Archive for the 'blogging' Category

I took a holiday and that included not blogging, so there.

Well it’s been pretty quiet around here for the past couple of weeks hasn’t it? I took a couple of weeks off for a beach holiday with the fam, up the coast in Port Stephens. Beautiful spot! (see pic).
Port Stephens

Obviously I didn’t blog while on holiday, and I didn’t pre-write any posts and schedule them to be published while I was away, as many would advise. I just had a much needed holiday and I’m not apologising for it, just explaining where I’ve been. It was good. I think taking some time off to recharge and reflect on life is important.

If you follow some of my tweets you’ll know that I didn’t take a holiday from tweeting. I just tweeted less, and about holiday activities, and on thoughts mostly stimulated by holiday reading. Holiday tweeting is different from usual tweeting, so there.

I’m back now. What did I miss?

How’s Murdoch’s News paywall working out so far?

I came across this article from The Independent not long ago which suggests that all is not well behind the great News paywall experiment. Ian Burrell maintains that traffic to the site may have fallen by 90 percent and some advertisers have abandoned the site altogether.

The Time paywall

Faced with a collapse in traffic to thetimes.co.uk, some advertisers have simply abandoned the site. Rob Lynam, head of press trading at the media agency MEC, whose clients include Lloyds Banking Group, Orange, Morrisons and Chanel, says, “We are just not advertising on it. If there’s no traffic on there, there’s no point in advertising on there.” Lynam says he has been told by News International insiders that traffic to The Times site has fallen by 90 per cent since the introduction of charges.

It’s also stated that, so far, actual figures are a closely guarded secret, so presumably nobody outside the organisation really knows for sure at this stage. If it is true, there must be a few other sites and blogs out there who are loving the extra traffic that used to go to The Times and The Sunday Times sites. Thanks Rupert?

HaHa, Twitter Movie Trailer! [parody video]

Well by now you’ve probably seen the trailer for the much anticipated, and apparently quite dark, movie about the founding of Facebook, The Social Network. Now comes a new spoof (there are others) of The Social Network trailer, complete with an excellent parody soundtrack.

The Twit Network trailer relentlessly lampoons Twitter’s flood of minutiae from people’s everyday lives. It begins with Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey having a conversation with a friend which goes “I need to create a way to blog that is as random and incoherent as writing on a bathroom wall”. “Why”. “Because normal blogging is tedious and dumb and leads to fully formed ideas”.  I’m sure you get the picture. It’s funny :)

The parody trailer also begs the question, if  The Social Network turns out to be a box office success, will we one day see a feature film about Twitter too?

On a side note, as you can see from the tweet below, which is a quote from the video trailer, Twitter Co-founder Biz Stone seems to think it’s funny too.

Biz Stone Twitter

via Mashable

I take issue with the label Green, here’s why.

From a mainstream communications point of view, I think there’s a growing issue with labeling things “Green”, or having a separate category for Green, as is nearly always the case. It’s true, a few individuals, organisations and businesses have started to move beyond using the Green label but most have not yet.

Green

Mainstream backdrop

A little background is in order first. Over the past few decades, since the sixties and even before that, there has been growing concern around the world over rising pollution levels and increasing environmental degradation in general. In addition, world population is now approaching seven billion people, estimated to reach nine billion around 2050.

Further, since the eighties, mounting scientific evidence of human induced climate change (despite ongoing attempts to discredit the science), has become occasional front page news, and pretty much never out of the news completely. That’s most unlikely to change over the coming years.

We had the situation late last year where governments who agree that climate change exists and is a significant problem, met in Copenhagen to attempt to hash out a binding global agreement to curb global emissions. There was unprecedented media attention on the COP15 event and an enormous amount of pressure from different individuals and groups to achieve a sensible outcome. Needless to say, there was an accord reached but expectations were not met at Copenhagen.

However, it’s not over by a long shot. Global warming is still on the agenda and it’s not going away. As I said on Twitter the other day, I’m 100% convinced that climate change will continue to cause catastrophic damage to the careers of quite a few of the world’s politicians. In Australia (where I live), Kevin Rudd’s position as Prime Minister comes to mind. Among other issues, after publicly staking so much on it, he never really recovered from the failure at Copenhagen and his party’s failure to get a proposed emissions trading scheme signed into law. He was ousted from within the party after a significant drop in the polls. The new leader, Julia Gillard, will face the issue again should she be reelected.

The problem with Green

So given the contemporary situation, what’s my issue with the current proliferation of the “Green” label or category? What’s not to like? What we have appearing all over the place recently are things like Green sections on popular news blogs, sites and in newspapers. We have Green products proliferating, and companies advertising the new Greenness of their products and services, in some cases whether they are actually more environmentally friendly or not.

“Greenwashing” is a term I have less of a problem with by the way, as it seems like a fairly descriptive and accurate term for what has gone on in some cases. BP’s Beyond Petroleum makeover springs to mind as an obvious example, but there are many subtler versions out there. But I digress.

Now, after Copenhagen, we have governments such as the Obama Administration talking up a much needed push towards a new, emerging green economy, and the many green collar jobs that will create. We have technology related blogs and sites introducing Greentech sections. We have Green online social networkers wanting to build sizeable communities and become ‘friends’ with as many people as possible in order to help spread the word and get action on various environmental issues.

Don’t get me wrong, this is all well and good. Green has been useful and has worked well to attract and communicate with a certain percentage of people. I don’t think the fact that there’s a growing awareness and a proliferation of information, ideas and action is bad at all. It’s brilliant! The main reason I now have a issue with the label “Green”, is that we have got to the point where it’s going to marginalise what needs to become very mainstream, ubiquitous in fact.

So what next?

There are many people, perhaps the majority, who do not want to identify as Green and probably never will. Green is a turn off to many. Even though the label Green has become a lot more mainstream, to many it still conjures up images of hippies, “greenies”, “treehuggers” and environmental activists climbing chimneys.

But hey, guess what? A lot of these people would still like to help fix the environment even though they don’t identify with the Green label. Many might switch to clean power given half a chance, rather than use coal-fired power, if it comes at the right price that is. Many might buy an electric car one day that runs on clean energy. They might buy it because the technology is more advanced and it’s more efficient. They might buy more environmentally friendly products, but because they are better quality products, not just because they are greener.  They might buy locally grown food, it might be organic, but they might buy it because it tastes better and is healthier, and because Jamie Oliver says it’s better. But green? No not me.

We will have big businesses who come to realise that investing in clean technologies, efficiencies and more sustainable production processes will in the long run make them even more profitable. It will also give them a leading edge when it comes to how their brand is viewed by the public, their customers, suppliers, shareholders and by the media. They won’t have to shout “we’re Green” and try and make it stick. It’ll become obvious they are making real changes when perhaps others aren’t doing so much.

The issues need to be so mainstream that they need to be integrated within many other information categories: news, technology, politics, business and finance, transport, energy, food, lifestyle, you name it. The majority of people in the world are going to need to change the way we live and work in order to move towards a more sustainable situation. Having a Green category that appeals to only a minority (admittedly growing) percentage of people is simply not going to be enough to do the job.

So I think it’s time to move beyond the Green label. It’s been useful but it’s served its purpose. It is happening to a certain extent but it needs to go much further. Most of the time I think Green in used for want of something better. I think sustainability is not a bad term to use within businesses. I think the term Clean is useful when talking about the clean economy, clean energy and cleantech. Eco can be useful but is a bit like Green in that it has often been used as a greenwashing instrument. Perhaps we need some new terms. Perhaps we don’t need a new label at all. After all, the idea of, and push for a more sustainable future needs to become so mainstream that it doesn’t have a name anymore, it’s just normal. We have a long way to go.

What are your thoughts on this? Do you agree we need to move beyond “Green”?

How do you use Posterous or Tumblr? Here’s how I do.

Posterous

Today came the news that Posterous has grown by over 700 percent during the past year. As TechCrunch points out, Tumblr has been around for longer and is seeing around 23 million unique visitors a month, and Posterous (launched in June, 2008) is now seeing around 5.3 million a month.

The increased growth in Posterous over the past year seems to be in no small part due to its introduction of an iPhone app that allows you to post photos and thoughts. Even without the app, it’s easy enough to email content in from a mobile device, which is my preferred method if I’m mobile. It’s also easy to cross-post to other services such as Twitter, Facebook, Flickr and many others, even WordPress.

So, if you use either Tumblr or Posterous, how do you use them? I’ve found myself using Posterous on a increasingly regular basis lately. I’ve tried both these services over the years. Although I think it’s good, I gave up on my Tumblr account because I couldn’t really think of a decent use for it. I found that I already had more than enough to be going on with. I guess it just wasn’t the right time for me.

Having said that, later when I found out about Posterous and tried it, I found the fact that you can send images via email from a mobile device very handy. In addition to using it for posting various images and videos from my iPhone, I’ve also found myself using it for increasingly regular posts on various subjects I’m interested in that don’t fit the theme of this blog.

It’s really a way for me to discover and comment on additional themes and subjects I’m interested in, and to share them with others. Maybe some of these thoughts will turn into other more substantial projects later on, maybe not, but for now it seems an appropriate place to experiment. Also, sometimes the 140 character limit of Twitter is just not enough.

How about you? Do you use either Tumblr of Posterous, and in what way? Feel free to share your URL in comments.