It’s a bit of a chicken and egg question but some of our blog posts in the past have hinted at the fact that Web 2.0 brings with it not only a change in technology but also a profound change in culture, particularly in the ways that Web 2.0 users are used to doing things.

To buttress this point, I came across an interesting blog post on the confluence of technology, culture and giving and it’s worth bringing it to your attention.  In his post, Peter Dunn points out that the Red Cross has found the right technology (phone texting), for the right purpose (fast fundraising), aimed at the right generation (Gen Y, a group of users who “average 740 texts per month”).

As he points out:

“…often times, charities aren’t meeting the “needs” of those it asks from. No one writes checks, and even online giving isn’t doing the job for Gen Y. The fast-paced, multi-tasking nature of Gen Y often is a hindrance when it comes to charitable giving.

The Red Cross figured it out (or at least I’m giving it credit for figuring it out). It is allowing mobile phone users to simply text the word “Haiti” to 90999. By doing this, it has cracked the code to Gen Y giving.”

I don’t know about the accuracy of the “no one writes checks” statement or whether Gen Y members feel that it’s a hindrance to give online or not but I strongly agree with the underlying meaning of the statement and the overall post.  Gen Y, or more accurately, Web 2.0 users, are used to doing things differently.  Driven by their use of technology first, they expect to be able to get things done online via their computers or increasingly, via their mobile devices.  They want to do things fast, with a minimum of steps and they are used to doing several things at once, with various devices.

I would add that what Web 2.0 has enabled in this case – giving users the ability to help via their cell phones by making a charitable contribution via texting – is not the end of the story in Haiti—or in this case, the beginning.  Most of the reports of the tragedy first surfaced via Twitter and social networks such as Facebook, as most other forms of communication in the country were wiped out in the earthquake.  As reported by James Morgan of BBC News, these social networks were then used very effectively to raise record sums in record time by non-profits helping in Haiti.

It is the confluence of users, their behaviors (and expectations) plus the technology that is giving rise to a completely new way of doing things…the Web 2.0 way.

In the fourth of four social media webinars I’ve been following being given by Matrix Group International, I learned some great tips for “Measuring the Return on Investment of Social Media for Business.” CEO Joanna Pineda and her staff reviewed common ways of measuring ROI on traditional marketing campaigns, but noted that 84% of programs that use social media don’t measure ROI (per Mzinga and Babson Executive Education, August 2009).  There ARE ways to set goals for social media campaigns to determine ROI. The webinar had some great tips regarding what one can track and how.

Quantitative numbers you can track include traffic to your website as well as number of:

Mentions of your organization across the Web (web, blogs, Facebook, Twitter)

• @ mentions and RT (retweets) on Twitter
• Facebook and Twitter followers
• Comments on your blog
• Comments from your organization’s members or feedback from customers
• Subscribers to your RSS feed
• Opt-in e-mail addresses

You can also track hard returns like direct sales, donations, new members, and event registrations. Regarding the how, the presenters were big on Google Analytics, as well as usage reports, marketing codes, URL tracking, and alerts (Google, Twitter, Facebook, RTs and @mentions, blog mentions). The webinar ended with several illuminating case studies and Q&A. See the Matrix Group International, Inc. website to learn about upcoming webinars and events.

Image courtesy: vechtrack.com

Recently Comcast and Universal announced plans to merge their two houses.  Every time I hear about two large communications corporations merging I remember what my Communication 101 professor said about such things, “Nothing good can come of this.”

What’s so bad about it? Consider that the entertainment behemoth would control the content and the means to distribute that content. In other words, they control the shows and how those shows get to your television.  Think such a thing couldn’t happen? It already has.  This year if you wanted to see the show Friday Night Lights, you needed a DirectTV subscription. If you didn’t have one, well maybe you can buy the DVD in 2010.

Should this merger go through, I worry for the growing trend of on-demand over-the-internet providers like Hulu.  They answered a decades-old plea from media consumers—an a la carte cable system.  Only the pluck and grit of a start-up can do that.  However, based on recent examples of large corporate mergers, Comcast-Universal may not even get the chance to execute anything. Even if they pass regulation they have a steep hill to climb—one that is littered with the wrecks of AOL-Time Warner and Vivendi-Universal.  So watch this development with a skeptical eye.

Photo Courtesy: http://gabesguide.com/