<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.1.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Ontario uses YouTube on aboriginal land claim</title>
	<link>http://www.sosaidthe.org/2008/02/28/ontario-uses-youtube-on-aboriginal-land-claim/</link>
	<description>How Government Organizations Communicate and Integrate Social Media</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 30 Sep 2008 23:59:05 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.1.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Barbara</title>
		<link>http://www.sosaidthe.org/2008/02/28/ontario-uses-youtube-on-aboriginal-land-claim/#comment-460</link>
		<author>Barbara</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Feb 2008 18:24:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.sosaidthe.org/2008/02/28/ontario-uses-youtube-on-aboriginal-land-claim/#comment-460</guid>
					<description>To be a bit facetious, but only a bit, those frequenting Starbucks would probably offer differing perspectives. 

I thought the unscripted nature was better for YouTube than the polished, also-put-up-on YouTube pieces tend to be. The most substantial information was 3 or 4 videos in and I noticed that the viewership dropped with each successive part. Putting the key info in the first part would have been wiser. It doesn't seem that they astroturfed the ratings, which was also wise. I wouldn't be too concerned about the use of YouTube for a serious topic if it had been part of a wider strategy but I haven't seen other communications around the second anniversary of the occupation. 

I do think that the opposition parties will regret dismissing YouTube out of hand as they look to ways to get their messages out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To be a bit facetious, but only a bit, those frequenting Starbucks would probably offer differing perspectives. </p>
<p>I thought the unscripted nature was better for YouTube than the polished, also-put-up-on YouTube pieces tend to be. The most substantial information was 3 or 4 videos in and I noticed that the viewership dropped with each successive part. Putting the key info in the first part would have been wiser. It doesn&#8217;t seem that they astroturfed the ratings, which was also wise. I wouldn&#8217;t be too concerned about the use of YouTube for a serious topic if it had been part of a wider strategy but I haven&#8217;t seen other communications around the second anniversary of the occupation. </p>
<p>I do think that the opposition parties will regret dismissing YouTube out of hand as they look to ways to get their messages out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin</title>
		<link>http://www.sosaidthe.org/2008/02/28/ontario-uses-youtube-on-aboriginal-land-claim/#comment-479</link>
		<author>Kevin</author>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Mar 2008 01:34:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.sosaidthe.org/2008/02/28/ontario-uses-youtube-on-aboriginal-land-claim/#comment-479</guid>
					<description>To be fair, Caledonia doesn't have a Starbucks that I'm aware of, however your points are quite valid. ;-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To be fair, Caledonia doesn&#8217;t have a Starbucks that I&#8217;m aware of, however your points are quite valid. <img src='http://www.sosaidthe.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
