dougv.com « Doug Vanderweide

Social Media, Real-World Friends, A Thick Skin And A Sensible Strategy

Just a short while ago, my Facebook Wall had this series of notes from The Economist:

What’s remarkable in this exchange is the degree of openness involved and the ability to accept a contrary opinion without changing their course of action. In short, it’s how social media is supposed to work; and it’s evidence of why social media isn’t right for everyone.

Let’s look at the key points in what was said:

1. We heard your complaints about an annoying advertisement on our Web site. Thus, we are interested in what you have to say. You’re not just an invoice.
2. We passed on your objections to the advertiser in question. We want them to understand that many people find their ad annoying. One would have to assume that Air New Zealand doesn’t want its ads annoying people, since the object of an ad is not to generate ill will.
3. We’re obligated to run the ad for another two weeks, and we are thus going to run it. That means we have integrity.
4. We’re going to review our policy on what is an acceptable type of ad. In other words, we accept the criticism as valid and intend to do something about it.
5. We removed a post from our Wall complaining about the ad, and that was a mistake. In other words, we don’t run from opinions of us we don’t like, we address them directly.

A better outcome, I couldn’t imagine. The people who complained had their issues addressed; the advertising contract and current policy was upheld; The Economist portrayed themselves as reasonable and fair.

A “Friend” Isn’t A Sycophant, IRL Or Online

Now, this doesn’t mean that you should leave every troll post on your Facebook page or blog. If someone’s just looking to be disruptive, you shouldn’t cater to that.

Haters gonna hate. Via Erik J. Gustafson on Flickr

It does mean that a social media strategy is not one-way. Not every “fan” is going to be 100 percent supportive of you, and you’d best expect the haters to hate on you.

Social media is about creating relationships, and as we all know, relationships have their ups and downs.

I like the analogy put forth by Rebecca Kelly over at shoemoney.com: The Internet is a public toilet. Some places can be counted on to be clean and genteel. Most, not so much. And the guy who’s in there before you is really only interested in himself, especially since he doesn’t ultimately have to deal with what he did in there.

Ironically, I was reminded of that lesson today when I got into scrapes over net neutrality and immigration with some IRL friends on Facebook. Which provides an interesting contrast between social media and real-world networking.

I got into those arguments because forgot the first, and simplest, of Dale Carnegie‘s ideas: No one is ever wrong. I should never have brought the subjects up, as all that was to gain was argument and hurt feelings.

The difference between the disagreements I had today with actual friends, versus those I might have with a first-time blog commenter, is a background of trust and experience with those people. My relationships IRL aren’t defined solely by disagreements; and when they do come, disagreements are comported with a basic respect established with time and experience.

That is the purpose of social media: To build relationships like those one has IRL. That is, not to have “fans” who are sycophants; but to build “friendships” in which a single argument isn’t the defining aspect of the relationship. You are trying to create an environment in which your friends don’t trash your bathroom, because they care about it, and you, and expect others to do the same.

You don’t get that instantly, and you don’t get it if you become defensive. You turn enemies into friends not by trying to get them to see things your way, but by taking to heart the things they have to say.

You can’t make all your enemies love you. You can’t ensure your best friend today won’t betray you. All you can control is yourself: Your emotions, your actions. Act reasonably, and with others in mind, and you’ll be successful, online or at home.

The Basics Still Hold True

Kelly’s post, and its related comments, only brush the surface of the central lesson of her post. She says the lesson is, don’t let the bastards get you down. I am more inclined to agree with commenter Dan Nedelko (in spite of his atrocious, layer-ad-annoyance Web site), who advised: start with a respectful addressing of the objection, and withdraw if you sense it’s going nowhere.

That’s what happened in my IRL arguments; we gave audience, but when it became clear we were not going to change each others’ opinions, we stopped talking.

It would have been better if I had not created the environment that led to an argument in the first place. Absent that, it would have been better if, rather than conceding to friends’ valid points later, I had acknowledged them first. It would have been better if, in the words of Stephen Covey, I had first sought to understand, then to be understood.

I didn’t, and there’s a bit of ill will as a result. But, again, no real friendship is all roses and wine. We’ll move on to something better at some later point.

Being friendly in social media is exactly like being friendly in real life. I don’t need to associate with people I don’t like, but I can’t stop liking people just because the relationship hit a hiccup.

Nothing speaks stronger to my character as a friend than rolling with the punches, either at a party or on Facebook. The Economist clearly has that lesson, and it’s one worth sharing.

All links in this post on delicious: http://delicious.com/dougvdotcom/social-media-real-world-friends-a-thick-skin-and-a-sensible-strategy