Nature - Intertwingled: Information Changes Everything - page 18

an article in Wired that says the Web is dead, so why do we need a site? We can do it all on Face-
book.” In contrast, the older managers had no time for Twitter. “I don't need to know what y'all
had for breakfast” is how one executive put it. The need to embrace social media was real, but so
was the fear and the ignorance.
It would have been easy to let it go, to redesign the site without social, but instead we came up
with a plan of understanding and action. The first step was education. We organized a lunch lec-
ture for the group and a one-on-one meeting for the president. In both, I explained the value of
social media platforms in the context of a multi-channel communication strategy that balances
broadcasting with listening and conversation.
Together, we reviewed examples to see how similar organizations were using social media, and
we talked about risks and their mitigation. And it worked. When we launched the site, we also
launched social. A year later, we killed the blog due to lack of time and interest. That's okay.
Overall, it's a success. Staff have learned a lot about social media, and are enjoying new ways to
interact with customers and partners.
When we began, social wasn't part of the plan. But, being agile, we were able to watch, listen,
and respond. When we defined a social media strategy, we knew we'd get some of it wrong.
But, being lean, we were ready to build, measure, learn, and repeat. We studied the system,
made blueprints and plans, but were willing to launch and learn. We struck a balance that fit the
context. And we chose to invest in social to create new loops, a powerful intervention that's
changing the system by helping staff to learn with their customers.
Information architecture is an act of synthesis that leads to intervention. We must not act
blindly, but analysis paralysis is dangerous too. Getting this right is important. It's not just about
websites. We must work hard to understand the nature of information in systems, because our
information systems change everything, even nature.
Consider the island of my adventure. Isle Royale is as remote as it gets, yet it's the subject of de-
bate about intervention. Since its wolves are at risk of extinction, some scientists advocate “ge-
netic rescue” to alleviate the problems of inbreeding, while others advance “wolf reintroduc-
tion” only after the population is lost. xviii Both ideas run counter to wilderness policy and the
principle of nonintervention. But we're already entangled. The island is far from untouched. In
prehistoric times, native people mined it for copper. Then commercial loggers took over. Now
it's a national park. We aim to let nature take its course, but accidents do happen, like the dog
with a virus that decimated the wolves. Plus, while moose can swim the distance (15 miles) from
shore, the only natural way for new wolves to reach the island is an ice bridge, which is increas-
ingly unlikely due to global warming.
We're also far from unbiased. It's not just that we care about nature. Many folks earn a living
from the world's longest prey-predator study. There's funding from the National Science
Foundation and outreach that includes books, videos, lectures, scientific papers, newspaper art-
icles, websites, museum exhibits, art, and surveys of Michigan residents, because it may come
down to a vote. These sources are neither impartial nor immaterial. Information governs inter-
vention. It's the link that makes the loop. So it's not just about a website or an island. It's all con-