Facebook and Real-Time Interactivity
Probably in the works for quite some time, but helped by the success of its recent efforts to connect its users in real-time (Obama’s inauguration, NBA All-Star Game), Facebook will soon be updating its design to include a real-time stream to replace its current News Feed.
In this article, Mashable asks: how will this affect users’ behavior?
It’s interesting that as Web 2.0 continues to evolve into whatever is next, users are expecting not only the ability to connect and collaborate, but to be able to see the fruits of their efforts instantaneously.
When you read this article, what questions come up for you? What does the increased desire for real-time information and communication mean for churches and church leaders?
03/12/2009 at 2:38 pm
I think the key issue is the difference between closed vs. open ecosystem.
The open ecosystem (i.e. Twitter) is a great church tool for outreach, allowing current members to connect outsiders (fans) to their church because of a specific interest. This is a good place for churches to have a presence of their core values or strategies. As long as it doesn’t become so ‘niche-marketed’ to completely nullify the ability to connect to a broader network of believers.
The closed ecosystem (i.e. Facebook) is a tool to connect with “real” friends and family. You can post group pictures without much consideration of legal permissions (“Should we call Aunt Velma to see if it’s OK that she’s in the background of this picture?”) and even safety. (We don’t label our kid pictures in a church-site gallery, but I do on my FB gallery.) You can also do humorous status updates without much concern how people outside those who know you would take a particular joke or statement.
I believe the open ecosystem concepts are gaining ground because of the growing mentality/desire for each person to become “known.” Evidenced by posting videos to try and get noticed, or hoping your blog gets read by someone who helps connect you to someone important. (WGN had the lip-syncing curly-haired kid on the morning news this week. He wasn’t even a good interview, but he got a lot of hits on YouTube and hopes to get a show on the Disney channel. Why?) I really believe there’ll come a point when we grow weary of this pressure to become or be the first to see the next big thing.
However, I think what Facebook has introduced is the opportunity to provide “daily” interaction with people in a personal way. By this I mean people whom you might be open to seeing every day, but aren’t necessarily going to see every day. As this concept continues to grow, I believe people will be more inclined to reconnect to friends and family online who may be geographically distant. If all this is really about “social networking”, the ability to connect to people who’ve fallen off your relational grid due to moves or busyness will grow and replace the need to connect with random people (for most healthy individuals). In other words, you’ll be able to hold on to “real” friends longer and across farther distances. This idea could strengthen a community, local, or even global feel in the body of Christ.
Obviously, these concepts have lots more implications that need to be thought out. But I don’t see them as an either/or, but instead a both/and scenario. Hopefully strengthening followers of Christ, while enabling us to reach out to others.
03/12/2009 at 2:50 pm
I guess my comments were related more to the reference article than the questions you raised in the blog post.
Trying to be much more concise…
Real-time info and communication is great as it provides instant feedback, answers for questions, help at the right time, accountability, and so on. It’s dangerous if it makes us so tied to our virtual communication that we miss the live relationships actually around us. I’m pretty sure our greater impact for Christ will happen in the lives of those who can see and touch us. We can waste a lot of effort on the potential audience of the web and miss the audience God has placed in the seat next to us.
I might guess Jesus would have an iPhone today. But would he walk past the woman at the well to write a blog to all potential women at wells around the world? Would he not post the blog and just deal with the one he saw? Or would he do both?
(There’s a whole sermon here, but I’ll stop.)