<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Embracing my Digital Youth</title>
	<atom:link href="http://therutabaga.wordpress.com/2008/03/28/embracing-my-digital-youth/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://therutabaga.wordpress.com/2008/03/28/embracing-my-digital-youth/</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress.com weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 29 Mar 2008 01:57:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Kate Barr</title>
		<link>http://therutabaga.wordpress.com/2008/03/28/embracing-my-digital-youth/#comment-12</link>
		<dc:creator>Kate Barr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Mar 2008 01:57:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://therutabaga.wordpress.com/?p=15#comment-12</guid>
		<description>I agree with your view that socal media can&#039;t overcome the foundational problems with bad, manipulative or dishonest communication. I do think, though, that the new media will work out in the long run because good.communicators will find the appropriate use. I was at the session you describe, and I thought your final comment about knowing your audience and reaching them the right way nailed it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with your view that socal media can&#8217;t overcome the foundational problems with bad, manipulative or dishonest communication. I do think, though, that the new media will work out in the long run because good.communicators will find the appropriate use. I was at the session you describe, and I thought your final comment about knowing your audience and reaching them the right way nailed it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ashley Schweitzer</title>
		<link>http://therutabaga.wordpress.com/2008/03/28/embracing-my-digital-youth/#comment-11</link>
		<dc:creator>Ashley Schweitzer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Mar 2008 20:12:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://therutabaga.wordpress.com/?p=15#comment-11</guid>
		<description>I really appreciated your comments yesterday and your insights here.  We are in a unique moment, certainly, but I think its important to keep in mind what makes an effective communication.  Matching up the right message, messenger, and medium for each audience is something that we can lose sight of with all the new and shiny tools.  And the communications that will resonate, as you aptly pointed out, are those that are genuine.  It reminded me of a post I loved earlier from Katya&#039;s Marketing Blog, &quot;Technology isn&#039;t about wires, it&#039;s about bonds&quot; (www.nonprofitmarketingblog.com/technology_isnt_about_wires_its_about_bonds/)

If you&#039;re interested in some more of the &quot;Technographics&quot; (as Beth called them, I loved that term), I really like Pew&#039;s recent study.  It&#039;s not the same as an engagement ladder, but it breaks users into Types based on how they use new technologies, as well as other traditional demographic data.  It reminded me of how the VAN (I think) used mircotargeting to break voters into types to make for more effective voter contact.  Its certainly still a generalization, but I find it more useful than the either/or (digital/analog) paradigm that is sometimes bandied about, I think there are far more shades of gray.  

Those are my thoughts at the moment, I&#039;m still processing and reflecting.


Ashley</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I really appreciated your comments yesterday and your insights here.  We are in a unique moment, certainly, but I think its important to keep in mind what makes an effective communication.  Matching up the right message, messenger, and medium for each audience is something that we can lose sight of with all the new and shiny tools.  And the communications that will resonate, as you aptly pointed out, are those that are genuine.  It reminded me of a post I loved earlier from Katya&#8217;s Marketing Blog, &#8220;Technology isn&#8217;t about wires, it&#8217;s about bonds&#8221; (www.nonprofitmarketingblog.com/technology_isnt_about_wires_its_about_bonds/)</p>
<p>If you&#8217;re interested in some more of the &#8220;Technographics&#8221; (as Beth called them, I loved that term), I really like Pew&#8217;s recent study.  It&#8217;s not the same as an engagement ladder, but it breaks users into Types based on how they use new technologies, as well as other traditional demographic data.  It reminded me of how the VAN (I think) used mircotargeting to break voters into types to make for more effective voter contact.  Its certainly still a generalization, but I find it more useful than the either/or (digital/analog) paradigm that is sometimes bandied about, I think there are far more shades of gray.  </p>
<p>Those are my thoughts at the moment, I&#8217;m still processing and reflecting.</p>
<p>Ashley</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Beth Kanter</title>
		<link>http://therutabaga.wordpress.com/2008/03/28/embracing-my-digital-youth/#comment-10</link>
		<dc:creator>Beth Kanter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Mar 2008 03:36:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://therutabaga.wordpress.com/?p=15#comment-10</guid>
		<description>I think that you are right that we are in the cusp of a generational shift and that in 15 years -- things will be really different.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think that you are right that we are in the cusp of a generational shift and that in 15 years &#8212; things will be really different.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
