Category Archives: DMin

Monetizing Authenticity & Relational Connections

As part of my doctoral program at George Fox Seminary and my dissertation topic studying the effects of social media on preaching, I had the great opportunity to attend the largest industry blogging and social media conference in North America.

One of the many things I gleaned from the conference was the economic potential that exists in the area of blogging and social media.  This economic potential is being rapidly and increasingly democratized and monetized.  It is democratized in that anyone can jump into the blogging and social media world and, with enough social networking, media creation and media curation, you can create “clout” (interestingly: the company klout.com scores clout).  This clout can then be monetized.  The increasingly inherent challenge is that the monetization of clout carries with it a major temptation – the temptation to sacrifice authenticity on the altar of economic opportunity.

Let me explain:
First, clout (or influencer) is an industry word that simply refers to the influence you have online.  Basically, the more hits you receive on your blog and the more social connections you have with social media (FaceBook friends, Twitter fans, etc.), the greater your “influence.”
Second, as your clout and influence grows, so does your potential environment for advertising and product endorsement.  These fertile environments are bursting with ecological potential for financial benefit.  Allow me to explain through a hypothetical example: Jim Bob is marketing his new Whatyamacallits and he knows that he can use traditional advertising to reach a large group of people but by doing this he also knows that the audience will interpret the advertisement message as the Whatyamacallit Company talking about Whatyamacallits.  Thus, people will be, inevitably, skeptical of the claims the manufacturer is making about the product they manufacture.  The audience knows that the manufacturer is not neutral.  However, if the Whatyamacallit Company can get seemingly neutral Jane Doe to blog and/or Tweet about their product to her large social following for either a sample of Whatyamacallits and/or other financial or promotional incentives, people will pay attention because they will assume that this third person is an impartial product reviewer.  This neutrality becomes assumed and perceived authenticity.
Third, the other revenue stream exists through advertising. This revenue stream can produce substantial income to the blogger.  Custom advertising by an ad service can provide significant income, but it also comes at a relational price.  Ad services work by using information provided by the content of the blog and any information it can glean from the blog visitor, customizing the ads for greatest impact.  In essence, the person blogging submits part of their online presence and the information of their visitors for financial gain.
I have no problem with any of this IF it is clearly understood and disclosed upfront by the blogger/social media user.  The problem is that this level of authenticity rarely happens and if it does, is often hidden or subtlety communicated.
As we look ahead to the future of social media and blogging, this practice will only increase (industry experts and their budget allocations affirm that this will only intensify in usage).  The challenge is that our culture highly values authenticity and relationships (part of why using it for marketing is brilliant and effective).  This is the very reason that blogging and social media have economic value.   In addition, people are also increasingly skeptical and as people become more aware of what is happening (recognizing that people are monetizing their authenticity and relationships), skepticism will only increase, inevitably decreasing the economic value of influencer clout and destroying the presumed relationships that once existed.
Once again, I have no issue with people who use their clout/influencer ability to promote products, services or earn money through advertising, as long as they are honest and upfront about this.  If they are not, they are, to use a shockingly pejorative term, prostituting their authenticity and relationship connections for financial gain.  This, of course, will eventually hurt one’s credibility and in a culture that highly values authenticity and relationship will not have sustainability.
The future of social media and blogging is exponentially growing and as it does, we need to increasingly be aware of the effects it is having on us and how it is being used and abused and/or using and abusing us.  As Marshall McLuhen brilliantly said: “All media works us over completely.”

 

Preaching in the “Age of Anxiety”

Introduction & Preamble
Through a series of blog posts over the next several years, my hope is to explore part of the research I am doing for my Doctorate of Ministry degree (DMin) through George Fox Seminary (I’m in the Semiotics and Future Studies Track).  I am, specifically, studying the effects of social media on preaching with the hope of creating a methodological response to this cultural shift that is historically aware, theological grounded, biblically rooted and culturally contextual.

Before you read my first post: Preaching in the Age of Anxiety,” I confess upfront that I am a “media ecologist.”  In other words, I believe media is not neutral but effectual.  I also confess that I am a “hopeful new media ecologist” because I am not anti-media.  Therefore, my desire is the critical adoption and appropriate use of technology, while being aware of its effect and inevitable impact on the message.

Preaching in the “Age of Anxiety”

Original drawing of Icarus by
Nathanial Ashlin-Mayo

Greek mythology tells of the myth of Icarus, the son of Daedalus, the great Athenian craftsman (the attached artwork is from my artistic son Nathanial).  While King Minos held them captive in Crete, Daedalus fashioned wings made from wax and feathers to escape their imprisonment and fly to freedom.  In this mythical tale, Daedalus warns Icarus not to fly too close to the sun or the wax will melt (an ancient warning regarding the limitations of technology).  In the Greek narrative, Icarus ignores his father’s warning and pays the consequence by being lost at sea.

We exist in a great time of technological transition where media is having tremendous effects on how we communicate, relate and interact with the world around us.  To that end, if we continue to use our old methodologies, assumptions and presumptions, we will, proverbially, fly too close to the sun with our man-made constructions resulting in devastating consequences.

Our world has radically shifted: transitioning from the Guttenberg world to a Google world.  These two worlds are very different and this shift is having drastic and revolutionary effects on culture at multiple levels.  Continuing to fly with old world methodologies in a new ecology will, progressively, lead to devastating effects; just as it did for Icarus.

Marshal McLuhan warned:

“Innumerable confusions and a profound feeling of despair invariably emerge in periods of great technological and cultural transitions. Our “Age of Anxiety” is, in great part, the result of trying to do today’s job with yesterday’s tools–with yesterday’s concepts.”  (Medium is the Massage, 8-9)

Our world has, is and will continue to change in a substantial way and I sense this phenomenon occurring specifically in the field of homiletics (preaching).  I believe we need to learn the lesson from the Greek myth of Icarus. If, as communicators of God’s Word, we decide to try to communicate to today’s world using yesterdays methodologies, it will not only lead to anxiety, the proverbial warming wax, but that wax will inevitably melt and our effectiveness will be lost in the ocean of irrelevancy.

I believe that understanding media and its effects are profoundly important for the future of preaching.  As Marshal McLuhan also stated:

“It is impossible to understand social and cultural changes without a knowledge of the workings of media.” (Medium is the Massage, 8)  

Most pastors, including myself, have a tendency to enter the homiletic act with presuppositions based on former questions, presuppositions and assumptions. These questions, presumptions and assumptions were designed and based on a culture and society that once was, rather than now is.  I think this tendency is largely due to an ignorance regarding the seismic change that is occurring culturally around us.  This change is ubiquitous and will effect everything – including preaching.

It is my thesis that social media (informational technology’s teenage child) is rapidly and exponentially changing culture on a global scale.  In the dominion of homiletics, people do not enter the preaching relationship (as the congregation) with the same presumptions, assumptions, questions, etc., than they once did. This has changed and is perpetually changing as we move through this major tectonic shift in culture.

If we desire to be effective biblical communicators in our new world, we must be aware of the changing landscape (understanding our changing culture) and be willing to take different means of transportation towards our desired destination (methodologies).

Through future posts I will explore these related questions…

  • What we can learn through the history of technology/cultural change and how it affected preaching as a result?
  • What it means to preach to a generation of content producers rather than media consumers?
  • What does it mean to preach in a participatory culture?
  • How is information technology changing the way we think?
  • How the message (presentation) of the Gospel is re-shaping and why this isn’t bad (the message we share now was largely shaped during the last technological/cultural shift (Guttenberg).
  • What it means to communicate in a non-hierarchal culture – your degree and ordination does not mean what it used to.  What now grants you authority and why? 
  • Preaching in an image-based culture.
  • And many more….