A Facebook friend posted about the death of her significant other, which apparently happened unexpectedly that morning. While I obviously feel for her in this terrible time in her life, I am not sure that I could do the same thing in the same circumstances. If someone I deeply cared about died, I don’t think I would want to publicize it immediately via social media. First of all, I don’t even think I would be ON Facebook that day or for several days or possibly weeks afterwards. Secondly, would I want others who cared about that person to find out that way? I think a personal call or visit would be better. I know people use social media as a way of reaching out, so maybe this person was just reaching out for her well-deserved sympathy via “a group hug” on Facebook. 

On the flip side, I know people post about the death of their pets and favorite celebrities regularly. I’ve even seen posts about losing parents. I know social media is a vehicle for connecting with people and is a way to reach a lot of friends quickly. Maybe for some people, it is easier to reach out without having to keep reliving the experience. 

I think, like everything else associated with social media, it’s new and the rules are constantly changing. I wish Emily Post had given us a guide on how to discuss sensitive topics on Facebook. Maybe that would make navigating these uncharted waters a bit easier.

Just last week, a senior Iranian cleric proclaimed that women who wear immodest clothing and behave promiscuously should be blamed for earthquakes. Yes, you hear me right – cleavage-caused earthquakes. Upon reading this, Purdue University senior Jennifer McCreight, 22, wrote a blog post about this claim, and decided to test the cleric’s theory by wearing her most cleavage-showing shirt today. She spread the word about her experiment through Facebook and Twitter, and at last count, nearly 200,000 women had pledged their support of and participation in this endeavor, aptly named “Boobquake.” 

Being neither a cleric nor an employee of the U.S. Geological Survey, I have no expertise in presuming the likelihood of an earthquake or linking it to the actions of a lot of immodest women. However, I cannot help but to think – who would have ever thought that such an unsubstantiated claim would 1) garner this much attention and 2) receive such an overwhelming response, so quickly, through social media? 

I think back to… oh, five or so years ago, when a story of this nature would have never been mentioned in our blog. I can’t help but ponder some of the possibilities had this story broken five years ago. 

1)      Assuming Jennifer McCreight even had a blog five years ago, she probably wouldn’t have had nearly as many hits to her blog as she has recently received, which is likely a result of her participation in social media.

2)      Assuming she wanted to spread the word about this effort, McCreight would have likely had to travel through traditional mediums, pitching this as a story to gatekeepers at print, TV or radio media outlets, and hoping that one (or some) of them picked up the story, broadcast the story to its loyal readers/viewers and hoped that they’d spread the word to their circles of influence.

3)      Seriously, who could have guessed the potential impact of Facebook or Twitter and how integral they would be in our everyday communication?

Social media has paved the way for a completely different cycle of communication—one that can, at times, override traditional mediums and take messages directly from influencer to audience. “Boobquake” is just another example of this phenomenon, one that I don’t foresee going away any time soon.

It’s exciting to think of the possibilities that social media holds for the future, but also a further proof that agencies like ours are critical for organizations to be able to continuously adapt to new ways of spreading messages.

This living portrait of Chris Lieto focused on a new form of dynamic magazine content captured by photographer Alexx Henry. As subscriber bases of print editions of newspapers and magazines increasingly dwindle, publishers are looking to new forms of innovation to continue to publish content that can inspire the imagination of their readers without sending all content online. Behold the Living Magazine! 

Imagine a world where the magazine you hold can tell a story not just with words, but with a movie-like feel – a veritable slate of miniature TV programs captured within the pages of the magazine. And imagine not having to pay much more for that magazine than you might pay for a printed edition today. It is possible with technologies such as OLED (Organic LED) and E Ink (currently used on the Amazon Kindle). This OLED technology is already being developed into a flexible prototype that is light, portable and energy efficient. According to the article, in August, scientists from the RIKEN Center in Japan announced advances that would allow OLED devices to be manufactured as inexpensively as printing newspapers! 

This is only the next generation of what is already being utilized by advertisers in places such as the tunnels of the London subway. Where movie posters may have once been displayed, those images are now coming to life with motion, which can be entertaining for passers-by. The negatives? Some have thought this technology to be intrusive. As digital marketers refine the way they use this technology, the focus is on attraction rather than distraction. I am looking forward to seeing this type of technology come into the mainstream, as the winning formula will be creating content and images in motion which are compelling to consumers, offering valuable information and entertainment. In this way, print can go on living, just perhaps, in a different way.

The study also reported that one in five companies allows use for work-related purposes. On one hand, it’s obvious from the employer’s perspective that team members should be working rather than “playing” online. However, it is interesting to note that these sites also offer value via “staying connected” with current/prospective clients and business partners. I find myself using Facebook much more often now to reach out to business contacts than I did a few months ago. I often send messages to “friends” as a means of following up, getting information and so on. In addition, our agency team members, as well as our clients, use tweets and fan pages to post news and events. And it is also interesting to note that I get an almost immediate response to my messages, which leads me to believe that people have access at work or using Smartphones.  

I know it’s a challenging discussion as social media becomes more predominant. While I understand the management issue of regulating social networking sites at work, I hope that as professionals, we are responsible enough to understand the relevance of social media and the balance we need to maintain in our workplaces. 

I’m asking for an informal survey. Do you use social networking sites at work? Do you spend more than a few minutes/day on them? Reply anonymously if you’d like!