Running head: A REPORT ON THE USE OF SOCIAL MEDIA

A Report on the Use of Social Media by Local and National Not-for-profit Organizations Robert Sampron, B.A., B.S. Candidate and Intern Metropolitan State College of Denver

November 1, 2009

Running head: A REPORT ON THE USE OF SOCIAL MEDIA Abstract

Running head: A REPORT ON THE USE OF SOCIAL MEDIA

A Report on the Use of Social Media by Local and National Not-for-profit Organizations
Introduction Discussing the Subject of the Report This report examines the use of websites and web-based social media sites by six local and two national not-for-profit organizations. The organizations included: The Family Tree Inc. Volunteers of America Colorado Branch Denver Options Mile High United Way The Kempe Center The Salvation Army (National) American Red Cross (National)

Discussing the Purpose of the Report The primary purpose of this report is to inform Steve Harrell, the Communications Director of The Family Tree Inc., a not-for-profit organization based in Wheat Ridge, Colorado, about the use of websites and social media sites by not-for-profit organizations. The Family Tree exists to help people trapped in cycles of abuse, violence, and homelessness. The employees and volunteers of The Family Tree provide a range of services that help people become safe, strong, and self-reliant. It is important for Mr. Harrell and The Family Tree to inform the Denver Metropolitan community about its services. It is important that

Running head: A REPORT ON THE USE OF SOCIAL MEDIA

The Family Tree inform suffering families and individuals that they are not alone in the struggle to improve their lives. Mr. Harrell intends to use social media to communicate with all stakeholders of The Family Tree Inc, including employees, supporters, volunteers, and at-risk individuals and families. He thinks that that by having a better understanding of how other not-for-profits use websites and social media, he will produce better, more effective messages for his stakeholders. The secondary purpose of this report is to inform my internship supervisor at Metropolitan State College of Denver, Prof. Robert Amend, of my activities during the internship. Defining Key Terms In this report, the terms social media, Web 2.0, and texts will reoccur. The following section defines the terms. Defining Social Media Social media are any number of web-based tools that help stakeholders collaborate to accomplish a variety of tasks (Lamer, Sampron, & Sutter, 2009). At first, stakeholders collaborated through play (Schmid, 2008). Increasingly, they collaborate to train, inform, motivate, educate, and sell to various audiences. Defining Web 2.0 To understand social media and its potential uses, it is helpful to understand the core principle behind Web 2.0. Web2.0 is the convergence of economics, social, and technological trends through the Internet (Musser & O'Reilly, 2007). This convergence allows users to collaborate through networks, using social media and other tools, to achieve various goals.

Running head: A REPORT ON THE USE OF SOCIAL MEDIA Defining Texts

When used with Web 2.0 and social media technology, the word text does not necessarily mean the conventional output of words and images to paper or computer screens. Rather, text means every imaginable form of computer-based creative expression. Web 2.0 and social media put Musser and OReillys convergence of technology at stakeholders fingertips, allowing for the synthesis of various media into a final, web-based text. These media include: videos games animation fine art music films graphic presentations podcasts streaming netcasts words and images printed on paper words and images displayed on or with computer output devices

Discussing the Scope of the Report The key to unlocking the potential for Web 2.0- and social media-based lies in using their tools to collaborate. These tools allow people to collaborate in unprecedented ways. The more people use these tools, the more they work together to create a common experience, a common result, a common understanding of the world. In future messages, The Family Tree may be able

Running head: A REPORT ON THE USE OF SOCIAL MEDIA

to use these tools to create a common understanding within the community about its services and volunteer-support opportunities. In this section, the author discusses the scope of the report. The scope details how people collaborate through Web 2.0 and social media to create a common result. Discussing the role of collaboration. Traditional communicators have different thoughts about the meaning of collaboration. The following section contains an edited excerpt of a report created earlier this year by the author and several colleagues. That report concerned the use of Web 2.0 and social media in technical communication (Lamer, Sampron, & Sutter, 2009). Technical communication includes the type of messages currently transmitted by The Family Tree and other not-for-profits through websites and social media sites. Jones (2008) defines three types of collaboration: contextual collaboration hierarchical collaboration group collaboration

First, Jones learned that professionals often use contextual collaboration. Contextual collaboration takes two forms: genre-use and document-borrowing. Genre-use collaboration occurs when an author employs the genres, templates, and models created by others to form sections of a text. Professionals use this form of collaboration more than any other form.

Running head: A REPORT ON THE USE OF SOCIAL MEDIA Document-borrowing collaboration occurs when an author recycles text elements from previously written texts.

Next, Jones learned that professionals moderately use hierarchical collaboration. Hierarchical collaboration takes two forms: author-centered and sequential. Author-centered collaboration occurs when a single author creates all elements for a completed text. These text elements include writing, editing, and graphic designing. Sequential collaboration occurs when a group edits the copy of an original author.

Next, Jones learned that professionals rarely use group collaboration. Group collaboration takes four forms: horizontal-division writing, group single-authored writing, reactive writing, and joint writing. Each form requires that two or more authors work together to create a text. Horizontal-division writing occurs when "units" of writers work with little interaction on sections of the same text. Group single-authored writing occurs when one author creates the majority of a text, while others contribute small sections. Reactive writing occurs when a group of authors shares the work, separately creating each section. Joint writing occurs when a group of authors interacts throughout the process to create a whole text. Joint writing is the least used form in technical communication.

Running head: A REPORT ON THE USE OF SOCIAL MEDIA Despite Jones's findings, Lamers, Sampron, and Sutter contend that stakeholders did not

formerly collaborate easily or often due to the onerous nature of doing so. With Web 2.0, people will collaborate more because of the convenience of doing so. Until Web 2.0, collaboration was difficult, spanning geography and time zones. Collaboration required people to use relatively expensive, compatible software and hardware. At times, people had to transport a draft text by mail or overnight courier. This likely increased the costs beyond the grasp of many independent professionals, and certainly beyond the grasp of not-for-profit organizations. If used at all, electronic communication was by e-mail or instant messenger applications. Also until Web 2.0, messages traditionally flowed one-way, from communicator to userreader. Users had little direct input into the process of creating messages they would use. When collected at all, feedback came through usability testing. This creates particular concern, because the credo of all professional writing is that finished texts be user-reader-focused. If users have little or no role in creating the text, it is less likely to be user-reader focused. All of this changes with Web 2.0 and social media. The first thing that changes is terminology. Until now, we used the historical term author for the creator-transmitter of a text and user or reader for the one who received the text. With Web 2.0 and social media, the better term for both roles is stakeholder. Each is a stakeholder, because each is the potential author and user of text. Web 2.0 and social media allow stakeholders to collaborate: without the restrictions of time and space with online technologies, at little or no cost

Running head: A REPORT ON THE USE OF SOCIAL MEDIA with otherwise incompatible hardware with Web-based, communal, often free software

Ultimately, Web 2.0 and social media mean that text will no longer flow in a top-down, oneway path from the author to the user. Instead, stakeholders will collaborate to create meaningful texts that flow interactively throughout a network. This suggests that the managers of a not-forprofit agency look at any message transmitted through a website or social media site as a tool for creating common meaning. In a top-down approach, the authors imagination can look only so far into the lives of those who receive the information. Through Web 2.0, the former author may no longer have to imagine. Rather, the former author can merely manage the content to ensure it complies with the organizations standards. Research Methods The author used a qualitative method to assess how the not-for-profit organizations used their websites and social media sites to communicate with users. The author hesitates to use the term stakeholder in this assessment, because the websites do not use collaboration to create content. In very rare instances, the author saw minimal collaboration at the social media website Facebook. When using the qualitative research method, the researcher observes and reports on a limited number of cases relevant to a topic. For this report, the author examined every page and link of each website and social media site for the eight not-for-profit organizations. These examinations included: Assessing, based on Joness typology, what style of communication and/or collaboration was used

Running head: A REPORT ON THE USE OF SOCIAL MEDIA Assessing website use of technology Assessing masthead and margin text box indexes for content and navigation techniques Assessing body text for content, ease of navigation, and use of technology Assessing the overall use of Web 2.0 and 3.0 social media and tools Reporting the Results The author quickly saw that the websites used similar methods for organizing content,

10

regardless of whether the medium was a website or social media site. The sites use similar layout structures, terminology, Table of Contents (TOC) organization and navigation, and to the extent the organizations use them at all, Web 2.0 and 3.0 social media and tools. The author wonders if there is a social meme at work in developing and delivering content. Reporting Website Communication Styles The communication style for each website is hierarchical. The organization provides modules that focus on delivering a narrowly focused message. There is little evidence of collaboration, except perhaps by those in the community or organization who voluntarily supply graphic elements, like photographs. Organizations build their websites for scanning, not reading. Within a few seconds, users may generally find and read text or view video of interest. The ratio of text to video is about 98:2. Some websites contain professional video products. These products include professionally crafted marketing messages

Running head: A REPORT ON THE USE OF SOCIAL MEDIA professionally reported news stories from local television stations

11

By including these video products, likely obtained and displayed with the permission of the copyright holder, the sites use some collaboration to deliver a message. However, stakeholders do not upload these elements. The not-for-profits are firmly in control. The websites almost uniformly contain descriptive summaries of and/or text and video elements about: the organizations purpose the at-risk communities of focus contact lists, including names, phone numbers, U.S. mail addresses, Email address, and website links names and contact information for officers and/or members of the community who support the organization volunteer activities calendar of upcoming events support-donation opportunities various topics and programs involved in achieving the organizations goals instructions for obtaining help from the organization or partnering organizations non-passive information-gathering pages for those visiting the sites

Running head: A REPORT ON THE USE OF SOCIAL MEDIA Reporting Website Technology Each website uses some form of Extensible Markup Language (XML) to encode content.

12

XML allows the web designer to create a database of text and graphic elements, including words, phrases, clauses, paragraphs, borders, figures, tables, and hyperlinks to other documents. The designer can then insert the elements into an unlimited number of documents, including web sites, paper documents, and video programs. The only limit to inserting elements into media is imagination. XML also allows the content creator and/or the web designer to display content so it appears the same regardless of the output device. This means the content will appear the same, whether delivered through any kind of web browser (Internet Explorer, Firefox, Google Chrome, et al), printer, smart phone, high definition video display, etc. XML also allows the content creator, web designer, and/or, if written to do so, stakeholders to update specific text and graphic elements in the database. This update then populates to every document containing the element. For example, if the content creator or web designer wants to update one sentence in 500 different documents containing the sentence, all stakeholders need do is change the element in the XML database. The change then populates to all 500 documents. Some websites use Adobe Flash to deliver animated text. The animated text tends to profile a program or concept, and sometimes solicits financial support from users of the site. Finally, all organizations approach the website as a combination of online brochure and library. Just as one would read a brochure to gain a basic understanding of the organization, the organization designs the website for similar use.

Running head: A REPORT ON THE USE OF SOCIAL MEDIA However, some websites contain detailed text not easily delivered through a printed brochure. Indeed, some websites were so complex and filled with information, they took more than eight hours to assess. Reporting Website Content The websites contain four specific modules for delivering content. These include: masthead left-right text box body text footer (folio)

13

The arrangement of a page is somewhat different depending on whether one is viewing an index or content page. Depending on the page, the content is different. Index pages. A websites index page introduces users to the content contained within the website. The mastheads contain a wordmark or trademark that symbolizes the organization. The masthead also contains a website TOC. In each case, webmasters used Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) to link between the TOC and specific pages. Users either click on a link to access a different page, or highlight a word in the TOC to open a secondary menu. When the secondary menu opens, the user clicks on a topic of interest to access a different page. The secondary menus appear Adobe Flash-driven. For each page of the website, the masthead remains visible and available. The left-right text box(es) frame the body text. The left-right boxes contain one of three types of content: a TOC that mirrors masthead content

Running head: A REPORT ON THE USE OF SOCIAL MEDIA links to the most commonly sought topics

14

summaries of popular topics, including links to pages containing detailed information about the topics

Again, webmasters appear to use Adobe Flash to animate the media that scrolls through these left-right text boxes. Body text content contains the most variety. Content may include specific suggestions for help, appeals for funds, or introductions to the program. Finally, the footer modules most often contain a copyright notice, U.S. mail address, e-mail address, and telephone number. There is some variation between organizations. Content pages. All content pages contain the masthead. Some contain the left-right margin text boxes, scrolling the same content as found on the index page. All contain body text. Some also contain footers. A list of the most common content pages follows:

Social Media Communication Styles The three commonly used social media sites are Facebook, Twitter, and MySpace. The communication style is top-down