Come On In. The Water's Fine.
An Exploration of Web 2.0 Technology and its Emerging Impact on Foundation Communications

Produced for the Communications Network
Made possible by support from The California Endowment, the Edna McConnell Clark Foundation, and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation

"Is it Web 2.0 we're after, or Communications 2.0 that we're after?"

~ Rich D'Amato, The Case Foundation

Even government agencies have gotten into the act according to an article from The New York Times. The Transportation Security Administration (TSA), which ranked next to last in favorable public opinion among public agencies in an Associated Press survey from December 2007, launched a blog of its own in early 2008. The blog provides a platform for angry travelers to voice frustrations and gain information. The feedback acquired through the site has now been credited for positively influencing security rules and procedures. Through the blog, for example, TSA learned that a rule about removing electronics from carry-on luggage was being inconsistently applied at different airports and the agency was able to correct the problem.

Philanthropy Lags Behind
The philanthropy sector, by contrast, is only beginning to catch up.

There are numerous theories about why this is so. Some speculate that philanthropy’s failure to embrace Web 2.0 stems from the fact that foundations do not experience the same customer demands or competitive threats that modern corporations and public institutions face on a daily basis. Others point out that foundations as a group have historically shied away from extensive self-promotion or publicity, preferring instead to promote and advance the work of their grantees. In some cases avoidance of Web 2.0 tactics may be a holdover from the conventional, unidirectional communication structures that guided the businesses through which private philanthropists originally built their endowments.

Whatever the cause, it seems increasingly clear that communication practices that worked well for decades may no longer be effective. As users share and comment on what they care about most, more conversations begin to take place away from an organization’s address (physical or virtual). Study participants repeatedly stressed that this shift demands a wholly different way of thinking about communicating. As Rich D’Amato, vice president of communications for the Case Foundation asked, “Is it Web 2.0 we’re after, or Communication 2.0 that we’re after?”

Giving Up Control
The primary issue in this shift is control of the message. Successfully participating in social media requires a fundamental pivot away from traditional dissemination of a message in a linear manner (expert/source > messenger > recipient) to a transactional approach that allows audiences to influence and shape the message in real time (user < messenger > user).

In the simplest of terms, Web 2.0 puts individuals in the driver’s seat. Because of the constraints of the medium, most mass communication has traditionally followed a largely linear, broadcast model. Web 2.0 technologies create the ability for mass media communication to happen in a way that is much more transactional, and closer to interpersonal and group communication. As Teresa Detrich, director of electronic communication for the Lumina Foundation for Education describes, “The one thing more important than anything is to really understand how people are using new media—and their use of it is completely different from old media. You cannot control the message. It’s collaborative now. And that’s a good thing. And you have to help folks understand how good that can be. Everyone now is creating the message.”