K Street Cafe

This guest post comes from Ellie Brown, a graduate student at American University studying internet advocacy campaigns and blogging at the Daily Social.

Well what do you know? Nestlé listened. Following a two month Greenpeace assault on palm oil purchasing practices of the food giant, Nestlé announced earlier this week that they will stop purchasing palm oil (used in many popular products like Kit Kats) from companies that own “high-risk” plantations and farms. These high-risk plantations are accused of driving the destruction of natural habitats for animals like the orangutan. The new “zero-deforestation” policy is in partnership with The Forest Trust that will work with Nestlé to amend its palm oil purchasing policies.

Nestlé’s decision comes after a tumultuous 8-weeks in which Greenpeace released a provocative video on YouTube to raise awareness of Nestlé’s questionable methods for acquiring palm oil. The video, which likens eating a Kit Kat to eating an orangutan, was subsequently removed by Nestlé; an action that spurred an even greater backlash from the Greenpeace community who bombarded Nestlé with calls, emails and Facebook page comments. Now enter social media “meltdown” as Nestlé representatives responded to Facebook comments with mild requests for users to stop using altered versions of the Nestlé logo as their Facebook profile picture or risk their comments being taken down. Needless to say, users were not happy with this restriction of their right to publicly protest on an open forum like a company’s Facebook page and the comment threads were shared on blogs and news articles across the Internet – directing even more negative attention toward Nestlé.

As a result of the targeted Greenpeace campaign and the added headache of a social media crisis, Nestlé was forced to pay attention and had to address the problems with the palm oil it buys. Hopefully, Nestlé’s new policies will help save some orangutans and make some of us feel better about eating Kit Kats.

This weekend, nearly 300 top transparency and open government experts from non-profit, technology developer, and government staff communities gathered at George Washington University to attend the Sunlight Foundation’s Transparency Camp 2010. The purpose of this second annual “unconference” was to clarify the needs for making government transparent, both from a philosophical and a how-to perspective.

As with all of these self-organizing, “barcamp-style” unconferences, participants are actively tweeting their thoughts throughout the sessions. The depth of these sessions and Twitter discussions is such that this article cannot adequately cover them. Thankfully, the tweet-stream is available online here (or you can follow the hashtags #TCamp2010 and #TCamp10 yourself).

Some of the key points raised in sessions include:

1. Making government data accessible in online, machine-readable format is essential.

2. Transparency is essential to improve trust in government by making it more accountable.

3. Transparency is a long-term need, so building a strong foundation to ensure it continues to develop is essential.

4. Building a foundation for transparency means we cannot use as a short-term success metric how many people use what we are building now (that audience will grow over time).

5. Digital divide issues remain important and they are building universal broadband network, getting computers and mobile devices into the hands of underserved communities, training them on how to use these tools, and developing a culture that encourages people to use these resources.

The conversation will continue on Twitter and elsewhere, so book mark the Tweetstream link, follow along, and add your thoughts.

I was inspired by Amanda Phraner’s post, Foursquare for Advocacy. I have been using Foursquare for nearly a year now and love it (in fact I am the Mayor of Toscana West on I St, NW, DC between 13th and 14th… great place for lunch in the bar).

The idea of using Foursquare for advocacy makes a lot of sense, taking the flash mob notion to another level. Because Foursquare lets you post the address where you are and a brief comment, it is a great way to tell the world about demonstrations, events, and other activist activities you want people to join.

This has great potential, and it doesn’t matter that there are only 1 million Foursquare users, which is rather a lot, anyway. Not only is Foursquare mobile, allowing you to check in from anywhere, but it can post your check-in message and address to Twitter and Facebook. This immediately reaches out to all of your followers and friends and taps into the viral potential we all know and love.

(more…)

From Stephanie Vance, Advocacy Guru:

I want to let you know about an important upcoming event that may have the potential to change how you conduct citizen-based advocacy campaigns. On Wednesday, January 27th, 2010 from 8:30am to 12:30pm, George Washington University’s Graduate School of Political Management will be hosting a forum on the ethics of grassroots. In light of recent advocacy-related events, including the sending of fake “grassroots” letters to Capitol Hill, angry citizens yelling at members of Congress during town hall meetings, and policy persuasion campaigns based on inaccurate or misleading information, this forum will address the question “is it time to consider an ethical code of conduct for grassroots advocacy practitioners?” As one of the organizers of the event, I can tell you that we want and need your opinions on this topic. You can view a draft code of ethics at the registration site, which is www.gspm.org/ethics. Attendees will have an opportunity to review the proposed code and share their views before, during and after the forum — as long as you do it nicely with no yelling .

Among the sponsors are ASAE, the Public Affairs Council, Women in Government Relations, the American Association of Political Consultants, the Congressional Management Foundation and a host of others. Speakers include Dave Wenhold of the American League of Lobbyists, Brooks Jackson of factcheck.org and Frank Sesno of the GW School of Media and Public Affairs. In addition to an interesting topic discussion, this event will offer government relations practitioners the opportunity to network with others in the field and get up to speed on the latest developments in the field of grassroots.

Anyone involved in the practice of grassroots advocacy should plan to attend this event. It is free and open to the public and will be held at the Jack Morton Auditorium at 805 21st Street NW in Washington, DC. Again, there is more information at www.gspm.org/ethics.

We hope this will prove to be a groundbreaking conversation and we sincerely hope you’ll be a part of it.

I recently gave a lecture at American University’s Public Affairs and Advocacy Institute on how to use social media and other online strategies for advocacy. You can watch it here.

I recently gave an interview for Studio 1080 on KUDO in Anchorage, AK about using Twitter for advocacy/marketing and wanted to share it with you. Here is the gist of the conversation:

Why tweet?

In the US alone, there are 26.5 million people on Twitter and among them are many, if not most of the most influential people in the country. These people are talking about all of the issues of the day, from the most mundane to the most profound. If you are not on Twitter, you are not part of the conversations that matter most to you and your cause, and you are missing the opportunity to engage with the people who are most able to influence large segments of the country and the key decision makers affecting your mission. (more…)

Check out this video story from NationalJournal.com the featuring clips from the March Internet Advocacy Roundtable on Video Strategy for Advocacy and a video interview with me and Sean Gibbons.

There is a great discussion going on about whether Twitter is a strategy, or not, on the Progress Exchange Listserv. It was launched by Jon Pincus’s blog post on Tales from the Net and rejoined by Colin Delany on ePolitics.

Jon’s post

Colin’s response to Jon

Here is my response:

At the risk of being inflammatory (no offense meant Jon)… come on folks… aren’t we past the days when we refer to a tool (or a communication channel) as a strategy? The internet is not a strategy. A blog is not a strategy. And neither is Twitter.

These are channels for communication and we develop strategies for using them.

I am a big fan of Twitter. And I am always developing strategies for using it. But that is fundamentally different from saying Twitter is a strategy. Twitter can be used to inform people about ideas, promote events, engage conversations, and mobilize actions. And for each of these you can adopt a variety of strategies and tactics (using hashtags to engage different groups, linking groups together, etc.).

I also believe, as McLuhan wrote, that technology is not ideologically neutral. Tools are not just tools that can be used for any purpose. Each communication tool has its own ideology. For example, socially dynamic tools like Twitter are inherently more democratic than broadcast tools like TV. Thus, strategies for Twitter that exploit the democratic nature of the channel will work better than command and control strategies. And vice versa for TV.

What makes Twitter inherently democratic? Well, 1) generally anyone can follow anyone else and 2) no one can restrict who uses a hashtag or how they use it. What makes TV inherently undemocratic? 1) only the producers of the content control the content, 2) access to the channel is restricted, and 3) no feedback loop.

OK… so the ideology of Twitter constrains what strategies work on it (or at least work better), but the bottom line is still: Twitter is not a strategy, but a channel that allows us to pursue a variety of strategies for how we use it.

Join me at the 2009 Politics Online Conference, April 20-21 in Washington, DC! I am moderating two panels you should definitely attend:

Panel #1

Title of panel: Advocacy 3-D

Description of Panel: We will explore the dimensions of online advocacy strategy, working our way from 1-D strategies for disseminating your message, through 2-D strategies for mobilizing action and interaction, to 3-D strategies for navigating advocacy in the social web.

Day/Time of Panel: Monday, 4/20/2009 3:30pm

Panel #2

Title of panel: Academic Research on Internet Tools in the 2008 Election

Description of Panel: This panel features new scholarly research on the use of online tools in the 2008 election.

Day/Time of Panel: Tuesday, 4/21/2009 10:00am

The 2009 Politics Online Conference

April 20-21 (Monday-Tuesday)

The Ronald Reagan Building

1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20004

See you there.

Join us on December 18, 2008 for an Internet Advocacy Roundtable that will explore how organizations can best address the challenges associated with the rapid growth of social media that has increased the fragmentation of the channels of public discourse. While the focus of the discussion will be on the relationships and influence of the English language blogosphere, the interrelationships between other forms of social media and blogs will also be explored.

Our speakers include:
*Marty Kearns, Green Media Toolshed, Netcentric Campaigns
*John Kelly, Morningside Analytics
*Ken Deutsch, Morningside Analytics

The event will take place on Thursday, December 18, 2008, 3:00pm—5:00pm at the Center for American Progress Action Fund (1333 H St. NW, 10th Floor, Washington, DC 2000).Please RSVP here as seats are limited.

You can also follow the event via a live stream here. Also, check out the archives of past Internet Advocacy Roundtables and announcement of upcoming events here.