Towards digital exclusion?
Earlier this month I read a great article - Social networking: Not as inclusive as you might think!
Some people will know that I have a passing interest in accessibility and that I have written a little on it in the past. So, when I saw the article it piqued my interest. I won’t repeat all of the findings here; I recommend reading the article, but I think some of them are worth discussing and thinking about in an educational context.
At various conferences I’ve attended over the last 12 months the virtue of using social networks has been a major topic, and whilst there have been warnings about user data etc, there has been little said about accessibility. The initial deployment of these tools meant that we saw students using them for fun and they were separate to an Institution’s learning and research activities. However it wasn’t long before we saw lecturers and researchers starting to use the tools in their practice, with some social networking tools deployed on institutional servers. I haven’t seen any accessibility audits of these tools but it would be interesting to see if they were deployed with the same rigorous checking as Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs). In fact, for all the criticisms of VLEs, the need to recognise the diversity of students using them was high on their agenda, whether they were large powerful corporate VLEs or homegrown. The COSE system developed at Staffordshire University was a prime example of where the needs of all users were put at the centre of development. Generally, social networking tools put the emphasis on interactions between users at the centre, or in some the need to generate income through advertising. This can be detrimental to some users. A further issue is the constant changing of the systems: new features seem to come on stream almost weekly (if not more often), and it is hard enough for a user who is unimpaired - a user with a cognitive disability must get very frustrated. There is also an emphasis on ‘cool’ layouts, often done in ways that are inaccessible rather than using good coding techniques.
Content is another major issue. Recently it was explained to me by an accessibility apologist that “Web 2.0 and social software are very accessible”. “How so?” asks I. “Because in user generated content everyone, not just those technically able, can tag material with context, add transcripts to videos and podcasts, and explain what is going on images”. And he was absolutely right – but the reality is that they don’t! Browse the video, picture and podcast sites and count the instances where this has happened.
Why is this becoming a problem? Because at the moment a lot of people in both education and working with social software tools are blurring the boundaries, for example, tools that can interface with social networking sites and VLEs. In some cases tutors have been placing material on social networking sites rather than the VLE and point students there instead. Did they check all their students could access it first?
Finally, a word on the social model of disability, something that most disability organisations work towards and advocate. The article I mentioned at the beginning of this post reports that:
“A lack of accessibility is driving many disabled web users to create their own, alternative social-networking platforms. US-based sites such as Disaboom and Don’t Dis Me, for example, provide disabled people with a secure, accessible online community along with advice, forums and information. In the UK, there are a growing number of social-networking sites for disabled people, including Y-A-P, launched earlier this year by Mencap, and CKfriends.org.uk, a Scottish site that provides a safe online community for adults with learning disabilities”.
Rather than inclusion, social networking sites are actually creating a divide in digital space, a space where it shouldn’t matter about disability, race or gender.
Seven steps to developing an effective communications plan
This week Alice Gugan, who works with the U&I team on communications and marketing, has written seven steps to developing an effective communications plan. This is a really important area for any project involved in the Users and Innovation programme as many of the themes will be based on new and emerging technology; effectively communicating to potential audiences what a project is about is of paramount importance when little or nothing is known in the area.
Marketing or disseminating your project is more than having a website. Your project is exciting and dynamic and for the most part people will want to know about it! Sometimes it’s not easy to see clearly and distinctly which bits to tell others about.
Take a step back and try telling a completely new person what it is you do (try telling the cat, if you can’t get someone else to listen, not a dog; too indulgent!). This may give you a whole new perspective.
Marketing is rather a grand term for really what is basically common sense:
- What are you doing?
- Why is it important?
- Why will it make a difference and to who?
A little bit of planning in this area will pay dividends in terms of coherence and consistency in what you want to say and when. You also need to give some thought, especially in complex projects, to who is going to do the talking!
Here are seven things to think about in putting together a comms plan:
1. Know what your overall priorities and objectives are.
This might sound ridiculous; of course you know; you’ve got a project plan. But how do these objectives translate into messages your audience can either relate to or will be interested in? How do they fit in with what might be happening in the wider world? Many priorities and objectives don’t necessarily need to be relayed to anyone outside a project – they’re merely part of the development. Having those accessible on a website or where people can find them if they need to, should be fine. But one or two will be real corkers, else you’d not be doing the work!
2. What main themes do they fall into?
Keep these themes straightforward.
3. Who do you want to tell?
And who needs to know (funders, partners)? How aware of you or your activity are they already? (one of the biggest challenges is dealing with different potential audiences who are at differing ends of the awareness spectrum). Try not to be too ambitious and reach too many people – better to keep it small and do it well. Map your audiences against their likely angle of interest in the project (in the technical or the social networking side for instance?).
4. How do you think you can reach them?
What do they read/attend/listen to/log onto? How much of your dissemination might be simply word of mouth and networking at particular events? If that works for you, fantastic; don’t discount it! Equally, other partners can help your message get across and often even strengthen it.
5. What bite-sized messages can you break your themes down to?
Don’t confuse through making a message too complex or irrelevant. Are the end-users really going to need to know all about how the technology works? Focus on what each person needs to know and tell them simply and succinctly. Avoid jargon and too much background. If people want that they can get it later. Less is more, as long as less gets to the point!
6. What sort of timescales are realistic?
Don’t be over-optimistic; don’t underestimate preparation time and capacity. Having just a few, but strong, key comms milestones is probably a good thing to aim for, with perhaps some drip-feed for inbetween times.
7. And finally
Map all these back to objectives and main themes – keep it focussed on the end goals!
A comms plan often doesn’t seem to be finished – and maybe that’s how it should be, because they do need constant revisiting; things change, both in the outside environment and within the project. So keep going back to it, and treat it as a living document.
Facebook Friday?
While Facebook is being banned from many workplaces, Serena Software has decided to take the opposite approach. A company-wide program called “Facebook Fridays” will encourage employees to spend one hour each Friday updating their FB profiles and creating personal connections between colleagues and clients and having ‘fun’. The initiative began on Friday November 2nd and will eventually be rolled out in 18 countries where the company has offices.
In the same week McAfee have released a report stating that one in five businesses block sites such as Facebook and MySpace, but that they expected it to be much higher because “IT managers should be well aware of the dangers”.
However, Toralv Dirro from McAfee stated:
“IT decision makers often have the difficult job of making a choice between what they know are serious security threats and other business priorities such as productivity and employee morale.” He played down the role of security software and firewalls in the debate: “The lines between work and play are blurring… but putting fair-usage policies in place and educating people on how to be safe on these sites is the most realistic option.”
So what role can social networking sites genuinely fill in a business operation, be that educational or commercial? What is your experience of social software directly connected to your work, as opposed to connected to the relationships that are part of that work – or is this the same thing? Let us know your thoughts as the Facebook debate continues!
Portrait of a User #2
S, Academic
Interview conducted by email, Oct 07
What do you think of as ‘technology’?
Well, even a pen was technology at one stage!
Technology is practical, every day, stuff which we take for granted (umm, usually powered by electricity in some form) as well as gadgetry and gizmos.
How would you describe your ability to use technology?
Well, when I was teaching computing I would have said that I was at the cutting edge but since I stopped my skills have remained in a state of limbo whilst the technology has moved on. But I’m happy to embrace new technology as, and when I need to.
What sort of technologies do you typically use?
Mobile technologies, my PDA replaced my trusty filofax two years ago. And yes, I do use it; it is more than a glorified diary, I use the excel spreadsheets for expenses and mpg of my car, word for notes of meetings if I haven’t got my laptop. And yes, it does have a selection of music and photos too. It also has wireless, so I use it for email and internet access when away from the office or abroad. It is both work and pleasure.
My mobile phone is 8 years old - state of the art at the time but it functions. I usually have a digital camera with me, so there is no need for a camera phone (for better quality photos and videos). My PDA gives me access to email, so no need for that either.My laptop goes most places with me but this will change when I get my PDA keyboard working efficiently! And yes, I have an ipod too with music, photos and some files.I’ll get SKYPE, when more than one other person I know uses it!
What’s on your business card?
A colleague from a library in the North East sent me a PDF of his new business card this week. It looked for all intents and purposes like a traditional business card but I noticed that other than just the institution’s website, his email and directline, there were two additions. These included his MSN messenger address and his Skype details. This is a major change for his institution’s Corporate Communications Unit.
The business card is in many ways a physical representation of interoperability. They are normally the same or similar size and carry standard information. The modern business card has its roots in the visiting cards of 17th Century France, presented to servants as a means of introducing visitors, when it would contain at the minimum a name, title and where appropriate a coat of arms or crest. In the 19th Century they were adapted for business use, where a visiting card may have been presented when making a social call, a business card would state what business you were in and the address as a way of saying you had called and expected a bill to be settled. This practice of having a card to represent you in your business became what we now have, an effective means of exchanging simple information about each other’s roles and how to keep in touch. This 19th Century method remained largely unchanged until the advent of the telephone, whereupon the telephone number was also added, in the 80s a fax number, and in the 90s we saw the widespread addition of e-mail being added and the business’ website address.
Perhaps then the business card can be seen as a way of measuring the spread of communication technologies. This year I have attended several conferences, and as always at these things you end up with a fistful of business cards: mine are filed in a large pile on my desk. When my colleague sent me his PDF it prompted me to pick up the pile and see what other information was being added to the cards (disclaimer: this is in no way scientific!)
Out of the 157 cards that I’ve collected (in 18months or so)
- All bar 1 had name, title/role, address (mainly HEIs), telephone and email.
- 93 had a Fax number (59%)
- 81 had a personal/project website (52%)
- 31 had a blog address (20%)
- 24 had a MSN messenger or other IM address (15%)
- 7 had a skype address (4%)
- 1 had a LinkedIn public profile address (had no physical address)
What does this all tell us? Probably not a lot, at the positive end of the spectrum (from my perspective) I wonder if it says we are deviating from the norm and there is acceptance that ‘users’ are taking control of the way in which they are contacted. I also wonder how the demographic changes depending on which conferences you go to, and how it will change over the next 18 months.
-
Lawrie is available through Skype
-
