Is Your Church Leadership Interactive?
One of the most predominant characteristics of the New Media is it's interactivity. Regardless of what specific application you're using, web-based media, in general, provide more user-to-user interactivity than any other form of mediated communication in history. Additionally, interactivity between user and information is what marks the shift from Web 1.0 to Web 2.0. The "one-to-many" model of traditional mass communication is being replaced with a "many-to-many" web of interactive communication.
Since the New Media alters traditional models of mass communication, we must radically review the ways we interact and communicate with others. The Church, as a primary vehicle for communicating the Good News, stands to amplify it's voice by using the interactive attributes found in the new media.
The image below represents a New Media mindset rather than a string of specific apps. Whether you blog or podcast, whether you facebook or MySpace, whether you Twitter or Jaiku, the significance of your web presence (whether individual or corporate) is greatly diminished if you are not providing ways for your users to easily hear and access you.
Let's remember, the congregation is not just listening. They're also talking.
Image attribution: Wayne Sutton
I’ve started getting into the whole 2.0 world. My facebook friends are growing by the day. Unfortunately, I’m feeling as though the people in my world are not heavy users. I’m not feeling great about the number of 2.0 consumers and I feel like the number of producers is nearly 0.
So, do I keep on putting myself out there? Do I keep writing? Or do I just accept that my world is still 1.0?
Ryan, I took a look at your blog and think you’ve got a great start going. We will never go back to 1.0 so you can cross that one off. I have some additional ideas that I’d like to submit to you for consideration. I’m gonna email you directly with my thoughts.
nice post…tried explaining this to our staff the last few weeks and especially yesterday and today. But i’m not quite sure everyone has grasped it…actually, they haven’t. Only a handful. That can be frustrating.
rhett
cynthia, I would love to hear from you. it seems that my email was wrong on the last post. this one should have it correct.
Since rolling out our new social prayer website, I’ve certainly met my share of church leadership that embrace the “many to many” aspects of interactive communities and others that don’t get it yet.
Even though the interactive crowd is a much smaller community, I believe their numbers will grow mainly due to the fact that using today’s online communication tools will only help to grow their ministries - online and off.
And that growing reach will be powerful evidence for interactivity that today’s leaders will not be able to ignore for much longer.
Thanks Ryan - I’ll email you.
Rhett - this is why you are the web evangelist, and to the college cohort, no less.
Robert - we cannot use one another for cross-referencing because since we think exactly alike it’s kind of like self-referencing.
And, the most significant aspect of interactivity may not be seen until the iGeneration comes of age - when interactivity & being wired will be seen not as novelty but as normative.
I so agree Cynthia. I think this is why so many pastors are now blogging, as well as using other means of media to make touches with their people.
Part of me wants to go, yea! at what’s been said here. But I don’t think any mof the comments are pushing interactivity far enough. Of course, considering how I just posted on how I think Nokia Mobile gaming environment N-Gage is an opportunity for evangelism, I am pretty sure that I am running way before we as a Body have even begun walking totally.
That being said, its not just that aspect of using blogs and social networking tools, but transforming your relationships as these threads have more relevance to the lives of those around you. If you will, the goal should always be interaction, we just now have more threads towards getting there. I’d even wager that there is a literal limit as to how much interactivity we can have in this case because we are now using these tools as relationship enablers.
The question is, after you have added the Facebooks and the MySpaces, is the status of your relationships stronger, or just digital?
Antoine,
Relational development is not an issue of digital versus live. it’s a tough thing, especially for me. I think what it boils down to is intentionality, or as you put it, “the goal should be interaction.”
Sometimes having more media makes it easier to manage our interactions, but, at least in my case, I still have to ask myself “am I genuinely engaging with people, or am I just checking it off of my list.”
just because I’ve given people a way to connect with me, doesn’t always mean that I will engage. kinda sad, actually.
Roger, you stated:
I totally disagree. If you are using a social network, chances are that those that are already on are forging relationships and have bonds that are just as relevant as those which were previously done over live channels. If you are making these points of connection, then you have to be ready to engage in them as you would in other connections (with the same ideas of permissions and boundaries that one would in former media connections).
Study social interaction and online community development in the past 20 years and you will notice that as the technology has increased the ability to, relationships have formed just as much, if not stronger in some cases, due to those digital ties. Its not enough to ‘twit’ a conversation because its convenient. Twitting is now accepted just as much as a phone call and the rules of engagement and responsibility of the church there are the same as they have always been.
If one has to ask themselves ‘if they will engage’ but has already built the road ‘to engage’ then we have to step back and really assess if the technology is relevant or if we have missed the point of discipleship and relationship as the Commission has called us towards.