Comments on: Shaping NAR’s Social Media Face

By: Bill Lublin

Bill Lublin — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 07:16:22 +0000

Jonathan; Part of the problem (from our perspective as social media participants) is that when we speak we speak as individuals with our own personalities, responsible to no one but ourselves –

When anyone speaks on behalf of NAR they speak as the voice of all of its members. Becuase that voice is the voice of all of the members and not each of the members (many of whom do not agree on many issues) the voice is a synthesis. Therefore we need to listen to that voice differently, appreciating the need of the voice to articulate the viewpoint of the organization – That doesn’t mean that it won’t be genuine or effective, but it will take a very clever individual to project and maintain their personality while bringing the association viewpoints to the members.

Benn- Great post on a solid topic – I especially like the statement “Controlling the message without using a heavy hand is an art. ” Though the Sm will need to provide the Association message, I believe the effort will be made to provide that message in an open and conversational manner, allowing for the two way flow that is essential to any good dialogue.

Craig – You said “And give the membership a reason for them to follow the SM” I think that those of us in this arena will follow and engage the SM because they are here – which is , I believe, the point of the job. Though NAR gets bad rapped too often, the association is constantly looking for ways to better communicate with the membership – though you might mot like the vehicles it uses, there is no question that the association is proactive in creating a variety of electronic and print communication vehicles to reach the membership from newsletters, to email to listservs to magazines and direct mailings. As far as the value to the association and the member, I disagree with Benn a little here – the communication itself provides the value to the participants.

Kevin – I know Teresa at least well enough to guess this is not a job she would want – mostly because she likes to speak for Teresa – not for anyone else – and that’s what makes her so great and her voice so real

By: Benn Rosales

Benn Rosales — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 03:48:35 +0000

Jonathan, you’re right, it’s semantics, but a good point you make none the less. Controlling the message without using a heavy hand is an art.

I’m imagining the smm at one of the bubble blogs right now, whomever they chose should get a raise before they even begin…

By: Kevin Sharkey - IBR Broker

Kevin Sharkey - IBR Broker — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 03:26:09 +0000

I nominate Teresa. No one understands or uses SM better.

By: Jonathan Dalton

Jonathan Dalton — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 02:58:15 +0000

I disagree on just one thing, Benn, though it may be mere semantics. Trying to control the beast won’t work (I keep picturing DiNiro in Backdraft when he talked about fire). But guiding it can be accomplished, and guiding is a lesser form of controlling, at least to my mind.

By: Mark Eibner

Mark Eibner — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 01:16:42 +0000

we're at it again Shaping NAR’s Social Media Face: Time flies when you\'re commen.. http://tinyurl.com/4ob64k

By: Benn Rosales

Benn Rosales — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 00:27:34 +0000

Craig, that is a question we face every day, what is the tangible value of social media, the problem is, if you value a position within a conversation, then it’s actually up to you to place a value. If that value is zero, then its zero- for others it’s invaluable.

By: Craig Barrett

Craig Barrett — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 22:55:15 +0000

And give the membership a reason for them to follow the SM. Once discovered every member across the country will ask… “What’s in it for me? How does this affect my bottom line?” Give value, specific value to the membership and how a member can increase or improve their business. I think if specific, tangible value is not part of the frame work, the words of the SM are as good as SPAM.

By: Benn Rosales

Benn Rosales — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 22:41:08 +0000

I understand what NAR wants to accomplish is important to the nar, however, it’s a dynamic thing this social media, and attempting to control it any further than it needs to be controlled would lead back to my initial comment of SM FAIL. Why? because as much as you want to control a lifestyle, you can’t, it’s a natural thing- it’s simply what you did that day, that minute, that hour, not what you want to accomplish tomorrow- it’s a right now thing, it’s a human thing.

just sayin…

By: Cyndee Haydon

Cyndee Haydon — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 22:03:13 +0000

Oops – Benn I am so sorry for my mistake – Lani’s tweet and her consistent brilliant blogging had me thinking she wrote this article. My humble apologies – let me set the record straight – YOU hit it out of the park with this one – hope NAR has it’s google alerts going off so they see it!!

By: Bob

Bob — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 21:53:31 +0000

While Benn penned the framework I would like to see, I think Jonathan has nailed it in both of his comments.

The crux of the issue here revolves around what is NAR trying to accomplish with this position.