Tag Archives: social media

Share your work in the open

I already shared this quote that helped me decide to blog daily:

“For years, I’ve been explaining to people that daily blogging is an extraordinarily useful habit. Even if no one reads your blog, the act of writing it is clarifying, motivating and (eventually) fun.“ ~Seth Godin

As a result of blogging daily, and having it also post on Twitter, LinkedIn, and Facebook, I now transmit a lot of posts about my own work, and I’m sure that for some, that can feel like too much.

Last night I was chatting with Jonathan Sclater and, like me, he has some healthy living goals he is working on. One of the things he now does is share his morning runs on social media. Here is his Tweet from Monday,

My #health #oneword2020 keeps me moving forward. 5 hours of sleep last night, so I felt like sleeping in instead or saying “maybe tomorrow”. But I got up anyways and put in the work. Won’t stop pursuing my goals. Don’t let anything get in the way of yours today!

#runlap

#health

I love to see sharing like this. Jonathan questioned if some people thinks he is over-sharing regarding his runs, and I responded that I think it’s great! We don’t have to worry about that. If someone doesn’t like it, they are free to unfollow, but sharing your passion and commitment are inspiring.

Similarly, Kelly Christopherson has been sharing Exploring Personal/Professional Learning One Day At a Time. Here is an example from Twitter:

Every day is a new opportunity to try something new. Each one of us is capable of doing great things if we only give ourselves permission to try without limiting ourselves to what we know we can do. Every day is a PD day. #myPDtoday @DomenicScuglia @dteneycke1 @LoriMeyerMseJaw

Sometimes he tags me in the Tweet and I appreciate it, and actually asked for it. Kelly’s regular reflections on living a life of continual thinking and learning ‘out loud’ is inspiring.

It’s not for everyone watching and reading, and that’s ok. It doesn’t have to be daily, but share your work. Share the things you value, or simply share your love for writing, or taking photos. Have fun, enjoy the process, and know that others can be inspired by what you share.

Preying on your fears

It works because we don’t fully trust big companies with our data. It works because we value our privacy. And it works because it convinced people you trust to share it.

It’s a hoax. It’s fake. Versions of it have surfaced and resurfaced for over 4 years now, (see this article from June of 2016)

Here is what Facebook has to say:

I did a quick DuckDuckGo search for: Snopes “Facebook permission”

…and found this on the Snopes website:

“…In both cases the claims were erroneous, an expression of the mistaken belief the use of some simple legal talisman — knowing enough to ask the right question or post a pertinent disclaimer — will immunize one from some undesirable legal consequence. The law just doesn’t work that way.”

These kinds of messages play on our fears, and spread easily. Do your part not to spread fear… if you’ve already shared this hoax, don’t delete it, edit and add a note at the start of the post, and/or add the following image to your post so that it becomes a weapon against the spreading of such fear.

Thank you!

PS. I give you permission to copy all or any part of this post without needing to attribute or link back etc… Share this information any way that you please.

Ad Hominem Attacks on Social Media

Ad hominem (Latin for “to the person”), short for argumentum ad hominem, typically refers to a fallacious argumentative strategy whereby genuine discussion of the topic at hand is avoided by instead attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself. (Wikipedia)

It used to be that an ad hominem attack during an argument was a (weak) defensive move, but that is no longer the case… especially on social media. Don’t like someone’s ideas? Attack their character, their physical features, their business acumen, or even their choice of clothing. As for the point they are making, the very thing that was upsetting, this is not dismissed with any points of merit. No, instead it is simply assumed that the opposing view is already a lost argument with no need to fact check or provide counter evidence or opposing rationalization.

I’m not sure when this became so acceptable? It is a weak and counterproductive approach to disagreeing with someone’s ideas, and yet it is pervasive on all social media platforms. While ad hominem attacks used to be used as a poor, defensive response, now it is done as a knee jerk reaction with little thought as to how it undermines any points made in conjunction with it. While ad hominem attacks used to be used by weak people avoiding having to put forth a weak argument, now it is used as fuel to feed the rage that social media can invite. ‘Here is my point, and here is a personal attack I’ll add for good measure.’

Ultimately, here is the problem, an ad hominem attack is literally an argument that preaches only to the converted. It undermines any valuable information or argument that is shared along with the attack. Sure it scores a point with the people who agree with the person on the attack, but it does the opposite with those that disagree, those that the attacker would actually want to convince otherwise. Think that through to its logical conclusion: Ad hominem attacks are great for convincing people who are already agreeable, while angering or being fully dismissed by those that disagree. What does this accomplish?

____________

Addendum: Sarcasm works the same way, pandering to those who need not be convinced, while being dismissed by those that it would be desirable to influence.

Also, this brings me back to the post: Ideas on a Spectrum.

Empathy and forgiveness

Last night I (re)read, “(Digital) Identity in a World that No Longer Forgets”, by Alec Couros and Katia Hildebrandt. I say ‘(re)read’ because I thought I was reading this article, written in October 2015, for the first time… but when I looked at it again today, I saw the first comment on the article was by me. The internet might not forget, but I do!

In the article, this sentence really struck me:

“In a world where forgetting is no longer possible, we might instead work towards greater empathy and forgiveness.”

We need to recognize that people are allowed to make mistakes. Take the time to read the article by Alec and Katia. These things matter when measuring the severity of someone’s digitally inappropriate contribution: Context and intended audience, intent, history, authorship, and empathy (and forgiveness).

If we treat every transgression on the internet with the same level of disgust and anger, then comparatively we are reducing the level of anger and upset over truly appalling and disturbing comments and behaviours. Furthermore, we are creating an unforgiving and un-empathetic society, that does not allow us to apologize and/or learn from our mistakes.

I’ve written about this in my post ‘Resilience #OneWord2020‘, and I’ll end with a quote from that post:

In Online Spaces:

People will make mistakes online. They will say things that are unintentionallyhurtful, or blindly offensive. This is different than someone being intentionally biased and rude. If the slander is intentional, it should be reported. If it is unintentional, even to the point of ignorance, we need to be more resilient about what our responses are. When every transgression is treated with an attack, the most severe/bigoted/rude/biased transgressions are not given the heightened alarm that they deserve. With lesser errors and mistakes, we need to let people have a venue to recognize their errors and invite conversation rather than damnation.

Growing up, I heard the playground retort to taunts, “Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words will never harm me.” We are past the era of letting nasty people say whatever nasty things they want, and just turning the other cheek to pretend we are not hurt. This is a good thing. We want to live in a world where that behaviour is not acceptable. But it does not serve us well to treat the attacker like they can not repent or be sorry.

Breakfast with a friend

“Come gather around people, wherever you roam
And admit that the waters around you have grown
And accept it that soon you’ll be drenched to the bone
If your time to you is worth savin’
Then you better start swimmin’ or you’ll sink like a stone
For the times they are a-changin’ ~ Bob Dylan

We sat at a booth chatting, breakfast done, bill paid. We had already turned down more coffee and the waitress was kind enough to fill our water glasses. The restaurant wasn’t full, we weren’t filling a potentially needed booth, and so the waitress didn’t mind that we were still there over 30 minutes after our meal was done.

We were reminiscing about our childhood, and how people would come for a visit and stay for dinner. In my family there were 4 kids so we made a family of 6, but my mother never cooked for less than 10. Someone’s friend (or 2), an aunt, granny, a cousin, even a neighbour might be joining us. If it was just the 6 of us, we had leftovers.

This doesn’t happen much anymore. Having friends over means a half-day of getting the house ready, and a half day of preparing food. Meeting for coffee? How’s next week Thursday? Breakfast? Pick one of these two Sundays. Dinner with a group of friends? We better use that appointment App to find a day that works for all of us.

Or maybe we just chat on the phone. Maybe we text. Comment on Facebook. Like a friend’s tweet… smiley face emoji:)

Gatherings used to be impromptu, spontaneous, and they extended past expected times. “See you soon,” not “See you later,” as in weeks or months later.

Things have changed.

I’m going to try to bring the old ways back a bit. I’m tracking my social connections this year. A dinner and a breakfast last week, a morning coffee and a minor league hockey game this weekend… A walk with my wife, dinner out with my daughter… I’m going to see if intentionally keeping track will inspire me to connect face-to-face more frequently with the people that are geographically available. That doesn’t diminish the opportunities to connect with people who I can’t always see. For those, we have spaces like this.

Anatomy of a Tweet

Harnessing the Power and Potential of Social Media to Build Learning Communities #CDNedtech19

I’ve been invited to host a Round Table Breakout Session at the 10th Canadian EdTech Leadership Summit today, titled; “Harnessing the Power and Potential of Social Media to Build Learning Communities.” The invitation was born out of a Podcast I did with conference organizer Robert Martellacci @MindShareLearn, where we discussed my free ebook, Twitter EDU.


You can get the book here:

FREE on Apple, the iTunes version is available here.

FREE on Barnes & Noble, the NOOK version is available here.

Download the FREE ePub version now from Smashwords: (You might need to open this in your web browser, if you came here via mobile Twitter: https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/776978 )

What I’ll share below are resources to support the conversation, and hopefully this can also be a resource to come back to later, after the discussion.

For those interested in tweeting during the discussion, please use both of these hashtags: #CDNedtech19 and #TwitterEDU

Advice from Dave Sands @dhsands: (If you are playing along, follow the people I share tweets from!)

DHSands Twitter Advice

My True Story Of Connectedness about my network being better than Google:

Here is a short link to the video: 2di.me/connectedstory.

Here is a Twitter Moment I shared where I asked, “What’s the best advice that you have to share with someone that’s new to Twitter?”

Best Twitter Advice for Twitter Newbies

Short link: 2di.me/advice

Discussion Points/Questions

Hardest part of Twitter

“The hardest part of Twitter is that it does not have a friendly entry point.”

What are the challenges of engaging on social media?

—–

Bill Ferriter @plugusin “My goal in social media spaces isn’t to “have a bigger audience.” My goal is to find people who challenge my practice.” (Link to tweet)

What are you looking for from your social media network? 

“Geography used to confine and limit our networks, and now we can connect to people from around the world.”

What excites you about the possibilities of being a networked/connected learner? 

Twitter is a river

“Think of Twitter as a river of information that streams by, not a pool of information that you collect.”

How do you manage the stream of information ‘coming at you’ in today’s digitally connected world? 

See ‘Drinking from the fire hose‘.

drinking from a fire hose

– – – – – – – – – – – –

Additional Twitter Advice

Cross-Posted on my Pair-a-Dimes Blog.

3 ways that people are digitally evil

I’m a huge fan of Twitter. I think it is a tool that has a challenging entry point, but with a little help and advice, it can be a powerful place to learn and build a great PLN.

It can also be used for evil.

Now, to be honest, I don’t see this very often because I don’t look for it. I see a whole lot of good in my Twitter feed, but here are 3 ways people use Twitter that are digitally evil, and would probably be less likely to happen in a face-to-face conversation:

1. Ad hominem attacks.

Ad hominem (Latin for “to the person”),[1] short for argumentum ad hominem, typically refers to a fallacious argumentative strategy whereby genuine discussion of the topic at hand is avoided by instead attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.

Examples include making fun of someone’s weight, looks, background, or social position, rather than looking at the actual issues. If you think about this, by attacking the person, rather than their ideas, you actually diminish the points you make against their arguments. Let’s say you hate the ideas someone is sharing, and you call them fat and ugly on Twitter. Would their argument be better if they were skinny and handsome/pretty? Are you suggesting their ideas are dependent on their size and looks? That these things matter? Should you be judged on the merits of these kind of arguments? It is hurtful and derogatory, and insulting not just to the person you are attacking.

2. Sarcastic questioning.

This is a passive-aggressive move. It is the asking of a question that your question already suggests you understand what’s going on, but you ask it anyway.

“Is it just me or… ?”

“Why is it that… ?”

“Why on earth would… ?”

“Can you believe that… ?”

These openings can be fun and lighthearted, or they can be accusatory and underhanded. I used this strategy above by asking, “Should you be judged on the merits of these kind of arguments?” But it wasn’t an intentional attack, it wasn’t comedy at the expense of people.

3. Full on rants.

I will confess to ranting against poor customer service in Twitter. I don’t do it often, but I’m also not guilt free. That said, there seem to be a subset of Twitter users that use it as a venue to regularly rant. This seems unhealthy to me. It is something I try to avoid, but often angry tweets are retweeted, and so I might see them not because I follow the person, but because someone I follow retweets this person.

—

Sometimes I think digital conversations give rise, and permission, for ‘inside voices‘ to be externalized. The medium allows people that may not normally have a voice to be heard, to speak to (or at least at) a CEO, politician, or movie star. A hashtag gives anyone an audience. Someone might only have 5 followers, but #companyname, #election, #event, or #movie will find them readers of their tweets. For those that already have a large audience, there is an even greater responsibility not to be intentionally evil.

I try to be thoughtful. I pause before tweeting a complaint or a rant. I think about the point I want to make… and I’ll still make mistakes. But at least I‘m making an effort not to be mean, and I unfollow people that don’t seem to have this kind of filter. I filter my timeline as best as I can from digitally evil people.

PS. That doesn’t mean I ignore people with different opinions, or shy away from good, challenging questions.

Do you choose?

Do you decide to respond to that red alert notification on your phone, or does the red dot make you look?

Do you want to scroll down your social media feed, or do you need to scroll down your feed?

Is that daily streak on your game something you enjoy keeping, or are you compelled by the streak to keep going?

Are you making these decisions, or are you giving up control and reacting without any real decision being made?

Do you really choose?

Likes, likes, and more likes

I am fascinated by the whole process of ‘Liking’ something on social media. So many people use it in different ways. For a long time, my ‘liking’ habits looked like this:

  • Facebook: Family, a few friends, ignore everything else.
  • Instagram: I love the photo for it’s artistic qualities, or ‘No like for you!’
  • LinkedIn: Great article, a like will probably also get a share and/or a comment too.
  • Twitter: I really like what you said and want to ‘keep’ it, or someone shared something of mine and I want to thank them.

But that has evolved… or rather devolved. Now a ‘Like’ is just an acknowledgement. I shifted to this unconsciously as I’ve watched others do the same. It wasn’t intentional or thought out at all. I miss being a lurker on Facebook, not caring if others knew I came to visit things they shared or not. I miss seeing my favorites on Instagram only being wonderful photographs. I miss going to my ‘Likes’ on Twitter and only seeing things worth reading again.  I’m still not that much of a ‘liker’ but I definitely ‘like’ far more than I used to.

I’m not sure I’m going to change my habits back? It feels rude. Isn’t that interesting? I feel an obligation to be more generous, more ‘like’-able. I share an anniversary photo on Facebook, someone takes the time to send us well-wishes, I guess I should like their comment. I share something on Twitter and someone responds. I don’t have a response in return, so I should like their tweet as my response/acknowledgement. Someone shares a wonderful family moment on Instagram, I should be nice and like it, after all, they liked my family photo. And so suddenly my habits above became watered down to things I should do to be polite on social media.

We have moved to a world of likes, likes, and more likes… and I’m not sure I like it?

An open letter to the Ontario College of Teachers re: Social Media, Part 2

I’ll start by saying, ‘Shame on The Canadian Press and shame on cbc.ca’, I thought this was a news source I could rely on. Next, I’ll say, ‘Shame on me’, since I reacted publicly, based on a single secondary source for information, and I did not go to the main source. As an educator who makes great efforts to use social media in appropriate ways, I feel embarrassed that I contributed in disseminating exaggerated and miss-informed hype! I will learn from this, hopefully others will too. 

But what was of greatest concern to me was the message to ‘not use’ social networks with students, and that is not the case!  

The Ontario College of Teachers DID NOT say teachers should avoid connecting with their students on Facebook or Twitter.

Here is a great video they have created: 

While I could nitpick and suggest some minor changes, I think that the advisory does an excellent job of saying three key things:

1. Interact with students appropriately 
2. Understand privacy concerns
3. Act professionally

And, they offer sound advice that will help teachers both think about, and understand, that their digital communication is public and therefore needs to be professional. 

Here is the actual advisory:

OCT_Prof_Adv_Soc_Media.pdf
Download this file

I will end in saying, ‘well done’ to the Ontario College of Teachers! 
And again, my apologies.
Kind regards,
David Truss

ps. Special thanks to Ontario teacher Lorna Costantini @lornacost for questioning the news article’s interpretation and for pointing me to the sources provided above.