understanding of 'why' social media is being implemented. Without a clear appreciation of the benefits and uses of social media, any proposed strategy for its use will fail. What demographic group(s) are you trying to reach, and what do want to tell them?

As mentioned in my earlier post, social media gives local governments a very good vehicle in which to engage with harder to reach demographic groups, such as teenagers and young adults. It can give citizens a voice in decisions that affect their local communities. Social media can provide a two way communication channel, allowing citizens to be both informed (listen), and to have their say (talk). Social media presents local councils with unique opportunities that should be fully utilised.

Different social media channels work better than others for particular types of communication. For providing an 'online community', Facebook / MySpace may be suitable channels. For quick updates in real time, Twitter may be a more suitable channel. There are no rules, and each channel has its own particular set of advantages and disadvantages. Each social media channel should be used to its own particular strengths.

To summarise, any strategy for implementing Web 2.0 within local government should include answers to the following questions:

• What do you want to achieve with social media? Why are you using it?
• What social media channels will you use?
• What do you want to use these channels for?
• What resources do you have? Who will provide the content, who will post the replies, who will moderate the comments and so on.

Adopting Web 2.0 in local government

What is Web 2.0?
The term 'Web 2.0' has been attributed to Tim O'Reilly of O'Reilly Media. He coined the term to refer to the applications and software technologies that promote the sharing of digital information between users.

Web 2.0 is very often used synonymously with the terms 'social media' and 'social networking'. Indeed, they are often so similar that in most cases they can be used interchangeably (and so will this blog).

Web 2.0 represents a group of technologies including blogs, wikis, RSS feeds, podcasts etc. Together, they provide a more socially connected web, where everyone is able to update the information space. This is obviously a much more egalitarian model, and so the web also becomes a good leveller.

Web 2.0 and local government
As Web 2.0 allows users to update the information space, irrespective of who they are, it is therefore more than ably suited to be used within local government, where social democracy is important to its constituents.

The use of social media is one way in which a local council can become more transparent, accountable and possibly even increase it's levels of trust amongst its constituents.

As stated earlier, Web 2.0 provides an egalitarian playing field, where every citizen can have their voice heard. In a Web 2.0 world, you do not need to be a celebrity, famous or powerful. However, having a web presence is not necessarily the same thing as having a voice, and the two should not be confused. This is where local councils can play a major part by giving their citizens a voice they may not have otherwise. This promotes the ideals of citizen empowerment.

Uses of Web 2.0 in local government
There are many examples of Web 2.0 being used within local governments. Lichfield District Council, in partnership with Jadu Content Management Systems, have implemented a Twitter feed for their planning applications, and developed an application called Twitterplan to allow citizens to receive more specific planning notifications.

Redbridge council used online polls to solicit feedback from its citizens in relation to the closure of Post Offices. Their web site is generally considered cutting edge, whether it is to your personal tastes or not.

One very important trend in the use of Web 2.0 within the local government space, is to engage with a wider, harder to reach audience, such as teenagers and young adults. Through the use of social media sites such as Facebook, YouTube and Twitter, local councils have a far greater ability to engage with these younger demographic groups. Such channels are also more cost effective than the alternatives.

Employee access to social media sites
There still seems to be a mis-conception that using social media sites leads to a lowering of productivity, and so in many places of employment (including local councils), there is a move to ban all such sites. So although the citizens may benefit from the adoption of social media, it seems that its staff seem to be losing out.

This position is misguided. To use social media effectively, you need to engage with it. How can you efffectively use Facebook or Twitter, unless you actively use them yourself.

Thankfully, there do appear to be some forward thinking managers working in local government. To quote David Wilde, Chief Information Officer at the London Borough of Waltham Forest 'For managers it can be difficult to know what exactly their employees are doing. But the organisation needs to be outcome-based, and I don't think we should be using technology to prevent access to social networking sites. If there are staff performance issues, we should address them directly'.

Some guidelines for using Web 2.0

• Don't look at social media as purely about technology. Look at it as about being more effective, saving time and making cost savings. These are issues that citizens will greatly appreciate.
• Think about what resources you have. There is little point having a Twitter feed, or a blog, if there is no-one to respond to the incoming tweets / comments.
• A local government blog should be seen as a council wide communcations platform, not as a side project for a handful of keen individuals.
• Consider a Web 2.0 strategy. What social media channels will be used, and what will they be used for?
• Ensure you have a staff policy on the use of social media sites during working hours.

The attraction of tweeters

I have already written a blog about Twitter and social media, so I won't repeat the contents or ideas I have already described. Instead, I would like to focus on the attraction some twitterers have. I am not talking about celebrities, CEOs and the like, as by and large they have large numbers of followers as a consequence of their status.

Ashton Kutcher, who was the first person to achieve one million followers, did so on the back of his celebrity status. Without wishing to seem overly critical, it was certainly not because of his inspirational or informative tweets, as by and large, they are pretty self serving and self indulgent.

I also do not wish to repeat the plentiful advice given by so many others in how to increase your following count. Instead, I am more interested in the attraction of non celebrity twitterers. People who are not famous, are not celebrities, and do not own or run a business. In essence, I am talking about the vast majority of twitterers. The Ordinary Joe's of Twitter. Since I joined Twitter, I have been impressed by the large numbers of followers these non celebrity twitterers attract.

Why do some people attract such large followers? What is different about these people that separates them from the vast majority of twitterers? Some people simply don't 'get' Twitter. They fail to see what it's about, and therefore fail to harness its elegant, simple, yet powerful means of bringing people together. To mis-understand or fail to grasp what Twitter is about, is to miss a great opportunity to interact with large numbers of people.

During my time twittering, the Ordinary Joe's who have amassed large followers seem to share the following traits:

• They follow back. They are not Twitter snobs. By following more people back, they form more connections. This is an exponential increase in followers, where each new follower puts you in touch with a whole new set of followers. A large network can quickly amass by simply following more people back. However, this comes at the cost of becoming more difficult to manage, and so there is a trade off between generating more followers versus manageability.
• They engage and communicate with their followers. Rather than simply tweeting links and information into the void, they respond and interact with their followers. They reply to them, and hold conversations with them. It's always a really nice feeling to get a reply from someone on Twitter. They have taken the time to read and respond to your tweet, and are willing to engage with you.
• They share good links and information. They post useful, informative or interesting links. Unfortunately, there is no definition for what constitutes as useful, informative or interesting!

What sets these twitters apart is really down to the fact that they have grasped the concept of social media, and Twitter specifically, and are willing and able to engage with those that follow them. As I said in my earlier blog about social media, it all comes down to connecting people.

Pill solves complex social problem

Ok, I admit I borrowed my blog title from a chapter in Ben Goldacre's excellent book Bad Science (which I fully recommend everyone to read). He also has his own web site called Bad Science.

We've probably all read the headline grabbing stories whereby some new potion or pill is reported to cure or solve some social problem. "Omega-3 increases attention and behaviour in children", "Scientists have discovered fat gene", "New pill to aid weight loss". All of this sounding very familiar?

There are several things wrong with this level of reporting. Firstly, most of it is quite simply wrong, and is not based on any evidence. What evidence there may be, may simply show that there is a relationship between certain factors, but the underlying cause may not be known. What has been confused is what the study was measuring, with the conclusions of the scientists who undertook the study. For example, compare these two sentences: 'Research has shown that black children in America tend to perform less well in IQ tests than white children', and 'Research has shown that black people are less intelligent than white people'. The first sentence tells you what the research found - the evidence. The second tells you the hypothesis - the interpretation. They are very different.

Newspapers and magazines are in the business of maximising their circulation to as wide an audience as possible. Attention grabbing headlines such as those above certainly help. Why let something like the truth get in the way of selling a few more copies.

Secondly, stories such as this hide the solutions that may actually provide real benefit. Social problems such as obesity, problem behaviour in children and so on, are complex. Instead of focusing in on gimmicks such as quick fix pills and potions, we should instead be looking at parenting skills, teacher recruitment and retention, social exclusion, classroom size, social inequality and the widening income gap. None of these solutions however are going to grab any one's attention in the media. Finding a quick fix pill is much more like a 'proper' news story, than anything as boring as a parenting programme.

Thirdly, stories such as this do science no favours. As many of these stories are not based on clinical trials (which should have been double-blinded, randomised, tested against placebo, and their methods, measurements and results published in the public domain for closer scrutiny), then is it any wonder people have come to have completely unrealistic expectations of both the role of science, and what science can achieve.

Fourthly, they do the general public no favours. They feed our growing fixation for quick fixes. Rather than implement societal change and parenting programmes, we'll simply develop a pill instead - it takes far less effort. So real change is never forthcoming, and the problem never goes away.

The media (propped up by their PR machines), with their focus on maximising copy, are responsible for circulating vast quantities of mis-information and bullshit. If you are genuinely interested in science, and what a study may reveal, or what possible benefits a study may have on society, then read a proper science book, magazine or journal. I fully recommend New Scientist. Do not rely on getting your science information from the tabloids, broadsheets, daytime TV and the like. If you do, fully expect to be manipulated and lied to.

Why hasn't social media gone corporate yet?

With social media very quickly maturing and becoming more prevalent, it has still not been largely adopted by mainstream corporations and businesses.

Social media forms a part of many individuals daily lives, as a means of keeping in touch and networking with friends for example. The same holds true for a business. As a means of keeping in touch with your customers, as well as creating new ones, the opportunities are huge.

The savvy businesses (and there are many) have embraced the tide of social media. They are staying in touch with customers, keeping them informed of new services and/or products, and making new customers. More importantly, this brings the customer and supplier relationship much closer together in a way that is not possible using more traditional methods.

It seems that social media is still often seen as a toy and not a real business tool, used by the serious business. Some may question the value and benefit, or see it as a passing fad. As I have said in an earlier blog, social media is fundamentally about one thing - building connections.

Some businesses are gradually dipping their toes in the water, and hopefully many more will follow. From my own experience, a supplier from my work place is on Twitter (and hopefully they are reading this), and can testify to the positive benefits it has.

Social media is not going away any time soon, and the more quickly it is embraced and adopted, the better it will be for everyone in the supply chain - from the customer to the supplier.

The future of Social Media

We've seen many changes in the applications that are being used within the realm of Social Media. From Bebo, Facebook, StumbleUpon to Digg to name just a few. Where is this taking us, and what will Social Media look like in the future?

Well, I may not have a crystal ball, but I have noted several key developments that will almost certainly shape the future of Social Media applications.

Firstly, real time updates are crucial to the future of Social Media. This functionality is one of the key elements attributed to the rapid rise in success of Twitter. While all Social Media applications allow communication, they have largely been asynchronous communication. How do I know that this is critical? Because Facebook have very quickly responded to this feature of Twitter by adding the same functionality. As human beings, we converse in real time, and so any application that can emulate this ability is likely to succeed. This explains why instant messaging applications such as Microsoft Messenger are so popular. It is therefore important for any future Social Media application to allow real time updates of information, and to allow more human like synchronous conversations to occur. Like cash within the financial sector, liquidity is key.

Social media applications should allow for the greatest number of connections between users as possible. What I mean by this is that it should be possible for any given individual to connect with as many other individuals as possible. Many current Social Media applications work on the model that your network will consist only of people you know, without allowing you to search for and connect with people you don't know. If Social Media is about one thing, it is this: it is about connecting people. The Social Media application of the future will allow people to search for, connect with and communicate with as many people as they desire.

The Social Media application of the future must be developed using open and extensible technologies. You only have to look at the many applications that have developed around Facebook and Twitter to see this. If you develop your new Social Media application using proprietary technologies, then it is simply doomed to failure. The Internet is the biggest, most ubiquitous development platform there is, so this is an inexcusable faux pas.

These are fascinating times, and I cannot wait to see what the future holds.