The 3 Golden Rules

After becoming apart of twelve social media platforms I have gained a better knowledge of health organizations using social media.  Especially organizations who are promoting themselves and their causes with social media.  After exploring twelve different platforms I feel as if close to all social media sites are screaming out to health organizations everyday:

  "Pick me, let me promote your organization,
it's definitely a whole lot cheaper than the current advertising
company burning a hole in your pocket!"

Although any of these platforms may be challenging for first time user, the benefits are astounding.  One health organization has the ability to connect with their market through one-on-one conversation without leaving the office.  The advancement of technology allows for easier communication with any two (or more) people; whether one of them are from an organization or not.  Social media enhances the ability for these separate parties to communicate with one another by giving many different ways to do so.  This may be through a picture, a video, a live chat, a post, a comment, an open blog, a forum, and so much more.  What health organization does not want to communicate to its donors, survivors, patients, fans, and so forth? 

Promoting a cause through social media is an easy, yet not so easy, way to increase metrics an organization may currently have.  This includes increasing awareness, increasing donation dollars coming in, increasing research abilities, increasing fans, and ultimately popularity of an organization.  The question still remains for many health organizations of how to do so.  This is where the not so easy part comes in. 

Many health organization still have trouble meeting their specific metrics through social media.  They are not sure where to begin or how to go about it.  What should they be posting?  Which platforms are going to be most useful for them?  How will this effect their organization?  Will a platform support their cause or mission statement specifically? 

Many of these questions and more can easily be answered quickly with a search online, through sites such as Mashable and other blogs.  Many of my personal questions about social media platforms were answered through articles we were provided for class.  Further research for a health organization using social media can be found on the actual platform site.  For example, on Facebook and Google+, you can find informational material on how an organization can use them while signing up. 
 
Finally, I have come up with three golden rules for social media and health promotion through my own experiences this semester.  These Golden Rules are easily interchangeable with close to any platform.  Although more rules made be helpful, utilizing these rules will likely set the stage for a current organization using social media or those who are making the decision to do so now. These Golden Rules are created to help meet metrics an organization may have.

ONE: Create a Great Team
Create a team that is interested in social media, or greatly interested in exploring it. A health organization's team may only consist of one person, but there still is no 'I' in team. This person should be interacting with others throughout the organization. Doing so will help create awareness of what is going on internally. All of which expands the social media team and social media material. Current events, current research findings, and so forth may be incorporated into the social media material. The article How to Build an All-Star Social Media Team puts into great detail how an organization can build such a team. Although all of these positions may not be filled in a smaller non-profit organization, they may still take parts from it.

TWO: Know When to Respond to NegativityA negative comment or response of some kind from viewers is going to happen somewhere along the way. At one point or time these will appear on an organization's chosen platform(s). Lets face it, this world is full of negativity and it doesn't stop at social media. The health organization's social media team should be given strict guidelines on times and ways to respond. A comment on Facebook from an individual saying they are disappointed in the customer service line is not something to ignore. The guides for the team should address which negative communication to respond to, which to ignore, which to delete, and which to report. An ASPCA article, Top 10 Tips for Responding to Negative Comments, provides just that. Although this may not be a social media expert blog. The information is great!


THREE: Remain Consistent
A health organization should not let their viewers down, or they will go elsewhere!  This pertains to amount of posts,  material, and interactions with the viewer.  If an organization is posting on a regular basis (3-5 times a week) and suddenly does not post for 5 days in a row the viewers are going to leave.  If the material in posts begin to repeat themselves or lack interest, intellectually or visually, viewers are going to stop coming back.  If an organization intereacts on a daily basis with their viewers and suddenly stop, the viewers are not going to return.  This is exactly what an organization does not want!  They want to increase viewers instead of decrease them. 

Times may come up where social media is put to the side for a few days, especially in a small nonprofit organization where the "Great Team" is only one person.  In these instances the viewers should be told ahead of time.  A post on Facebook should be found stating social media for 'ABC organization' will be taking a short break until Monday, Nov. 4th.  In the post also should be stated the site is not shutting down and the viewers are not going to be ignored.  If the viewer is informed from the organization directly they will believe it.        

Pinterest: Pinning for Health Organizations



I cannot hesitate to explain how excited I personally get over Pinterest.  I fell in love with Pinterest because of its easy to maneuver set-up.  Unlike other social media sites, even Facebook in the beginning, it took me awhile to adjust and see what was really going on.  Pinterest, on the other hand, I find to be very simple. 

 

I resort to Pinterest just as often as I do Google or Bing, if not more.  I find myself getting lost in Pinterest, yet coming out with more information that I intended to get.  I have used Pinterest in the past for a wide range of reasons; including school project ideas, holiday gift ideas, photography tips, and much, much more.

 

I am not the type of person to research health topics of any sort through the Internet, but Pinterest really peaked my interest of starting too.  Through Pinterest I have actually started to explore the Internet more with health questions.  I have found blogs and health tips through the use of Pinterest.  Although I still do not fully trust the actual information, I still continue to utilize Pinterst to research.

 

 The features of Pinterest give health organizations an opportunity to put pictures to their words.  This would work for any organization, not only health organizations.  Through a separate article from socialmediatoday, Patricia Redsicker provides tips for a health organization using Pinterest.  Her tips include:

 

#1. Pin client photos and testimonials

#2. Show practical use of your products or services

#3. Use what you already have

#4. Show your organization’s culture

#5. Pin for conversation

#6. Take advantage of workshops, conferences and seminars

 

I feel the overall impression of these tips ask an organization to be themselves, work with what they have, and ask for help/contributions from their followers.  With tip #1 the organization could make their page more personable.  With actually testimony from clients a organization becomes more real for a viewer; especially those from a nonprofit organization.

 

As stated in a provided Mashable article, video is not yet popular on Pinterest, but is slowly growing.  As a user a video must have a catchy view in order for me to view the entire video.  Sometimes this is the very beginning of the video or is just a still shot from the video.  Either way, the initial screen must encompass a a bright pictures or a catchy phrase.

 

A MultiMerchantChannel article makes an important observation that an organization should consider the great reaching capabilities of Pinterest.  Although this article in particular is speaking of retailers, this is true of health organizations also.  Similar to Twitter, you are able to connect a Pinterest account with Facebook and/or Twitter.  This connects your Twitter followers, Facebook friends, and Pinterest pins altogether.  Just another reason pins should incorporate many different audiences. 

 

Overall, Pinterest makes itself distinctive with having images instead of mostly words.  It also has the features of comments, likes, followers, and video capabilities as other social media websites do.  Pinterest should be used by a health organization that already has material built up.  This material could be promoted through Pinterest to increase donations/traffic, etc.

 

The American Lung Association has a somewhat successful Pinterest account in my eyes.  I say somewhat due to amount of action they present to viewers compared to the amount of followers.  They have 20 boards that range from 5 pins to 157.  The board with 157 pins allowed viewers to input their opinions.  With all of the information the ALA is providing to users they only have 49 followers. 

 

I would argue that the organization should attempt to gain more followers by targeting one particular audience at a time.  This could be done maybe by creating a different board for every audience they want to reach through Pinterest. I would consider their Pinterest as an overall success needing only small improvements.  

 

Stumble Upon: Click to a New World

I had previously heard of Stumble Upon but I had never actually explored it myself.  I find that it could become very addicting for any one person.  And turn into something very time consuming.  Even just exploring it in preparation for this class I found myself getting lost in article, pictures, tips, and etc.  Number eight of this article is extremely true!

Stumble Upon's launch of Stumbling for Good seemed like a very smart move for the company.  The large amount of users creates a HUGE audience for non profits.  The audience also basically segments itself by choosing what interests them.  If a user is interested in health this option will be given to them the very first time they sign up for the website.  This keeps a nonprofit from wasting time promoting themselves to those who are never going to utilize their resources.

Although Stumbling for Good does benefit a nonprofit it does entail patience on behalf of the organization.  In order for an organization to become popular it must have many, many likes and recommendations from users.  This will not likely happen over night and entails weeks of progress and build up for the organization.   

This may seem has a drawback I believe those who are extremely passionate about their organization are willing to take the time and invest in Stumble Upon.  The benefits of joining are among others the increase of traffic to your website, as stated in this article.  An additional article from Read Write Web also mentioned the high traffic on Stumble Upon.  The second article in particular compared Stumble Upon to Twitter.  The comparison seems difficult in my eyes, but the article is also over three years old now. 

Through Stumble Upon a user is able to explore their interest and discover website they had not previously known existed.  The "random'ness" of it can easily get a user lost in links from blogs to blog. (Like myself!)  The user may even discover a health organization who promotes a cause dear to them.     

I would not recommend a health organization to use Stumble Upon as a starting grounds for many reason.  The most important being that you must already have ready to read material prior to investing yourself into Stumble Upon.  Stumble Upon should be a third or even fourth media platform an organization should utilize.  The platforms prior to Stumble Upon would help an organization build up enough material to promote first. 

A came across Woman's Day a couple of time exploring throughout the site.  Although it is not primarily a health organization I found it in the health interests as well as the fitness interests.  I was directly to their own website which pertained articles about home remedies and exercise habits a person should consider. 

In the article you could clearly see the tab 'Health+Fitness" through Stumble Upon, which is what grabbed my attention.  Before I knew it i was exploring a health blog through blog spot by following an article on Stumble Upon.

Over all I am really pleased when Stumble Upon based on the similarity to Pinterest.  I enjoy getting lost in my search through Stumble Upon and found it to be educational.  I see the benefits of a health organization utilizing it, if they are patient and have prior material to provide to interested users.

   

 

MedHelp: my health online

MedHelp was the website I chose to explore for no particular reason.  I went to the home page of the four we had to choose from and this one caught my interest the most. 

I was hesitant at first to sign up due to these websites requesting information of yourself.  But with MedHelp I did not feel uncomfortable filling any of the information out.  Actually, MedHelp allows you to fill out what information you want to at first, then allows you to go back and fill in what you may have passed up. 

This allows the user to check out the site first off then make up their mind as to whether or not they want to stick around.  The first information that the user is asked for is basic: nickname, password, and email address.  Furthermore, the user is asked about weight, height, and what interests the user to become apart of this online community.

From there the user is able to open up an completely different community for the health world.  I was shocked at how much information was on one website for a health community.  As a user you are presented with journals, forums, experts, health tools, health information galore!, trackers, and so much more.

MedHelp has been around since ealy 1994, therefore it has had plenty of changed in the last 18 years.  With 18 years of experience in this business I can see the benfit of having a big history.  MedHelp must also be popular among the online health community for being able to survive such a long time. 

Personally, I could see myself utilizing MedHelp with the trackers.  The trackers make it simple and easy to set a goal and see yourself progress towards it.  For instance, as a user, I may want to lose 10 pounds in two months.  With MedHelp I am able to have a start and end date of the goal, title the trackers, who can see the tracker online, send myself updates daily, and design a graph to see my progress through pictures.  Although this tracker may seem simple, I think it is benficial to have other users seeing your progress.  They could easily encourage me in my weight loss and so forth. 

 The Experts section of Medhelp includes over "200 doctors and experts from top medical institutions".  I feel more comfortable with this than say Wikipedia because the doctors and experts are chosen by MedHelp.  They are not self proclaimed doctors or experts.  This make me feel more comfortable as a user to trust MedHelp and the experts utilizing the site.

Through the experts section you are also able to become involved in a Health Chat or find a doctor for yourself.  Again, all of the options on MedHelp shows its history of being in the online health community.

Inorder for a health organzation to better utilize such a community as MedHelp they would need to select an individual to respresent them through the experts section.  The health organization would not likely be able to become apart of the community on their own.  An individual who is apart of the organization who would be considered an expert could promote them through chats on MedHelp. 

A benefit of obtaining an individual to respresent an organzation on MedHelp would be the large amount of traffic that MedHelp has on a monthly basis.  These large numbers are shown on Alexa.  This particular article breaks down everything on the MedHelp website.  This would help the health organzaition segment their audience through MedHelp if they chose to use it. 

The CrunchBase website published an article on MedHelp and named it the largest online health community and platform company.  I agree with this article in that MedHelp contains "trusted information and advice tailored to comsumers' personal health needs"

 

 



Yahoo! Answers: are there any answers?

Yahoo! Answers as a social media?! I had not even thought about this. 
My first thoughts going in to exploring YA was similar to Wikis and comparing it to Wikipedia.  I was very skeptical.  I have to admit, I still am.  I feel skeptical because I question the credibility of those giving answers.  I do not feel this is out of questions when it comes to something as serious as a person's health.

The feature of a person providing answers with a bio is somewhat helpful.  The only problem being I could essentially create an account and provide false information to make myself seem more credible.  For an organization they are able to provide links to their website.  This makes me feel more comfortable as a user. 

Another problem with this is finding an organization providing answers.  I had a difficult time finding an organization doing this.  In my opinion, the majority of answers are coming from individual people. 

The Top 10 Ways to Promote Your Business On YA  article is from an individual who is apart of an organization.  I can see where this might be more beneficial for this media due to the users being individuals.

The same article suggests breaking rules that are not liked by the users.  I'm not so sure this is a great way to promote yourself.  Although it may work out in the short-run, why would an organization want to promote themselves based on actions that are looked down on by the users?
I, myself, would not think highly of an organization who vote for their answers to gain popularity.  This almost contradicts itself; of course you think your answer is the best, or you wouldn't have provided it.

An individual I found through YA was Dr. Qutub.  Dr. Qutub includes his work experience in his 'About Me' section that seem credible to me, but are they real?  His graphs include 4978 questions being answered and 3756 being voted best answers. 

As a user how do I know these were truly the best answer to the question?  How do I know he did not vote on them himself?  How do I know he didn't choose questions that no one else had answered, except himself?  All of these are risks users of YA must take into consideration.




        

LinkeIn: Are you In?

In my opinion, LinkedIn has more of a professional networking site feeling.  This medium is a great way to really put yourself out there for the career you desire.  It is an online 'per-interview', aside from actually attaching your resume, you are also invited to post an entire profile dedicated to yourself.

Throughout this profile a user will include a personal picture, their work experience, volunteer experience, causes they care about, a personal summary, and recommendations.  All of these sections are similar to those needed for a job application and/or interview. Essentially, LinkedIn is an 'interview' before THE interview for an organization.

The mashable article states that:

"LinkedIn is no longer just a place to post your resume and look for a job. It’s become

a vital business tool for professionals and companies."  

 

Furthermore, the article explains that LinkedIn in a social channel that creates new oppporunities.  Although I agree with both statements, I still see LinkedIn as an extended employee site.  

I see where LinkedIn allows for great connections to be made between companies and people.  These connections can lead to greater opportunities for users as well as companies.  For a non-profit organization to join LinkedIn and utilizes features a hiring process could be sped up dramatically. 

The company is asked to complete a company page and have its employees 'connect' to the companies page.  This will help get the word out about the organization itself, as stated in the LinkedIn article about nonprofit organizations.

Canadian Foundation of Women's Health has a great overview on the company description.  It includes their mission, vision, goals, priorities, and specialities.  Each of these are very important to any organization and LinkedIn allows the company to be upfront about them.  These attributes for a non-profit can attract a person whose interests match this overview. 

Although the CFWH does a great job with their companies overview, the connection to the employees is missing.  Currently (9/29), there is only one employee of eight included on the "Employee Insights".  This drastically limits the companies ability to connect to critical audiences.  This is evident with CFWH having only sixty-three followers. 

I'm not sure if this has to due with the organization being in Canada or not.  This medium may not be popular in Canada, therefore its popularity on this site is low.  In my opinion the organization should have all employees join LinkedIn whether or not it is popular in Canada.  This way, the employees are familiar with the site if LinkedIn were to catch on in Canada. 

 

 

Twitter: Short, Sweet, & to the Point

Twitter brings a simple, clean element to the social media platforms in my eyes.  Twitter allows for short, quick statements coming and going in every direction possible.  Interactions are quick and to the point.  These interactions are coming from an array of people: personal or organizations.

The amount of characters limited in one tweet may be sleek and to the point, but it can easily cause problems for health organizations attempting to get information out.  Organizations would need to communicate to users in 140 characters or less.  The tweets would need to be attractive to users and informational all at the same time. 

The Mashable article could easily be utilized by health organizations to improve their presence on Twitter.  @ClevelandClinic takes into consideration a lot of these tips.  Cleveland Clinic does a great job of having less structure.  Many of their tweets incorpoFarate regular day-to-day life for Cleveland Clinic employees.  Pictures of their lounge area at the clinic are featured on Twitter.


Featuring personal pictures aside from a constant feed of information gives Cleveland Clinic a sense of feeling real to the user.  I personally like seeing a break in information and can relate to personal items from an organization. 

On a separate article from Mashable, Social Media is said to be a large distraction to individuals at work.  This article in particular points out that Twitter contains 400 million tweets per day.  This large distraction could potentially be a benfit for health organizations.  During an employees time of distraction they could be taking in constant information from Twitter. 

The article includes an infographic showing the possible loss from employees using Facebook, Twitter, and email:

   

I had not previously heard of Tweet Chat prior to reading the Health Works Collective article.  The growth of organzations after holding/being apart of these chats should be motivation enough for any organization to have such a chat.  The popularity of Heath Literacy Missouri (HLM) after a tweet chat alone is amazing to me. After a tweet chat HLM increased its network by 1000. 

1000!

 

1 0 0 0

 

ONE - THOUSAND !

 

That number is larger than some organzations ever have.  All of this occured through Twitter.  The simple, short, and sweet Twitter.  Why wouldn't a health organization want to take on the challenge of educating and attracting the public through 140 characters or less.   

 

 

 

Youtube: Putting a face to your words

YouTube gives anyone the ability to put sounds, visuals, video, movement, and a voice to what everyone encounters online -- just words!  Sometimes you might encounter a picture here and there online, but the picture is still and does involve any visual movement for the user.  YouTube allows the user to encounter movement, sound, and a voice.  This brings more interest to the user and possibly more involvement from the user.

With YouTube you:

• SEE who is giving you the information in an interview, instead of by a small bio at the beginning or end of the article. 
• SEE what the environment is doing in result of the hurricane. 
• SEE who the opinions are coming from
• SEE where current donations are going after being donated
• SEE what the organization hopes to accomplish
• SEE how a non-profit works
• SEE what the risks factors are of a fast spreading condition/disease/illnesses
• SEE how YOU can help out!

And so much more!

YouTube is essentially the news channel for health organizations.  There is a constantly feed for users to see.  In order for a health organization to be successful, as stated in the CDC social media guidelines article, there should be consistency among the video postings.  The CDC article makes very good claims that could be used for any organization who is utilizing YouTube, not only health organizations. 

As stated in the article, the video posted should:

1. Clearly Define Objective: What are we trying to say?
2. Know Your Target Audience: Who are we talking to?
3. Clear Content: Get straight the the point.
4. Promotion: How is the audience going to see the video?
5. Evaluate: How successful was our video?

The Alzheimer's Association has had their own channel on YouTube since the middle of 2007.  The channel currenly has 930 subscribers andnearly 800,000 video views.  With over five years of experience on YouTube this association embodies the check list mentioned above very well.  The bio of the Alzheimer's Association is short and to the point:

   

"The Alzheimers Association is the leading voluntary health organization in

Alzheimer care, support and research. Our mission is to eliminate Alzheimers disease through

the advancement of research; to provide and enhance care and support for all affected; and

 to reduce the risk of dementia through the promotion of brain health."

 

This short bio give the user clear content of the videos they will be provided and what they want from the viewers. 

 

The target audience are obviously first those who are diagnosed with the disease.  But are not limited to those who have family members/friends with the disease, and those who are interested in eliminating this disease.  The videos are promoted through YouTube; on their channel, on Twitter, and and their Facebook page.  Throughout the YouTube videos they are cross promoting Twitter with t-shirt having the hashtag #ENDALZ on the front.

 

I see consistency with the two current videos on the ALZ YouTube channel, but looking further back they do not.  They use the YouTube channel as a great promoter of events that are coming up and speeches that occurred at different events.  They seem to slip up on anything other than these events. 

 

I would suggest using their YouTube channel to increases awareness, possible prevention, and so forth.  I would also suggest making the videos shorter, not losing the viewers attention with five to ten minute videos.  Such videos would improve their consistency in between important events they often promote currently.

One last suggestion would be how someone could contribute to the cause.  Yes, the videos are consistent in asking for your help/donation, but it doesn't tell you how.  Maybe a link should be added to the channel in different ways to contribute to the cause.   

 

    

Google+: Breaking into the limelight

Google+ is to Facebook as Mac is to PC.
I believe this comparison is the very first thing that came to my mind when I began exploring Google+.

Going into this weeks assignment Google+ was not entirely new to me.  I have heard people talking about it before around campus.  I heard they found features to be easier compared to Facebook and how other features seemed to be more complicated.  I am still in the works of completely understanding this network, but I believe it is very similar to Facebook overall. 

You have the basic posts from the page owner and the ability to interact with one another.  The common ability to comment or +1 a post I find to be the most similar to Facebook.  Although this is a very common theme among social networking sites. 

The most innovative feature in my opinion are the circles.  The ability to coordinate friends, family, organizations, acquaintances, news, and so forth is a feature I was not familiar with.  I know other sites, such as Facebook, allow you to do similar lists with "friends," but this one is a little more unique.  Google+ goes a little step further in coordinating who your following and who are in your circles.  You have the ability to allow only certain circles to see a post of your choice. 

A health organization would be able to segment their audience by using different circles.  The array of circles a health organization might have would allow them to easily send messages to people who can relate. 

The +1 option, I discovered, is more than just a "like" button for Google+.  The +1 button allows you to bookmark articles you may run into throughout the internet.  A health organization could utilize this +1 button on important article they may post anywhere online.  The user can easily find the articles anywhere they can log onto their Google+ account.  This makes finding the articles super easy for the user.  The user doesn't have to worry about adding the article to their favorites at work and then having to email themselves the link to read it more in depth at home on a separate computer.    

The health organization that I found on Google+ was the American Heart Association. [https://plus.google.com/u/0/?tab=jX#+AmericanHeart/posts]  This organization keeps their posts up-to-date.  They have only posted a maximum of three posts in one day the last three weeks.  I see this as being adequate posts for an organization.  A follower of the American Heart Association would not be bombarded with posts all day long from them. 

Not only are the amount of posts important to me, as a follower of AHA, so is the content of the posts.  The posts most commonly are questions or short facts/statements.  These are the type of posts that we spoke of in class today.  These type of post make it short, catchy, and to the point.

AHA asks questions of followers that pertain to heart issues as expected.  But also other posts are catchy such as the following that was posted on September 17th:

 

"Where would Rocky be without “Eye of the Tiger?” Sometimes

a good song provides just the boost you need to power through a 

workout. Tell us what’s on your workout playlist! http://bit.ly/AHASongza."

 

This post itself speaks for itself.  It is suggesting a workout, yet mentioning music to go along with it as inspiration. 

 

Looking over the AHA Google+ page I do not see a lot of post activity from users.  Some post do not have any activity at all.  Others have just one comment, one share, or a couple +1's.  I'm not sure if this is due to Google+ still being new or anothe factor.  Maybe it is due to the post only having text, and their page not being as catchy unless you read over and over again.  AHA has only posted two pictures in the past couple of weeks; this may be prevalant as to why they do not have much interaction among followers.

 

At the end of the day, it can be agreeable that Google+ still has a few tweeks to work on.  As the popularity grows I can see where Google+ may overtake Facebook in the future.  I do not think it will be in the next or even the year after that.  Who knows when it will be exactly, but I think it will happen.  The combination of Google products that are being used is of a wide variety.  Google search, RSS, gmail, docs, calendar, blogger, and more.  Why not combine them all into one social network? 

 

 

So are you Mac or PC and what will the world be, (Mac or PC) say in another ten years?   

 

 

 





Facebook: More like home

Facebook is more of comfortable social media platform for me personally.  I am more familiar with Facebook than any other one.  Although I often learn something new about it.  Facebook seems to lead the way, or be the first social media platform a perosn or organization goes to for connections or exposure.

Facebook makes the link between people and health organizations seem simple.
"Like" their page:

• Their popularity goes up
• Receive a coupon for a product
• Receive posts on your timeline from them

Visit their page:

• Learn about an event they have coming up. 
• Learn how to contribute to their cause
• Get updated (hopefully, anyways) health information related to their cause
• Get tips on how to remain healthy
• Receive words of encouragement

Both the organization and the user are able to interact and communicate with each other on the same page.  Posts are able to be posted by a user onto the organization's Facebook page and easily a conversation could be started.  The interaction may also be halted by the organization not responding or even going as far as deleting the original post.

Organizations are not just taking in typed words and relying information through typed words to the users.  Videos, pictures, links, and more are shared by both the organization and the user over Facebook.  Such features makes Facebook more attractive visibily and keeps the attention of users.

An organzation is able to make more of a brand through the setting up of the Facebook page.  Tech support is constantly available to organizations who have questions or need assistance with their page. 

The Facebook page that I searched and quickly found was the American Heart Association - Go Red For Women: http://www.facebook.com/GoRed#!/GoRed

Go Red For Women kept their page updated multiple times throughout a single day.  It was a a very busy and graphic page.  Multiple pictures and encouraging sayings/facts were uploaded on these daily posts.  Users of Facebook were interacting with each other through comments and posts.  Some posts included over 100 comments from the users!

The area that I seen that was lacking the most was interaction on behalf of the American Heart Association itself.  Some posts initiated by the American Heart Association were questions directly towards the viewers.  Although there were plenty of answers on behalf of the users the organization itself never commented back or responded at all.  I understand this is a large organzation and with over 300K likes this would be a tough job.  No matter the size of the organization I think it should still acknowledge their users.

The overall success of a Facbook page for a health organization are the constant updates, the multiple use of its resources provided through Facebook, and the interaction between it's "customers" and organization.

After all, its free, it helps obtain and maintain "customers", and provides key resources directly to the organization. 

Wikis: Never out of style!, or is it?

After getting over the initial confusion on what exactly I was needing to do with the Wiki page I think I got it down.  I would almost consider this to be a smaller version of Wikipedia.  The name and all!

I could see where our class could utilize the Wiki Mark made for us over our class projects.  Pages could easily be peer edited, idea could be discussed, and suggestions could be made.  All of the resources would be on one convienent page for us.

This is the idea I get from other organizations who utilize a Wiki page.  They made the pages to get everyone on one page.  Ideas are easily and quickly swapped.  Members of the page are kept up-to-date with discussions.  Other pages took up timelines and accomplishments.  The settings for a Wiki page seem to suit just about anyone who is in an organization, team, group, and so on.

I am almost overwhelmed by the amount of personization a Wiki gives you. The sharing of files, videos, and docs. The options to promote discussion, timelines, graph sharing, and the ability to build your own content

The many features make it personalized to just about anyone.  A health organization may decide to use a Wiki internally and/or externally for the publics use.  Internally, the health organization could organization events, office meetings, monthly goals.  Externally, the same organization may be promoting those events, asking for donation, or promoting a certain cause. 

Multiple users having access to the wiki is an excellent feature.  An organization who splits into different groups and later comes together to communicate as a whole could do it quickers and easier with a Wiki.  Whenever somethings changes or is no longer true it can quickly be changed. 

The organization I came across utilizing a Wiki is the Canadian Interprofessional Health Collaborative (CIHC).  http://cihc.wikispaces.com/  This wiki was basically promoting the health care changes and programs in Canada.  This Wiki had not had any changes to its site for a couple years.  Although there had not been interaction for quite some time the website was still full of plenty of information. 

From what it seeems, the site had been very well planned out and implemented in the beginning of its history.  There are plenty of changes, explainations, and file exchanges to read.  There are over fifty members apart of this Wiki to contribute information.

My overall thought on a Wiki page is positive, but time consuming for the creator.  The features are great and especially interactive for members.  Why should a health organization spend so much time creating and personalizing a page for external use when facebook and twitter are more streamlined?  For internal use I could imagine an organzation utilizing this in a simple form to keep on one page. 

If time and money are present, then go for it!   

RSS: Is anyone listening?

Going into checking out RSS I tried to have a much more opened mind compared to blogger.  I find RSS to be the exact opposite of other social media platforms. The constant feed of article after article from organizations is what RSS is all about.  This keeps a user from having to search all over the internet for their favorite blogs, entertainment, news, or so on. 

Although this may be seen as a positive, it does not really give an opportunity for a conversation to occur between the organization and possible subscriber.  The pros may outweighs the cons in this case, but I think that an organization who is going to attempt to put out articles for its users should allow for some kind of feedback.  Feedback is what completes the cycle of communication after all!

The organizations who use RSS are relying on their subscribers to be excellent listeners.  This is helped by RSS tracking which articles you have and have not read.  In order for subscribers to be great listeners the information should be attention grabbing to them.  The organization must know what is important to their subscribers.  They should know what information their subscribers want or need.

The organizations that I found had general health information for a wide variety of people.  It was the healthfinder.gov website.  The information found on RSS from healthfinder.gov mostly pertained the current news, such as the West Nile virus.  They also had random updates throughout the week on their feed pertaining to health in the United States.  

I guess at the end of the day I have mixed feelings about google reader.  I see where it may be overwhelming to users because it is all information based.  It also does not entail much interaction between the user and organization compared to other platforms. On a more positive note I see where convience is for the user.  They no longer have to spend time going from their favorite websites to blogs and waste time. RSS allows them to do this all in one.  

The only question that remains is if the user is a great listener or not.  Is the information catchy enough to read the full article? Is the information what they're really interested in? Does the information pertain to them? Is the information relevant and up to date, or just old news? Are they really listening or only monitoring the out coming information?

In the end it seems all these questions rely on the organization itself.

Blogspot: A free link to the public at your fingertips

Blogging is a place where a great amount of opinions may be expressed. This social network seems to be a clean slate compared to other networks. Opinions of all types are welcome; especially over a variety of networks.

Although this class is focused on health organizations it is easy to get lost in other topics; such as sports, education, news, opinion etc. The added interactions from other bloggers allows for a beneficial conversation.

Health organizations could, and should, take advantage of this great piece of media for their own benefit.  Especially those who are non-profit, or working with a limited budget since this product is totally free.

Health organizations would benefit by interacting with their patients and potential patients easily from their own homes. Questions from the public could be answered and information/advice could be easily given.  Events from a health organization could be broadcasted to the public through this social media .  New and improving health information can be provided to clients through a blogging site.  From this information clients may shed their opinion on the information and so forth.

My original reaction to blogging as a media platform was the generic, "I'm not so sure about this." I held this opinion based on no prior blogging experience. My encounters will blogging had only gone as far as my mom using them to research upcoming grocery couponing deals! How ridiculous on my part! Simply exploring different blogs for thirty minutes made me really open my eyes to blogging.

The blog that truly touched my heart as far as health organizations goes was the Federation for Children with Special Needs. This blog seemed a little bit different to me compared to all the other blogs I have encountered so far. It wasn't announcing upcoming events, asking for donations, or even that grabbing of your attention at first glance.

The blog was clearly directed towards readers who had disabilities or parents with children who have a disability. They were stories of those who deal with disabilities on a daily basis. They told of athletes, celebrities, and regular people who had a disability.  The two latest blogs point out Justin Timberlake who has OCD and Michael Phelps who deals with ADHD. Another entry tells the story of a regular person who deals with a disability

The entries had a common theme of encouraging those who have a disability.  They simply asked them to never give up.  I think those who live with a disability on a daily basis need these stories in order to see they are not alone and should not allow their disability to keep them from success!

www.fcsnblog.blogspot.com