Conversation requires a reply

Remember when we were all so impressed by the campaigns who had websites and used words like 'conversation' and used familiar tools like YouTube and Twitter?

Well a conversation requires two way communication guys. I emailed the Barack Obama campaign about something and I have received no reply. Not only that - I started getting spammed email from their mailing list. I never asked to be subscribed to their mailing list?

I have heard the same happen to others.

Is this a conversation or yet another cynical way to appeal to a constituency without really trying?

A conversation requires two parties - one listens, one replies, then they swap.

Are you guys paying attention?

Conversation Economy

There is a fantastic post about the Conversation Economy on BusinessWeek by David Armano.

There is really nothing more I can add to it. It is beautifully written.

Here's an excerpt:

"Conversation architects move marketing beyond the idea of one-way messaging. Traditional marketing efforts were founded on this tried-and-true format and are still prevalent within the industry. Consider the example of a typical creative brief template, which usually says something like, "What are we trying to communicate?" Can you can see the old-world residue in the word "communicate"? It lacks the dimensions of experiencing something and having an ongoing two-way dialogue. "What are we trying to communicate?" implies a one-way conversation. Maybe we should ask ourselves: "How can we facilitate?""

Follow up: 08 Conversations continued...

Marian Richmond has made a fantastic post on the subject of the 08 Campaign Conversation on the new blog Campaign08Blog.com (a must read for political junkies and social media observers).

In the post 'Conversation according to Hillary and Barack' she quotes a number of bloggers (including me) questioning the authenticity of the call for conversation citing a number of (false) actions that are speaking louder than the words.

Here's a quote:

"They are not talking to us in the sense that the words that come out of their mouths are written and produced by third parties. They the candidates are not we the people as it relates to social media conversation… which means that the we, those having the conversations on blogs and other social media, are people talking directly to other people. Personal pronouns, we, they, us, are stand -ins for people."

Read the full post here.