Communicating in Different Online Arenas: Does Your Voice Change?

Comment by Amy K on December 9, 2009 at 11:29pm

I absolutely love this post and topic...

I find myself trying out different types of communication, whether I am really aware of it or not, to see what kind of feedback I can get...for example, on twitter I might personally address one individual with a question, I might post a link, or I might just tweet out a question to no one in particular and hope for a response. All of these tactics can be hit or miss, depending on who is "listening"...I find that the most rewarding experiences on twitter are when I engage one on one with another person, sharing opinions, experiences, and resources.

Facebook is a more difficult platform for me. I feel like less discussion is manifested there, but posting information and links can still be helpful and useful. My voice is different between the two and depending on who I am speaking with...on facebook my "audience" per se consists more of friends, acquaintances, and family. On twitter, my audience is more open, more often consisting of other health activists or people with similar interests as myself, my voice fluctuates though, sometimes more informational, sometimes more personal. I usually connect most with others when I am using that "personal" voice. I tend to be less formal and more "relate-able" when I speak more from my heart and less from my head. Of coarse, I am most interested in connecting with others who share my passion for creating awareness and creating change, this means my voice is likely to reflect that.
I find myself most comfortable speaking from experience, which means I become more vulnerable, but it usually results in a higher quality of relationships on-line and for a better connection with others. It is a choice I consciously make. In order to discuss the topics I want to discuss, being more transparent helps, in my opinion. This means I might sound a little less "educated" or "professional" but I believe when we connect with others on a more emotional and personal level our relationships as health activists or friends are heightened.

That said, there are times when I am less likely to expose and more likely to take a more professional tone. But speaking from my passion usually leads me in the direction I most want to go, whether it be on a blog, forum, or on twitter.

Comment by Susan M. on December 11, 2009 at 9:44am

Great topic Amanda!

I definitely strive to keep my "voice" consistent across different arenas in terms of personality but it does change in terms of the role I play on different communities or due to the limitations of different platforms.

On my personal blog, I am able to really step into the role of the leader because I am leading the conversation. Because I pick the content and the layout, it's easier to be the authority there. When people comment, they are responding to my posts whereas on other discussions or within other communities, the roles might be reversed. I've actually seen this with a lot of Health Activist blogs - a personal blog gives Health Activists a place to really lead the conversation and determine the flow and outline of the information there.

As Amy mentioned, I use direct one-on-one communication more with something like Twitter where my content is very limited. I can't add a lot of context clues to my tweets to make them digestible by all followers but I can address a particular person with a quick note.

For me, keeping my "voice" consistent in terms of personality is important. Though I use all of the platforms differently, I want my persona to be familiar across the communities. If one of my blog readers begins following me on Twitter or reading my contributions to an online community, it's important that I am the same "person" to them regardless of my role there. I feel like having that consistency helps add credibility to my information.

Comment by Alicia C. Staley on December 14, 2009 at 4:31pm

Hey Amanda, this is a great post. I sent out this question on Twitter last week and received a response from Rachel Happe (@rhappe) from the Community Roundtable. Here's her response in a blog post.

I learned a great deal from both posts. Community is all about the management of conversations and communication. If you can't communicate effectively within the context of the conversations, the community will fail. As health activists and leaders, it's imperative that we learn how to "translate" the delicate information that can shape conversations and interactions within our communities. We need to learn to present and share information in a way that engages community members and allows them to feel comfortable sharing their information and stories. Searching for and sharing health information online can be challenging for some people - the key to getting people to interact is to create an environment that feels welcoming and secure. As leaders, we need to be able to maintain a balance in the community that allows for this interaction.

I find that my voice remains the same throughout most of the platforms I use to connect with the cancer community. I wear “my heart on my sleeve” and tend to share information that’s relevant to a conversation.

Thanks for the great post - there’s some great information here that can help with a community's success! I'd love to explore this in more detail.

Comment by amanda on December 15, 2009 at 3:12pm

Thanks for your comments, everyone. This is already an interesting discussion so far and I'm sure it will continue to evolve as we (and our social networks) evolve.

One of the most important things I've learned about communication in our online health communities is something I've also learned in life—think and plan before you speak (or type). If the goal is best possible communication (and subsequent reception) of ideas, then it is okay to be deliberate and adjust your voice to suit the audience. You're not sacrificing the integrity of your thoughts by tempering them or toning them to fit the purpose or place. It's something I've been working on for a while and it seems to be always a bit out of reach. We will probably always have to strive toward better, more effective communication, and at the same time—we will probably never quite reach it. Which is actually great because it means our work is never done.

I've found that tempering my opinions is both difficult and essential when it comes to engaging with others in conversation especially about something as personal and important as health topics. Especially if it is potentially controversial. If your tone isn't even and inclusive, you run the risk of pushing the conversation too hard in one direction. But, at the same time, if you don't offer a good helping of unique ideas (or personal experiences) you might come across too dry or too ineffectual—which also might deter conversation. How do you avoid both these conversational faux pas?

It seems, the more of a role you have in a certain online sphere, the more important it is that you stick to what works for you. If your followers or community members have come to appreciate a certain aspect of your "voice" it's doubly important to keep that going. Your tone or language should work to maintain your "signature moves." But in addition, you can't just repeat yourself. This is a big challenge for me. Staying inside the box I've created for my online-self, while also challenging that self to be better and more effective! (Perhaps our next topic should be—how to stay on one topic without your brain going in too many directions!—I would love tips & tricks for doing that!)

Comment