Natasha Judd

About Natasha Judd

Natasha has been a web geek since she had access to the web and a writer since she could write. She’s been working in digital communications roles for charities, government departments and commercial organisations for more than a decade, and set up Taskforce Digital in 2013. Natasha spends most of her online time on Facebook, Google Analytics, Shopify, WordPress and NetMums.

Author Archive | Natasha Judd

Greenpeace vs. Facebook

On Beth Kanter’s blog this week, there’s a sneak peek into new Idealware research on how not-for-profits are using their Facebook fan pages. For those working in the charity sector – and perhaps for anyone familiar with Facebook – these initial results won’t be that surprising. Charities, it seems, are finding Facebook fanpages useful for increasing event attendance, driving traffic to their websites and encouraging online action (such as signing petitions), but having less success with using their Facebook presence to attract donations or volunteers.

Kyle Andrei from Idealware writes:

…more than 65% said that they’d had some success with moving people to take some form of action for a cause, like signing petitions or other advocacy actions. Online petitions and other political or advocacy actions are easy to do, demand little time, and are easily spread through Facebook and other social media.

A good recent example comes from Greenpeace. Greenpeace seem to just get online campaigning. Back in the middle of the last decade, they launched the Green My Apple campaign, drawing in Apple’s own loyal fan base to pressure the organisation into upping the green credentials of their products.

This year, for Earth Day, they’re asking Facebook to ‘unfriend coal’ and instead use clean energy sources. The campaign’s been run on Facebook itself. There’s a fanpage with a slick 30 second video introducing the campaign’s key message, and a welcome screen in a number of different languages. There’s a date target of April 22. There are regular campaign updates and fans are encouraged to add their comments.

I took the screenshot below this morning (14 April 2011). At that time, this post had 81,007 comments.

Unfriend coal

What’s Greenpeace doing right here?

There are presumably thousands of IT companies who are not using clean energy. They’ve picked the one with 600 million users. These are people who use Facebook, which means, whether or not they’re interested in the deeper issues of climate change, they’re on the platform already. These are people who get how Facebook works, who can leave comments or upload photos and who are spreading the word virally amongst their friends.

Greenpeace recently asked fans to help them set the world record attempt for the most comments on a single post – and achieved the goal within 24 hours. After all, it doesn’t take a lot of effort for a fan to leave a comment. It’s going to take far less time than volunteering for the cause. It’s doesn’t require the financial commitment of making a donation. And it’s exciting as well, to be part of a global movement like this, to say that your comment was one of over 80,000.

For those fans who are interested in learning more about the cause, there’s also a non-Facebook microsite. Interestingly, the blog post there, Greenpeace supporters set world record for most Facebook comments, has – as of when I’m writing this – no comments. Again this is proof that, in many cases, it’s better to take your organisation to your fans rather than asking your fans to come to your organisation.

With just over a week to go before Earth Day, it will be interesting to see how this campaign develops, and whether there will be any official response from Facebook. For now, it’s an interesting case study on how Facebook fanpages can motivate supporters to take the low-level actions highlighted in the Idealware research.

I’ve liked it.

Comments { 0 }

The Sun Microsystems Blogging Principles

From the old blog.

So far, I’ve only read the preface to Don Tapscott and Anthony D. Williams’ Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything. However, there’s already something on page xii that made me want to pause and post here.

The authors are talking the blogging principles that Jonathan Schwartz introduced for Sun Microsystems employee blogs in 2004:

  • Don’t do anything stupid.
  • Write about something you know about.
  • Make it interesting.

While the Sun website today seems to have a longer list of blogging principles, these three, in my experience, seem to be good general guiding principles, not just for employee blogs, but for blogs in general.

Don’t do anything stupid

When you’re blogging you’re essentially having a conversation. The other conversation participants – your readers and commenters – may be people you know, people you get to know or people who’ll always remain amongst the anonymous visitors figure in your Google Analytics statistics. The important thing is that they’re people. Remember that, and you won’t go far wrong.

What counts as ‘doing something stupid’ is fairly subjective, and bloggers will need to decide for themselves where they draw the line. It might be as simple as deciding not to post publicly anything that you wouldn’t want your parents or a future employer to see. Of course, mistakes are made. However, if you acknowledge them and try to deal with the consequences in a way that takes into account that there are actual people involved, then it seems that in most cases the harm can be minimised.

Write about something you know about

I’m not this one’s 100% essential. Anyone who’s read the Julie/Julia project blog (or seen the film starring Meryl Streep and Amy Adams) will know that you can build up a huge blog following as you learn to do something. In many cases, such as a recent post I wrote on a cupcake icing failure, your readers will be keen to share their experiences and help you out.

The better advice may be, ‘don’t pretend you’re an expert if you’re not’. In a job interview, for example, it’s often easy to tell when someone’s bluffing or has hyped up their skill-set on their CV. Fake it on your organisation’s blog, and you may end up being similarly caught out.

Make it interesting

As a blogger, you’re already interesting. Again, it’s because you’re a person. You’re unique. Let that uniqueness shine through in your posts, and it’ll help make them interesting. It may be that you take a great picture, or that you’re good at making people laugh. Use those factors to make your blog stand out.

Also, make sure you’re having a conversation that’s relevant. What are people talking about at the moment? Do you have anything to add? I realise that, by writing a post inspired by a book that was first published in 2006, I’m not following my own advice here. However, from my experience, if you can provide the content that people are searching for right now, you’ll not only increase your website traffic, you’ll also be creating something of real value to your readers.

So: don’t do anything that you think is stupid, write about something you’re interested in and don’t fake it, and be different and topical. Three(ish) blog principles inspired by Sun Microsystems.

I should probably go and read the rest of Wikinomics before I post any more, but I’d love to hear your thoughts on other essential principles for bloggers. Feel free to leave me a comment below.

Comments { 0 }

Rediscovering StumbleUpon

StumbleUpon screenshot

Despite my total lack of coordination in real life, I haven’t stumbled on the web for a while. It’s just one of those things on the internet where, for a month or two, I’ll be spending all my spare time clicking on the stumble button, discovering new sites and leaving reviews. Then – as has happened this time – I’ll get distracted by some other web tool, and my StumbleUpon account will remain inactive for almost a year.

However, on Thursday last week, my 5 essential iPhone applications for pregnancy article was published on Being the social media geek that I am, I kept returning to the page during the day to see how many tweets and Facebook shares it had received. While those social media numbers went up little-by-little, I was amazed to see that the article very quickly had 57 views via StumbleUpon.

For those of you who are unfamiliar with the tool, StumbleUpon is a people-driven website discovery engine. As users browse the web, they like or dislike and categorise the websites they visit. Then, when you click the ‘Stumble!’ button on the site or on your installed browser toolbar, you’re taken to a random website which matches your interests.

For me, the excitement of StumbleUpon is that you don’t know what you’re going to get. Of course, this means that a lot of time you get things you’re not interested in. But sometimes you stumble upon a useful blog post or a funny video or a great website that you wouldn’t have found any other way.

StumbleUpon can also drive a significant amount of traffic to a website – particularly if the site is ‘liked’ by a number of well-established Stumblers. While it’s not great etiquette to create an account just to promote your own content, if you take the time to establish a profile and a significant list of favourite sites, the odd bit of self-promotion shouldn’t do too much damage.

Alternatively, businesses can set up a paid discovery campaign, paying from US$0.05 per visitor, to add themselves to the randomly-generated site list. This seems to be a way of guaranteeing your site will be seen by like-minded Stumblers, without having to invest the time in building a StumbleUpon reputation.

Either way, of course, it’s important to have useful content on the page you’re directing Stumblers to. That ‘dislike’ button is just next to the ‘like’ one and it’s just as easy to use, and people’s negative reviews will be available for everyone to see.

For more information about using StumbleUpon to promote your website or blog, check out this article by Viktoria Michaelis. As always, if you’ve got any questions or want to share your experience of using StumbleUpon, please feel free to leave a comment below.

Comments { 0 }

Running a competition on Facebook

From the old blog.

Competition entry formOver the past couple of days, I’ve been reading up on running competitions on Facebook. This new interest was prompted by a single sentence in a blog post by Leyl Master Black called Top 5 Facebook Marketing Mistakes Small Businesses Make. Leyl’s post is useful reading in general, but what caught my attention was under the section on Violating Facebook’s Terms:

What are the most common violations? Some build a community on a personal page instead of a proper Facebook Page. Others fail to abide by Facebook’s rules around running contests. Read more.

So what are Facebook’s rules around running contests? I’ve promoted contests on Facebook in the past, but haven’t run one. I’ve also entered competitions on Facebook in the past – liking pages, leaving comments – but haven’t won one.

The official Facebook promotion guidelines seem to be located somewhere in the help section of their site, but I have to admit, it was much faster to find them through Google. There’s quite a lot in there, but basically the main rule is: don’t use any of Facebook’s features to run a competition on Facebook. It’s okay to limit competition entry to fans of a certain page, but you can’t ask them to enter by commenting on your wall, uploading a photo to your page, giving a thumbs up to a particular status update or anything like that. You also can’t pick a random fan to win a prize, or contact the winners via Facebook’s messaging service.

To run a competition on Facebook, it seems, you need to need to use a third party application – something that hasn’t been created by Facebook – to collect entries and the entrant’s personal data. There are applications which have been created to run competitions for you (a list can be found on the Social Media Examiner blog post on this subject). Alternatively, you could commission an agency to create a bespoke competition application which can live on one of the tabs of your page.

When people can upload photos and videos and add comments so easily on Facebook, it does seem fairly frustrating that they can’t use those features to enter your organisation’s competition. However, Facebook’s just a platform, and I guess legally they may need to distance themselves from how marketers use it. And of course, you don’t need to run your competition on Facebook at all. You could use your page or even a Facebook advertising campaign to link through to a competition that you’re running on your own site or elsewhere on the web, as long as you don’t violate any other aspect of Facebook’s terms of use.

As I look down my Facebook news feed, I’m constantly being asked to comment or like something to win the next great prize – holidays, iPads and so on - so it seems that a lot of organisations aren’t yet aware of these regulations. However, as the rules from Facebook say “we may remove any materials relating to the promotion or disable your Page, application or account if we determine in our sole discretion that you violate any of our policies”, it does seem that they are running a risk.

Competition entry form image courtesy of

Note: The Facebook promotion guidelines were updated  slightly on May 11, 2011. See this Social Speak Blog post for analysis of the most recent changes.

Comments { 0 }

Deleting social media channels

Earlier this week, I Googled myself. It’s been quite a while since I’ve done that, and I was surprised to see how the various social media channels I’ve created over the last five years had crept up the results list. Channels that I set up to promote my newly published novel back in 2007. Channels that I originally used to create groups for various organisations that I’ve worked or volunteered for. Channels that I no longer update; the ones where I’ve been ignoring the ‘new comment’ and ‘new friend request’ emails. There they all were on Google, looking abandoned and unloved.

In the world of social media, having an abandoned or unloved channel is often worse than having no channel at all. The content quickly goes out of date. Followers drift away or become frustrated when they get no response. Given that I didn’t want to start updating them all again – I’m sticking to this blog, and my main profiles on Facebook and Twitter for now – I decided they had to go.

Farewell message from Twitter

Try to delete a social media profile, and you get a lot of ‘Are you sure?’ screens and the occasional begging email. They’ll ask if they’ve offended you, tout their privacy settings, try and convince you that you’ll be really missing out if you hit that final delete button. However, I’ve been strong. My accounts on Bebo and MySpace are scheduled for deletion. I’m no longer in their target audience – if I ever was. That extra twitter profile I set up for a #4change chat, the one that ranked higher in Google than my official profile, that’s gone too.

I probably should have done this years ago. It would’ve definitely be easier to do so. Wait to delete a channel that you’re no longer using, and the ‘last updated in 2007′ messages aren’t your only problem. I’d registered with email addresses I no longer had access to and ones that no longer existed. I’d forgotten my passwords. Twitter had temporarily suspended my account settings. In short, it was way more difficult than it needed to be.

The lesson here: delete your social media profiles as soon as you’re sure you’re done with them. They’re probably not helping you or your organisation by being inactive, so let your friends or followers know if you’ve gone somewhere new, and then shut them down. I’ve Googled myself again today, and some of the old profiles are still there, but I’m hoping they’ll disappear over the next week or two.

In the meantime, I’ll be trying to update this blog more frequently with my thoughts on all things online. Feel free to leave a comment if you’ve got any questions or want to share your own experience about trying to delete a social media channel.

Comments { 0 }

Starting a new social media channel

From the old blog.

Social media bandwagonI’ve recently started a new job, and along with the new colleagues to get to know, the new computer systems and the new tea rules, I’ve also got the opportunity to start up a new social network. It occurs to me that this is a rare privilege. Too often, it’ll be a matter of taking over a Twitter profile or Facebook fan page that someone else has started. Or, even if you have set something up yourself, once a year or two has passed, it’s all too easy to get into the habit of doing what you’ve always done: interacting with your fans or followers in a certain way, writing the same sort of posts, and so on.

The fresh start has allowed me to consider the challenges of social media with fresh eyes, to plan and prepare before I begin. In doing so, I’ve jotted down some questions which may be helpful to others in a similar situation – whether they’re starting a new channel or reviewing something established.

1. What do you want to say (and perhaps, do you have anything to say)?

While I don’t believe in scripting every tweet or having every blog update scheduled and approved months in advance, it can be worth having some sort of content plan. What are the themes you’ll be covering on your channel? Is it for your entire life (if you’re a person) or your entire organisation (if you’re setting up the channel on behalf of one of those), or for a particular interest or project? In the early days, it may help to plan out what kind of updates you’ll want to post and how regularly, and put these dates into a calendar as reminders.

2. Who is your audience?

Once you’ve decided what you want to say, it’s worth working out who (if anyone) wants to hear it. It’s all well and good tweeting your thoughts about what you had for breakfast into the internet void on a personal account, but if you’re doing this as a job, there are likely to be things like targets or KPIs for user interaction (and if there aren’t it might be worth nominating some – see point 5 below). So, who do you want to reach? Are they end-users of your product or service, or other organisations in your field? How old are they? How computer literate? How often do they get online – and when they do, what sites do they go to first?

3. How can you reach them?

One thing I’ve learnt over the past ten years is that, in most cases, it’s far easier to go where your audience are than to get them to come to you. So, thinking about the previous question, how do your audience behave online? Are they on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Flickr? Are they asking questions on Yahoo! Answers? Do they belong to a particular online community? Sometimes it may be easy enough to set up your own profile in these spaces to interact with other users, but in other cases, you may need to get permission from a community moderator or website owner before you make your first post.

If you’re still keen to set up a blog or community on your own website – and there are lots of good reasons to do so – then it’s still worth doing research into how best to reach your audience. Do you see your potential audience members commenting on other blogs? If so, it’s worth noting what sort of posts they feel motivated to comment on, the regularity of the postings, etc. And of course, it’s worth remembering that for a lot of people the internet is still all about email, so building up a list and sending monthly updates remains a perfectly valid way of spreading a message and driving traffic to your website.

4. Who’s going to do the updates?

People say social media is great because it’s free. Technically, in many cases, this is true. However, it doesn’t account for the huge amount of staff time that needs to be spent to set up and maintain a channel. Social media is about conversation. If you go quiet, you’ll be ignored. So, who’s going to do your updates? And who’s going to do your updates when that person is on leave? And who’ll be the person who can provide sign-off on anything controversial or out of the ordinary? Because that’s another side-effect of having a conversation – you’re never 100% sure about what that other person might say.

5. What does success look like?

For some, the opportunity to broadcast a message will be enough. For others, the end goal will be the online conversation itself. There definitely is some reward in being part of a community, in being generous and interacting with your fans and followers, learning from their updates as you shape your own, passing on their messages, leaving comments on their blogs, following them back.

However, for most, there will be some form of measurable action that you want your friends or followers to undertake. This may be visiting your website, signing an online petition, volunteering or donating to your cause, registering for an event or a myriad other options. It is this conversion from conversation to action that, for me, indicates real social media success. It’s what can be monitored as you go along and, through regularly reviewing the answers to the earlier questions, what you can aim to improve.

There’s a real excitement in new beginnings, but what I guess I’m realising anew is that it doesn’t have to end there. I’m looking forward to seeing how this project grows.

Image courtesy of Matt Hamm.  Used under Creative Commons licence.

Comments { 0 }

What’s wrong with face-to-face?

Originally written for the YouthNet blog.

So, YouthNet’s launched a new report today: a study by Professor Michael Hulme into how young people communicate, interact and seek information online.  It’s a really interesting read, encompassing the results of quantitative online research undertaken with 994 young people by The Futures Company, quotes from young people, and comments on the implications for website design and development.  It’s also too much to cover in one blog entry.  So I can only encourage you to go and read it yourself, blog about yourself, discuss the findings and debate the conclusions.

75% of the young people surveyed said that ‘they couldn’t live without the internet’.  That’s probabaly an exaggeration, but I don’t find it surprising.  I’d say the same thing.  Then again, I spend at least eight hours a week-day in front of a computer, I studied multimedia, and I work for an online charity.  I’m going away for a week in the country at the end of the month, and the fact that I’ve been told that there’s no internet or mobile access is already weighing heavily on my mind.  Being such an online advocate, I’m often asked ‘what’s wrong with face-to-face?’

After all, the very nature of online communication is that it’s mediated by a machine such as a computer or hand-held device.  With the lack of body-language and eye contact, and the possibilities for deception, it’s possible to see the internet as cold, impersonal and isolating.  However, what that assumption ignores is the way young people live what Professor Hulme calls ‘hybrid lives’ – their onlines and their offlines are blurred.  Their friends on Facebook may or may not be friends from school or work; status updates on Twitter may become conversation starters in the classroom.  80% of young people surveyed said they use social networking sites to talk to friends or family they see a lot; 22% said that they use them to communicate with someone they don’t know.

So, while it’s impossible to generalise the experience of every young person, it seems that for many these online tools aren’t replacing face-to-face communication methods – they’re complimenting them.  As Professor Hulme says, “The more we can communicate, the more we will, and do, communicate.”  What’s changing is the amount of communication tools available, and people’s ability to choose a communication tool which is appropriate for a particular situation: broadcasting their thoughts in blogs or vlogs, updating a selected group of friends on Facebook, texting or calling an individual, or having a face-to-face conversation.

I don’t have a problem with face-to-face conversation.  In fact, it’s often quite useful.  I do have more of a problem with the assumption that it’s absolutely-always-without-a-doubt the best form of communication.  The internet can be a great way to make first contact with communities of interest, for example.   After all, it’s easy to search online for groups of fellow social media geeks – in my case – than try and spot them during my morning commute.  Once contact is made, a mix of face-to-face and online interactions often result.  The internet also allows us to reach out beyond the restrictions of geographic proximity.  And, as the report goes on to say, the internet can also be a great way to source information about issues young people may feel less comfortable talking about face-to-face, with websites like allowing young people to access trustworthy advice on a range of topics.

While it’s important to realise that there are issues or dangers around communicating on the internet – the possibilities of online bullying, the possibilities of abuse and so on – it’s also important to realise that, in many cases, these are either reflected or replaced by alternative issues or dangers when communication occurs offline.  Moreover, just as I was taught not to give out my name on the phone by my cautious parents, today young people have learned similar lessons about the internet.  77% of the young people surveyed agreed that: ‘On the internet you can never know if someone is who they say they are.’

The past century has seen huge developments in the way we communicate: from telephone calls, through radio and television broadcasts, to the development of mobile phones, faxes and the internet.  While it’s not my place to predict what will come next, it seems obvious that there’s a lot more communication to do, and for each new generation, there’ll be more and more new communication tools as the years progress.

Today, 86% of the young people surveyed loved how new technology helps them communicate with people. Let’s keep creating technology, creating websites and online services, that will help us communicate with people.  Face-to-face, hands-to-keyboard, in the twittersphere and in the blog comments below, let’s ensure this conversation continues.

First published on the YouthNet blog

Comments { 0 }

Reflections on the #moonwalk

Originally written for the YouthNet blog

Last Friday, after work, a group of us from YouthNet walked down to Liverpool Street station for a twitter-organised moonwalk in memory of Michael Jackson. Given the instantaneous nature of the Internet, I’m almost too late to blog about the event itself. All over the web, you can read about how a tweeted idea became an exercise in mass participation, involving the police and Network Rail, announcements over the loud speakers at the station, and thousands of people bobbing up and down to Jackson classics. There are plenty of photos on Flickr, videos on YouTube, and a twitter stream using the #moonwalk hashtag where you can see how it all came together.

However, what’s more interesting, from my point of view, is the questions it raises for charity marketers, campaigners, press people and others who spread the word about a cause. It’s too easy for social media campaigns to fail – despite the best planning and the most inspiring causes – because they just don’t catch on. For all that we may believe that re-tweeting a message about one of our causes doesn’t take much effort, I’m beginning to wonder if it actually does. People have to be logged into Twitter to see the message in the first place, they have to pick it out of all the other tweets they’re receiving, they have to understand it, engage with it, and choose to pass it on. And that’s only one social networking tool.

It’s also easy to be impressed that the event went from concept to implementation in one day. And while the moonwalk wasn’t actually held in Liverpool Street Station in the end, and while there wasn’t actually room for much moonwalking in such a large crowd, the fact that it happened at all is testament to the power of social media to turn buzz into action. As charities, do we have the ability to be this spontaneous? If the mood of the public was to turn in the direction of our cause on a particular day, would we be able and ready to react? And, would it be appropriate for us to do so?

Finally, when you’re pressed up against people, it’s easy to overhear their conversations. A woman behind me was asked why she was there. “I’m actually more a fan of Twitter than Michael Jackson”, she said. And while, like many children of the 80s, I did bop around my room to Billie Jean, the same applied to me. What we had then was a crowd of people who used Twitter or who know people who used Twitter or read reports of people who used Twitter. While there were some real fans, I’d guess that a significant amount of people had come along to see what was happening and be part of it. If we were going to organise a charity event via social media, would that matter? Raising awareness is a goal in itself sometimes, but if some people are ‘there for the sake of being there’, is that enough?

Would be great to hear your thoughts.

First published on the YouthNet blog

Comments { 0 }

Who will organise the data?

Originally written for the YouthNet blog.

Earlier this afternoon, I attempted to clean out my inbox. I didn’t get very far. Old newsletters could be deleted easily; so could old invitations to events, sales emails, and spam. However, I found myself distracted by an emailed link to this half-forgotten YouTube video, entitled The Machine is Us/ing Us.

The video is from 2007, and of course, the internet has moved on over the past two years. However, I was struck by the continued relevance of a question which appears three minutes and one second into the animation: ‘Who will organise all this data?’ And the answers, ‘We will… You will.’

Last week, I was invited to get involved in a Twitter chat about using social media for social change (using the ‘#4Change’ hash tag). While I’ve been using Twitter since mid-2008, this was the first time I’ve participated in an organised, on-Twitter event – and another opportunity to reflect on this ‘who will organise all this data?’ question.

Earlier in the year, I went to Twestival, and in a crowded, dark and noisy warehouse in London, I commented to a fellow attendee that it was so much easier to find people on the internet. Back then, in the distant days of February, I was talking about finding them via Google or perhaps through using the Technorati blog index. I meant by searching for people or organisations based on the words they’d used on their websites or other online content. I still do that.

But, increasingly, Twitter itself is becoming one of my major communication tools. It’s often where I hear breaking news – both on the world stage and in the lives of my contacts. It’s where I can ask questions, get advice. However, with millions of people now twittering, and even with only 200 of those people on my personal follow list, it’s often a case of too many people speaking at once. To make sense of it all, I’ve found that I need start categorising my contacts, using tools like TweetDeck. There’s my ‘all friends’ list; then there’s those I talk to on a day-to-day basis. There’s another column for direct messages, one where I can monitor updates relevant to work, and so on. Often it’s just as important to say, ‘What can I ignore, what’s not important for me to know right now?’

The #4Change hash tag is another way of organising/filtering information – a way of bringing together information on a particular topic: in this case, information how people worldwide are using social media for social change. However, it’s not just the # that makes things happen. It’s also us. It’s Tom Dawkins from Ashoka, who had the idea, defined the hash tag, recruited regional organisers. It was setting a time when people worldwide could join in (even if this was between 10pm and midnight here in the UK!) It was sending @ messages to particular contacts, in the hope that it would make the tweet about the chat stand out amongst all the other tweets they received – and the excitement of, later in the day, seeing some of those people join in the discussion.

Twitter is another social media tool. It might be the next Facebook, it might never really catch on. That’s not important. What seems increasingly important though is how we individually make sense of the data we receive, how we filter this information, what we chose to trust and why.  As representatives of charities and other not-for-profit organisations, we also may need to consider how we can reach out through this barrage of information to raise awareness and support for our cause. It’s something that I’m sure will continue to be discussed in future #4Change chats.

For now though, it’s back to my email sorting. Who will organise all this data? Much as I sometimes wish I could give others the responsibility of adding ‘okay to delete’ tags to my inbox, that’s just not practical. So, who will organise all this data?

In this case, I will.


First published on the YouthNet blog

Comments { 0 }