Approaching the Federal election, there’s no doubt that the two biggest brands at the moment are the Australian Labor and Liberal Parties.
Examining the online presence surrounding the election, here are some key outtakes about how social media can be used to encourage consumers to act…

Getting people inspired

A couple of weeks ago, GetUP– an independent campaigning group launched an anti-Liberal video online (titled Tony Abbott’s Archaic Views), calling for donations from the public to put the ad on TV. Within a week of the launch the call raised over $300,000 and the clip has indeed been aired on television.

The viral element of this strategy is what made it successful. The ability for consumers to connect to other platforms such as Facebook and Twitter directly from GetUp’s website, saw the rapid spread of the video, and encouraged consumers to donate to the cause – seeing the direct result of their participation on TV.

Getting people involved

“Democracy is not a spectator sport,” reads the catch line on Oursay.org. This is an independent site that facilitates interaction between the public and politicians. Once you set up an account log in, you can post and vote for questions you would like to ask the politicians in the “hot seat”.

This platform directly engages with the audience, and places control into the hands of the users. Content is negotiated amongst consumers, and the most popular topics drive the conversation.

Getting people to interact (but don’t waste potential!)

The ALP has invented its own social media platform – Labor Connect – to act as a networking tool. The network currently possesses 20,000 community members, however falls short in a few areas.

From a new user’s perspective its lack of content and moderation, coupled with the inability to connect with the user’s existing social networks leaves the consumer directionless upon joining.  Nonetheless, this is an interesting example of what could be improved when establishing a social media platform.

Without examining Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and websites, these examples are only a small fraction of the use of social media in this year’s election. However, each tool illustrates how consumers can organise themselves on social media – driving the outcomes that they choose.

As part of last months State of Design Festival, Dan Hill, Senior Consultant with Arup ,was discussing some of the design innovations occurring around the world, and the potential they have to fundamentally change the way we interact with the physical environment.

One area he touched on that I found of particular interest was a traffic experiment in the city of Drachten, The Netherlands.

In 2002, all traffic signals were removed from a busy inner-city intersection that handles around 17,000 vehicles per day. The results can be viewed below…

I watched this short clip with a mixture of both fascination and horror as I waited to witness the imminent disastrous collision. However it never occurred, and Dan assured us that this intersection has proven to be essentially accident free!

The notion that a somewhat chaotic approach to traffic control, where anything goes and motorists, cyclists and pedestrians are left to sort out the rules amongst themselves initially seemed absurd. Yet upon further consideration this relaxation of the rules began to make more and more sense.

Perhaps, in many ways, it is actually the rigid rules and regulations of some activities that can lead participants to ‘switch off’. When expected to follow the prompts and directions prescribed to us by others, could it be the case that our level of engagement diminishes simultaneously?

When left to our own devices, armed solely with the desire to avoid smashing into something or someone else, we are suddenly required to pay attention, to increase our awareness and to apply a further level of consideration to our thoughts and actions.

Rolling this idea around in my head got me thinking about some of the unmoderated activity that happens everyday in our online research communities. The common assumption is that all of the real ‘nuggets’ of insight are derived purely from the research discussions we as moderators initiate.

However, when left to their own devices, our members not only initiate a great deal of their own discussions, but also show a great commitment toward ensuring the community runs smoothly; in many ways, they moderate each other. By practicing tolerance and embracing the different ideas and opinions of others, members prove to be very effective at creating a safe and harmonious place to interact.

Observing these interactions between community members is essentially very similar to observing Drachten’s traffic experiment. By removing the formal rules and regulations, and allowing individuals to navigate and negotiate themselves, we have the opportunity to gain a powerful insight into what they observe, what they pay attention to and how they respond.

Recently I sat in on an AMSRS webinar on Recent Advances in Qualitative Research hosted by Dr Sheila Keegan (UK).

It was so incredibly convenient! I didn’t have to block out my afternoon, drive across town or even change out of my jeans. Talking from her home at 2 in the morning on the other side of the globe, it felt like Sheila was talking to me personally. Her slides were right there in front of me, I could ask questions as soon as they popped into my head. I could even make a cup of tea without missing anything and check my emails during the less relevant parts.

What was interesting was that Sheila made the comment about being new to webinars and felt a bit strange sending her presentation out into the ether. She also suggested that she has some difficulty with the whole idea of conducting qualitative research on the internet, in particular the lack of face to face contact.

It struck me that the value and benefits of the webinar are very similar to online research communities. Yes there is a loss of the ability to gauge body language and facial expressions and being able to task a group to construct collages.
But there are so many benefits that outweigh those losses. Like me, people are saved of the trouble of travelling to a group venue, putting up with average sandwiches and sitting around with a group of strangers staring at a strangely oversized mirror. So people that would never attend are able to take part.

It’s also a bit like other non-face to face communication channels we use at the office. We share screens when one of us is working out of the office, at home or with our team in NZ; we iChat between offices to ask a quick question or share a passing thought. Ultimately it’s about enhanced creativity, efficiency and productivity and better, smarter outcomes.