#wpgvotes, new media is there

I’m fairly interested when there’s an election in my community, and usually spend the evening of the big day watching the results appear on TV. But yesterday’s election was easily the most exciting I’ve experienced so far.

Why? Because I didn’t watch it on TV.

My primary source as news developed was the #wpg votes Twitter feed with CBC Radio 1 streaming live online in the background.

Together, they gave me the up-to-the-minute (or, with Twitter, up-to-the-second) information I needed, while eliminating what I now consider the rather useless visual that TV provides.

I didn’t miss the line of candidates’ photos on screen with vote numbers flickering beside them, or the constant turn to a panel of experts giving their thoughts and predictions as the votes come in.

Instead, thanks to Twitter, I looked at the occasional backstage photos that journalists and CreComm J Majors tweeted and enjoyed the mixed commentating and news updates from “regular” people, and media professionals with some nice interaction and RTing between the two.

Sometimes I think that presenting local events in the traditional newscast format can create a disconnect, in that it doesn’t give that close-to-home, unscripted feel of news as it happens.

Following the election via the very untraditional Twitter, however, made the entire thing seem more relevant by being able to read real reactions from “regular” people (admittingly not always a good thing), while at the same time just as informative because of input from media outlets, too.

That being said, new media isn’t for everyone, and this time around the local TV stations really failed to deliver for those looking to them for immediate results.

I should point out that I don’t live in Winnipeg, and therefore couldn’t vote in that election (even though its results still very much affect me), but way out in my small part of the world, new media also tried to be a voice in the election fray.

Tried, and... well, it was a very quiet voice. Of the nine people running, only two had an online presence.

One candidate effectively (in my case) used this presence to appeal to youth voters, sending them a targeted letter with links to his blog and Facebook page.

He was the only person running to acknowledge the youth vote, as well as understand that it required an approach different from the usual canvassing. Case in point, although my parents read the brochures, letters, and other scraps of paper handed to them at the door, I preferred to read up whatever I could about candidates online.

I imagine there was a time when people didn’t know who was their new mayor until they read the (print!) newspaper the next day. Now, with better technology and web posting, people can – and demand – to know the results immediately.

Unless, of course, you have to rely on the Association of Manitoba Municipalities (AMM) for your results. Even with their website advertised as the new “one-stop shop on election night”, I still had a day’s wait. As Kenton Larsen would say, 'wah wah'!

New media works, but only if you use it well. AMM election organizers take note.

Learning from the pros...?: Media Interviews 101

Oral presentations? Not a problem. 20 page campaign proposals? No sweat.

But this week, when me and my fellow PR majors were asked to write a good key message and prep for our first on-camera media interview the room went suddenly quiet, oozing nervous tension.

And rightly so. Media interviews are no small undertaking – what with handling nerves, using appropriate body language, speaking clearly, remembering your key messages, and fielding difficult questions.

I went online to see how the professionals do it, and on top of the good ones, there are some really stellar bad ones too!

Lesson #1:

Where to start? I suspect the Managing Director of BT Retail knew that this was going to be a tough interview, but he made it worse with his a) poor eye contact, b) interruption, and c) nervous fidgeting (watch his feet!)

TIP: For seated interviews, try the BIBS (bums in back of seat) method mentioned in this blog which discusses the interview.

Lesson #2:

Don’t get emotional. In this clip, André Visagie, secretary general of AWB, a political group in South Africa, forgets two of the most important rules in media relations: stay calm, and remember you’re always speaking to your audience first through the reporter. Instead of politely refuting the allegations against him and then going on to deliver his key messages, he argues with the interviewer and gets pretty hostile.

Lesson #3:

Definitely something us regularly sleep-deprived CreComms should keep in mind: before an interview, get adequate sleep! (I’d really like to know, however, if the former Israeli president answered the questions correctly while nodding off! Now that would be talent.)

Thinking in circles going nowhere

EDIT: Re: Melanie’s comment below.

And just when you thought it couldn’t get more confusing....

Contrary to what I’ve been hearing and reading in the news, the city did invest some time into educating the public and providing forums for them to voice their concerns, which makes this story that much more intruiging given the amount of confusion and hostility some Winnipeggers are expressing towards the city.

I’m not entirely sure what could have been done better (other than airing an instructional online video or commercial and putting additional signage for pedestians & cyclists), but it’s clear that at least one of their objectives - educating citizens on how to use traffic circles - didn’t fall through.

What communication do you think would’ve been essential to this issue?

If you live in River Heights, what did you think of the city’s approach and what else could have been done?

----

I’ve spent too many mornings over breakfast this week fuming at the radio while Terry and Marcy from CBC play back calls from the listener line about Winnipeg’s new traffic “calming” circles - which is turning out to be a very ironic name for them indeed.

Its not the circles themselves that bother me, but the fact that I think its obvious some communications people somewhere really let Winnipeggers down.

From day one there has been widespread confusion about traffic circles: what drivers do, where pedestrians cross, how service dogs navigate, and why the particular intersection of Grosvenor & Waverley needs one.

New traffic circle in River Heights. Photo credit.

In all this chaos, one thing remains clear - much of the uncertainty and anger could have been avoided entirely had somebody involved simply taken the time to inform everyone - to communicate - well before the big day arrived.

Traffic circles have been around for decades, in various forms, and in numerous places around the world.

In other words, there’s no shortage of research, instructions, and examples of how these things work which could have been distributed to people in the nearby community of Grosvenor & Waverley, and Winnipeggers at large.

How about those 60 Minute Driver how-to commercials? Pamphlets or FAQ sheets delivered door-to-door? Town hall meetings or Q&A sessions? Proper public consultation and communication could have saved the issue from becoming the controversy it is today.

A dual lane, five-road traffic circle in Calgary. Kind of puts Winnipeg's 'confusion' into perspective, doesn't it? Photo credit.

On the other hand, just because the city missed the communication mark, doesn’t mean driver’s can’t educate themselves.

For the record, directions on how to navigate traffic circles are in MPI’s driver’s handbook, pg 52, available online. Or just Google "how to navigate traffic circles" for a plethora of sites with step-by-step instructions - just make sure you're not driving at the time!

The best French I ever learned was from a Scotsman

Review: Coffee Break French (CBF) audio podcasts from Radio Lingua Network

Contains: 80 lessons (15-20 minutes), with 40 new ones starting Oct. 18!

Affordability: All 80 podcasts are free to download. Bonus materials aren't - see CBF website for pricing.

My approach:

CBF, hosted by Mark Pentleton from fair Scotland, is for beginners through to the intermediate level. Since I’ve tackled Michel Thomas, I chose podcasts that focused on areas of the language in which I felt I was lacking: verbs, or more specifically, verb tenses.

I’ve been meeting once a month with my high school French teacher who’s helping monitor my progress. One of the first things she told me was the importance of being able speak in the future and past tenses, as well as the present – key markers in determining how advanced your language skills are.

CBF podcasts are well organized so I could easily choose to download only the episodes that dealt specifically with verbs (21) before listening to the vocab-oriented lessons and radio plays.

Effectiveness: Learning

a) Situational & Structural: as I explained in my Michel Thomas review, there is a crucial difference between the two. CBF offers both.

The first 40 lessons are great for beginners. You develop basic vocab and can speak simple, context-based sentences which boost learner confidence.

Then comes the technical stuff (lessons 41-67) for those interested in taking the language further and crafting their own dialogue. These episodes are well paced so as not to overwhelm listeners with the complications of verb conjugation, but cover a lot of ground in the process (present, future, conditional, passé composé, and imperfect).

b) Pronunciation & Spelling: Unlike some resources which expect the listener to key in on pronunciation indirectly by mimicking the instructor, Mark from CBF frequently calls direct attention to it, which is especially helpful when distinguishing between verb tenses (parlerais, parlerai?).

Spelling is another area Mark focuses on, which may be odd for learning spoken French (Michel Thomas nearly avoids it altogether), but its helpful with pronunciation too, especially when you see a word you don’t know has similar spelling to one you do.

An area I did have issues with was one that I previously mentioned Michel Thomas doing well - the negative (eg. Je ne veux pas, or I don’t want). CBF teaches this pronunciation the textbook way, keeping “je” and “ne” separate, although when talking with a native French speaker, you’ll hear either the two words blended together, or no “ne” at all - something that isn’t addressed in the podcasts, but makes a difference between anglicised and true French.

Effectiveness: Performance & Operation

a) Enthusiasm: if I had to give one reason to listen to CBF, I’d say do it for the cheerful instruction and Scottish accents. Learning a language independently is tough as it is; do yourself a favour and choose a podcast that you’ll want to listen to because the podcasters have great personalities - it’s impossible not to smile when fellow student Anna talks!

CBF also acknowledges the listener. Whereas Michel Thomas gives you a fly-on-the-wall feeling by never acknowledging an outside party, Mark and Anna frequently address “the listener” and bring you into their conversation. This rapport does make a difference - you feel part of a community, rather than someone listening through a crack in the door to the lecture hall.

b) Organization: Here’s the second reason to download CBF: it saves you time by being organized. Because this is my college thesis, I’m on a bit of a tight schedule and need to know if the resources I’ve chosen will teach me what I want to learn.

Each podcast has a text description of the lesson, and Mark and Anna announce what’s coming up at the end of every episode. I felt comfortable skipping ahead, knowing exactly what I was missing and where I could return to if I didn’t understand something.

c) Radio plays: the last 10 lessons develop your listening skills as you try and understand a conversation between two couples. Although Mark breaks the conversation down phrase by phrase, it was a little too-much-too-fast for me, especially trying to keep up with colloquial phrases.

Understanding others, however, is an important skill to grasp. The next step for me will be podcasts focusing on more real-life French conversations.

Bottom Line: Keep your money and download these podcasts. Well organized, entertaining, quality instruction that takes you beyond the “beginner” into thinking out your own conversations.

Silent short: The Hitman?

I guess I’ll just have to admit that Dean Cooper, like my mom, is always right.

For the second out-of-class assignment in a row, his predictions of our behaviour, initially scoffed by me, have come true.

Last term, when he said we’d spend upwards of 20 hours editing our montage, I did (and more). This term, when we were doing continuity edits for the first time, he said we’d be high-fiving in the edit suits.

And - well, we weren’t exactly high fiving, because that would be too accurately creepy - but lets just say it was a little giddy-inducing.

Editing for continuity - putting clips together to show the progression of events -

is hard to film, but super fun to edit because it makes your videos look like the real, professional, thing.

When an actor, say, reaches for a glass of water, you can make it look like one fluid movement from a medium shot of them reaching to a close up of their hand grabbing the glass. Magic! (Unfortunately, it’s also invisible magic because if you’ve done it right, no one notices!)

Me and awesome fellow PR major Lennie, decided to punch up the above water glass senario with a little James Bond (or is it Agatha Christie?) flavour for our assignment.

Thanks to the very Bond and Bond girl-esque Eman and Stacia for being so accomodating when we ran out of daylight, good weather, and driving skills...You guys were fun to film!

Next project... Wild Target?