Peter Bihr

Archive
culturally insensitive

Today, the last of the Zivis finished their last day at work. Calling this The End of an Era wouldn’t be overstated: From 1973 to 2011 (today, actually), more than 2.7 million young men served in Germany. (More stats and history in German on Wikipedia.) Only instead of serving in the military, they worked at mostly social institutions like hospital, elder care homes and the like.

1999

I was just about 19 when I put in my year of Zivildienst, roughly from mid-1999 to mid-2000. It was certainly one the most transformative years of my life, potentially also one of the worst, and I’m sure I’d be a very different person today had I not learned what I learned there.

Memories of details are a bit blurry by now, but there are a few things I remember very clearly.

Zivildienst in the Black Forest

My Zivildienst was in a small Black Forest town at the local branch of a large social institution, and the Zivis were used in a variety of context. Shifts in an retirement home, driving both elder people around and disabled kids to school, helping people in need with their chores, as well as elder home care were all part of the tasks we had.

My role was largely as a driver, at least that was my initial assignment. That was good. Often, home care for old or disabled people was part of that deal. Not as fun, but I got to learn a lot, empathy not the least bit of it. Whenever there was trouble back at the HQ, I was placed on some nightshift or another in the retirement home, which I hated.

There was a lot of trouble.

First day

When you were drafted, some of your basic civic rights are revoked. No more freedom of movement (if you went on vacation, you had to let your superiors know), no more civil police (in case of job-related trouble like, say, you not showing up, it was the military police that would come get you). None of that goes down particularly well with a 19-year old. But it’s part of the deal, and I didn’t think much about it. If I did, I grumbled, but shrugged.

Alas, the moment I started my service I know there was trouble on the horizon. On my very first day – I had hardly been briefed on what my job would be – the phone in the common room rang. The same common room where I and the other 15 or so Zivis would hang out for a good deal of the rest of the year. I picked up the phone, because I was the only one around, not having a job yet and all. It was the boss, telling me to come see her at her office.

I went upstairs, expecting my first task or something. Instead, she was clearly in a bad mood and started talking to me, then yelling at me. It became clear that she was pissed off at some other Zivi, or all her Zivis in general, for not showing up at work, or screwing up in other ways.

Even today I remember that conversation quite clearly. I replied quietly, that it was my first day, and that I could not take responsibility for the actions of the others. That I hadn’t yet met them, even. She kept yelling. I distinctly remember replying, still quietly, another three or four times that I don’t see how I could help, but that I also didn’t see myself as the person to blame. After all, it was my first day.

Then, after another five minutes of being yelled at, I snapped. I still remember being very clear that moment, thinking that this is probably not a good idea and that I’d regret it. But I snapped anyway, and started yelling back.

That was the first day of my service, and it didn’t get much better than that.

Vodka, painkillers and a Playstation

I was lucky. I was a home sleeper since I lived nearby, so I had natural breaks where I got out of the context of this work, or rather that office. Others had to stay there, a year at a time. And I remember what it did to a number of my colleagues. People from all walks of life, and everybody coped differently. Some didn’t cope at all. One guy had resorted to painkillers and vodka as his daily routine. Most stuck to a slightly healthier mix of beer and long nights at the Playstation.

During the day, we’d all be in our social role: Taking care of people in need. It’s sometimes hard, often times even gross, where too many bodily fluids are involved. But it’s an enriching, maturing experience that I’m thankful to have made.

But once back the HQ, the mood was different. Morale was often low with a mix of tristesse, anger and desperation. Tristesse because of the routine. Anger about the boss, the unfair and intransparent treatment. And desperation about the lack of power to defend against the mobbing.

And it was mobbing, I see that even more clearly today than I did back then. Vacations were cancelled the day before they’d start on implausible pretexts, certain jobs used as sticks, others as carrots. Legal threats were nothing unusual, which in this context means the same as for soldiers: Jail time is comparatively easy to come by. When you’re hardly 20, you don’t want to take chances and bank on the real probabilities. It scares the shit out of you.

Just as an example, I remember one time where I had cleared a long weekend to go to an IT fair in another city. I was half-way through my service, and hadn’t managed to line up a spot at university, so I wanted to go look for a job. It was 1999, and IT jobs were incredibly attractive. All papers had been signed months in advance. The night before I was supposed to leave, I get a phone call.

I couldn’t go, the boss said. Why?, I asked. Too many people might be sick the next day to keep the service running, she told me. Had anyone called in sick, I asked, suddenly worried. No, not a single person had, she continued. Yet, you’re grounded. Your vacation’s done.

I remember going a few rounds with her, explaining to her how that was an important career thing for me, and pleaded for a while, but to no avail.

The next day, and I’m not proud of this, I called in sick. That didn’t help me though. It didn’t take long and she threatened me with the military police if I didn’t show up – either healthy, to work. Or sick, in which case I’d be forced to move into the HQ until I was back on my feet. She had called my bluff and made me face legal prosecution. I guess you could call it heavy handed management.

This was the kind of atmosphere that marked my service.

On the other hand, so did the camaraderie that sounds like a bit like a cliché, but is a strong bonding force. Throw 15 young guys into an intense shared experience and you get yourselfs some strong bonds, no matter if they last beyond the service or no.

Torn

So you’ll understand why I feel a bit torn about my personal Zivildienst experience.

And yet, I’ve always felt like a service of some sort to your country is a good thing that can strengthen democracy.

People should be able to choose between military and social service. It should be gender-balanced, and include 100% of the people of the respective age bracket. And you should probably get credits for school, or tax incentives, or something. But I think a service year can be a rich experience, and it can give young people a year to get their head straigth about what they want to do afterwards, while doing something societally useful, instead of internships in ad agencies.

As things stand, I’m not going to romanticize or miss the old service. However, if the government introduced a service like that, as a smarter, more balanced follow-up to the service that ended today, I think I’d approve of that. It’s not a bad thing at all. And social institutions across the country would benefit quite a bit.

[permalink]

Connection Problem

The technologists among you will remember Postel’s law, also known as the Robustness Principle:

TCP implementations should follow a general principle of robustness: be conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from others.

Jon Postel wrote this as a basic rule for what would become the TCP/IP protocol. So he was writing the specifications for a technological communications protocol at the time. He was referring to adherence to technical standards: You should write your software sticking to the technical standards at all times, yet you should design your software to be forgiving in accepting non-standard conform input from others.

Be liberal in what you accept, and conservative in what you send.

This principle has been serving us very well for the development of the web.

I think it serves very well as a principle for inter-personal communication as well.

A Robustness Principal for inter-personal communication

Communication between people follows protocols, just like communication between software agents. So let’s rephrase this a little for the slightly different context of humans talking to humans.

Be respectful in what you send, and forgiving in what you receive.

Usually when a communicative act – a comment, an email, a concersation etc – pisses us off, it’s because we feel disrespected or misunderstood. In many, many cases that effect wasn’t intended. We all know the kind of misunderstandings that easily emerge particularly from text-based conversations.

And it’s no wonder, given that we lack most of the signifiers of meaning in purely written conversations. Namely, no facial expressions, no (or little) context about the other person, no intonation. This fosters misunderstanding, and easily leads to harsh behavior, or even rudeness. Or as XKCD phrases it: “It’s easier to be an asshole to words than to people.

I cannot remember the number of heated discussions I got into and that I’ve seen other normally very tolerant people get into because of an email, or a tweet, or a SMS. It’s just too easy.

(Come to think of it, I’m baffled how many emails get sent without a follow-up fight.)

If you, and I, and maybe a few more folks out there receive the next email that triggers a hostile reaction, let it sit there for awhile. Just don’t answer right away. Think about the ways the other person might have meant it other than the way you read it. Remember they might have just sent this in the blink of an eye, in a rush, under pressure, and might not have the time to re-read it, or to check for the chance something might be easily misinterpreted. Remember if the person has always been difficult to deal with, or if you usually get along. And only if none of this lets the message appear in a better light, then write back, and ask clearly and politely if there is anything that you’ve done wrong that upset them.

I’ve been getting much better at this, and it helps me a lot to think about email etc this way.

So if you – like I – are a bit trigger happy with your emails, please allow me this suggestion: Let’s adapt this special version of the Robustness Principle as a guideline for all our inter-personal communication. It’ll make all our lives easier, and take the edge off, a bit at a time.

So here it is once more, the Robustness Principle for inter-personal communication:

Be respectful in what you send, and forgiving in what you receive.

[permalink]

Disclaimer: I’m strongly biased towards openness. I prefer free and open software over closed systems, I prefer an open and decentralized web over a closed and centralized one. I prefer transparency over obscurity.

That said, I’d also consider myself a pragmatic idealist (thanks for the hint, Igor) in the sense that I think to reach certain idealistic goals it’s sometimes necessary (or even ok) to make compromises.

Examples: I use a Mac (closed) to feed my WordPress blog (open); I use Twitter (kinda closed) to promote open web ideals (open: duh!); my phone is powered by Android (open) but uses HTC’s Sense UI (closed).

So when we were about to announce an event that’s promoting the ideals of an open web (Drumbeat), we discussed how to best promote the event. We decided to complement the “official” event page on the Drumbeat site with a Facebook event page.

I insisted on having this second option, and for several reasons. One of those reasons is merely of the practical kind: it’s much easier to organize an event if you have any idea how many people are coming, and Facebook is very, very convenient to use that way. The other reason is more philosophical: I believe to reach out to new people, i.e. if you want to mainstream the discussion and get more people involved, you have to reach out to them where they mostly communicate. Facebook is an obvious choice, as you get access to a whole lot of people.

Like we almost expected, we got into a little flame war over this decision, including all the all-so-common personal attacks and insults. (My favorite being the statement that it’s “people like [me] who destroy the open web”, and that we’re “riff-raff”. I was surprised not to see Godwin’s Law invoked, but maybe that will happen in the next few mails?) To put one thing straight: I’m not even insulted, I find it very amusing to read a lengthy, hand-crafted personal attack. I appreciate, one could say, the effort people like this invest in personal trolling. (As long as – like in this case – it doesn’t even hit the mark and stays within certain boundaries.)

But it did get me thinking, and we discussed this a lot afterwards: To which degree is it ok to use a closed platform to promote an open web? And I stand by my decision, and would like to re-iterate: it’s not only ok, but necessary not to insist on personal moral high ground and being the true believer that knows everything better; but to go where the people you’d like to get involved really are and discuss with them. It’s not ok, and most likely damaging, to just assume everybody on the planet is thinking about these issues all day, and if they don’t leave all their bad habits behind they don’t deserve any better.

This kind of thinking is, from my point of view, arrogant, hypocritical and damaging. It devalues the ideals these same people strive to promote.

(I’m sure many other professions have to make similar decisions every day, like international development aid workers, who buy building materials on local markets to strengthen the local economy, even though they know that a certain share of those revenues go back to funding the same groups that caused the underlying structural problems.)

Long story short: For the time being I’ll keep doing it the way I’ve done it so far. I’ll keep using Facebook to promote events, I’ll stick to Twitter if that’s where I reach new people. But I’d like to hear your take on this!

[permalink]

Recently I’ve noticed a lot more inquiries coming in from agencies abroad, mostly the U.S. or UK. Two Three things I found noteworthy there.

24 hours of Flickr Party in Berlin
Creative Commons License photo credit: Seite-3

1) There’s more and more agencies specializing on Social Media. Over are the days where one ad agency covers all web needs. The agencies are going niche, which is mostly a good thing, I think. There might be a consolidation at some point in the future, but for the time being we’re (hopefully) going to see some more specialized agencies, or at least dedicated units.

2) Some feedback I’ve been getting is that said agencies get in touch also because of the simple fact that I blog in English, i.e. I’m accessible. I never expected to be such an important factor, but it is. The German internet scene (or rather, the whole country, to some degree) operates mostly in German. Not too odd, obviously, but still something to keep in mind when entering the market.

3) Interest in the German online market is increasing. It seems like there’s a strong trend, but that may be my skewed perception. The problem for particularly American companies and agencies: Europe is perceived overseas as one market, but within Europe it’s perceived as a large cluster of individual markets. (European countries do operate within a certain European framework, but culturally and most of all language-wise every country needs to be addressed separately. I know that at least Nicole Simon will agree with me on this one.)

It’s the last point that leads to some trouble – the German online market, particularly the blogosphere, can be a bit tricky at times. There’s no way you can just waltz in an push your content at bloggers and get away with it. You need to invest time and effort to build connections to bloggers. (Same should be obvious for bloggers world-wide, obviously. But trust me, Germany can be particularly tricky, and I know a number of you have made similar experiences here.)

Yesterday I emailed a few times with Monique Elwell over at U.S.-based Social Media agency Conversify, who seem to get it right. There’s a few brief thoughts I shared with Monique that I’d like to share with all agencies and companies thinking about tackling Germany, copied & pasted straight from my email:

  • The German blogosphere is oddly under-developed compared to the U.S. and France (which has an extremely rich blogosphere), with sometimes strong anti-commercial notions, but it’s changing rapidly, with more semi-pro/event/corporate blogs popping up quickly.
  • Pricing structure for consultants etc is similar to the U.S.
  • The German blogosphere is, language-wise, very German-centric. Not too many bloggers blog in English, but a good deal understands/speaks English. It won’t be a problem to find folks whose English is good enough to do everything you need.
  • Technical infrastructure for event bloggers (wifi, 3G and all) is ubiquitous and very well developed (equally or better than in the U.S., minus the Bay Area)

Of course that’s not to say that you shouldn’t touch the German market. Quite the contrary! Just do it right. Take the necessary time (I know it’s hard, working on a tough deadline), and build lasting relationships. Get someone on the ground to cooperate, and give them the freedom and autonomy to adapt your client’s message to fit the community. Don’t assume that you can jump a cultural gap without any friction. I’m sure you preach the same thing to your clients for your home markets.

[permalink]

Dipity lets you create timelines of all things internet. One of them I liked particularly, and that’s this timeline of internet memes:

Enjoy sifting through those classics!

(via)

[permalink]

For PR folks, pitching to the web is a problem. Talking to a PR firm recently, we ended up chatting about the challenges traditional PR firms face online. You have experienced professionals who know the ropes, the tricks of the trade, and their journalists. But facing a diffuse mass of bloggers is a different story altogether. What can you do about it?

Enter the Social Media Release, a concept that has developed over the last few months, maybe a year or two. The short-short version is this: Provide bloggers (and other online media) with as much material in as many formats as possible. These folks want to pick the materials they use, comment it, mash it up, and stir it thoroughly.

Lego Blogger Picture by Flickr user minifig Are blogs like toys, fun but not professionally relevant? Not any more. (Image: Lego Blogger Picture by Flickr user minifig, released under Creative Commons.)

(For further reading I recommend: Brian Solis (read his stuff thoroughly, starting maybe with what he says about blogger relations, his definitive guide to social media releases and social media releases, everything you ever wanted to know as well as the evolution of the press release.) Also, PR-Squared has a well-maintained list of successful use-cases of social media releases in the wild. (Update: and they have a template, too.) Just to pick one of those examples, Ford knows how to work the web: Note how everything is embeddable and the tons and tons of topic-related RSS feeds?)

Of course, this means you lose control over how your message is used, adapted, changed. The old rules of traditional media don’t apply here. They just don’t, so don’t even try. This is a hard lesson to learn for both PR firms and big brands, i.e. their clients. It requires a whole new approach to interacting with your stakeholders out there, and to some degree a new company culture.

It’s also tough to identify which bloggers to pitch, which services to use, and mainly: how to react to negative reactions on the web. For every campaign, you’ll have to find a decent strategy that works. A few basics like what’s listed in the articles above sure helps (think RSS feeds, embeddable pictures and videos, information in as many formats as possible). Also, forget embargoes, but that should be clear anyway.

If you’re a PR firm: How do YOU address bloggers (or do you at all)? If you’re a blogger, what are your experiences with being pitched?

[permalink]

Reporters Without Borders: Beijing 2008Sadly, the whole idea of giving the Olympic Games to China in order to get the government to respects human and media rights more has turned out to be a complete and utter failure. Without much commenting on my behalf, let me point out just some of the recent findings of human rights organizations.

Amnesty International (ai) just published their report “Chinese Authorities’ Broken Promises Threaten Olympic Legacy” in which they state:

In the run-up to the Olympics, the Chinese authorities have locked up, put under house arrest and forcibly removed individuals they believe may threaten the image of “stability” and “harmony” they want to present to the world.

Internet censorships continues, even in the confined Olympic media center:

Reports have just confirmed that foreign journalists working from the Olympics press centre in Beijing are unable to access amnesty.org, the Amnesty International website. In addition, The China Debate, a site recently launched by Amnesty International as a forum to discuss human rights has been blocked in China. A number of other websites are also reported to have been blocked, including Taiwan newspaper Liberty Times and the Chinese versions of both Germany’s Deutsche Welle and the BBC. This flies in the face of official promises to ensure “complete media freedom” for the Games. Internet control and censorship is increasing as the Olympics approach. Many other sites, including several reporting on HIV/AIDS issues in Beijing, have been targeted.

What’s more, reporters and activists (including, I suspect, bloggers) face legal and other threats:

Amnesty International believes that local activists and journalists working on human rights issues in China are at particular risk of abuse during the Games.

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) confirms this situation:

Chinese authorities deleted an Internet link to an article that appeared on 17 July 2008 in the prominent Chinese newspaper Xinjingbao (Beijing News) of an interview with a US photographer of Hong Kong origin, Liu Xiangcheng, who worked in China during the 1980s. They acted over a small photo showing men with bullet wounds following the 1989 military crackdown against the Tiananmen Square uprising. (…) The Hong Kong newspaper Ming Pao reported that the authorities also immediately demanded the removal of the newspaper from newsstands and censorship of the article online. The same source said that several staff on the paper, the editor and the journalist, were facing legal proceedings.

RSF calls for a boycott of the games (PDF). Amnesty International takes a slightly different approach. In cooperation with, as far as I can tell, New Zealand students, they organize the Freedom Challenge 08 in which so-called freedom teams rally support for human rights in China.

Do you know of any valid, up-to-date information sources on the situation for bloggers in China these days?

[permalink]