- December 2011
- November 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- October 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- May 2006
- February 2006
- December 2005
- Johanna I echo Ellen!!! Wish we were there as well! Such a special d...
- Ellen Beautiful! Thanks for posting the video, wish we were there...
- Johanna Happy birthday! We are so thankful for you, Charis!!!!!...
- Ellen Beautiful Mommy, Beautiful Daughter!...
- Yancy This is the perfect way to break down this infoamrtoin....
Going Viral – The need for the Church to catch on to Web 2.0
In his book, The Tipping Point, Malcolm Gladwell describes the tipping point of a fad or trend as that moment when it takes on a life of its own and spreads like wildfire. His intended reader audience are corporate leaders looking how to take their product/message to the next level. For example, he describes an artsy group in Manhattan that took to wearing pennyloafers. What started as just a small group quickly spread all over the country till the shoe manufacturer had trouble keeping up with demand. At some point, the trend took on a life of its own and spread. Or consider the way that the flu spreads. If a kid catches the flu, it’s only a matter of time till the whole family is laid up in bed. We all remember days in high school when there were 200 students absent on the same day. The flu became an epidemic and spread in a hurry.
The internet has a term to describe when something hits that tipping point on the internet – Viral. It’s the point where a site/video takes on a life of its own and grows exponentially. I remember telling a friend several years ago about this new search engine I found – Google! Now, obviously, Google penetrates every aspect of the internet. The word Google can be used either as a proper noun or a verb. It tipped and, seemingly overnight, became one of the most powerful companies in the world. It went viral.
I had already been mulling over these things, but a recent post over at Church Marketing Sucks entitled, “Where’s the Church’s Ask a Ninja?” really forced me to think through the issue. In the last 2-3 years, the internet has experienced a tremendous change. There has been a move from static to dynamic content, from information giving to shared-content creation (that is, letting viewers, readers add to the content) and from reading to participating. What are the “big things” on the internet right now? YouTube, HomeStarRunner, Ask-A-Ninja, craigslist, Flickr, Wikipedia, Facebook, MySpace, MeetUp, SecondLife, EHarmony.com, blogging and podcasting. And what do they all have in common? They are entertaining, interactive and have created communities around them. A blog, in its truest form, is designed to be a dialogue between the blogger and his readers. YouTube allows anyone in the world to be a movie star. Is there anyone alive who hasn’t seen the video about the “Star Wars Kid”? Wikipedia allows users to add/edit content in the world’s largest encyclopedia. Most of remember the first time a friend told us they fell in love with someone over the internet. But now it doesn’t phase us. Each of these sites have gone viral. The internet has a name for this new participative, interactive, entertaining, user-driven, community-centered internet – Web 2.0.
So here is my question. Where is Church 2.0 in the midst of Web 2.0? Why hasn’t the Church come up with anything like HomeStarRunner or AskANinja to reach people? Nearly every day I look at churches that are going live with new websites. Yet nearly every single one of those websites are really good Web 1.0 websites. They give service times, directions and tell people what to wear. But interaction is limited to, at most, a pastor with a blog and a maybe an iTunes-aware archiving of past sermons. These Web 1.0 websites about 5 years to late to really be effective ministry tools.
We hold in our hands and in our hearts the good news that Jesus is king and that in his love, he has atoned for our sin that we might know God. How cool is that!?! Yet, I look around, and it seems like Christians are just sitting on the side watching all this unfold. We’ve never figured out how to leverage the power of the internet, especially Web 2.0, to fulfill the Great Commission.
Now, before I go any further, I should mention a couple of sites/videos on the internet that are close…
- The Brick Testament – tells Bible stories using legos.
- Christian vs Christ-Follower videos – see one in the previous post or check out YouTube
- Desiring God – John Piper’s ministry are doing a radio ministry without the radio. They completely eliminated radio broadcasts and are doing everything over the internet because they can reach more people for a fraction of the cost.
- LifeChurch.tv – Huge multi-site church has planted a campus within SecondLife
Yet even those have never really tipped. Each has some strengths and something to teach the rest of us, but they have never gone viral. I don’t know the answer, but I ask you to join me in asking the question, “How can the Church use the new internet to reach people for Christ?” Any idea that would tip would have to be genuinely funny, interactive, give viewers chances to create content, able to have a community form around it and share the love of Christ without being abrasive. I’m not yet sure what the answer is. Do you?
9 Responses to “Going Viral – The need for the Church to catch on to Web 2.0”
Leave a Reply
Newest Pics
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Random Images
 |
 |
 |
 |
There is MyChurch.org, YaaWAY.com is also coming soon.
The problem is churches not realizing that they have to do web differently. That they need to get out of web 1.0 and into web2.0, dynamic web and dynamic sharing of the gospel like they would expect offline. They fail to see that that same rules apply. The key is the church.
Oh, I absolutely agree that is part of the problem. Churches have not realized they need to do web differently. But even look at those two sites you used as examples – mychurch.org and yaaway.com are both designed for Christian audiences! In fact, in the Church Marketing Sucks article I reference, they specifically make the comment that “We don’t need another Christian sub-genre that’s sub-quality. We don’t need a GodTube.” Yet YaaWAY.com appears to be exactly that – GodTube. What non-Christian is going to hang out there? Not many is my guess.
[...] Hat Tip [...]
I totally agree that Christians don’t need a sub-par website that non-Christians likely won’t visit. That’s why I love a new video site called zigvid.com.
Zigvid has alot of Christian content – but it’s not just for Christians. It has a great graphic look, and even though zigvid is still in the beta phase with more functionality coming on-line, it is already a great site.
I was recruited to be a beta tester, and I’m really happy with it so far.
I think there are some good points to listen to here. But I also think that there needs to be a realization that things evolve. I don’t personally like Godtube But at least they are trying to do something and not bitching about the fact that nobody is doing anything. I think sometimes the reason why ‘the church’ doesn’t seem to lead the way is that too many Christians do what they do best, and take pop shots at each other rather than focusing on doing soemthing. This post makes soem great point but it also carries that same ‘Christian’ culture that it seems to have a distaste for [by cutting down people trying to at least make an effort]
You tube was not the first video sharing site to hit the market. And there are millions of people that absolutely hate them… but they still keep doing what they are doing.
I think you ‘Christians’ might actually be able to do something great if you would just come together instead of cutting each other down.
hi5me – thanks for your comment, but I think you have misunderstood me. I don’t mind that there is a GodTube. My heart just beats not to do something for Christians, but to find a way to leverage this technology to reach non-believers. Someone once said, “the Church is the only organization in the world that exists for the sake of its non-members.”
If it sounds like I’m complaining, I apologize. That is not the goal. But GodTube, no matter how good it may be, is not going to expand the Kingdom of Light in the midst of darkness. My goal is to be find a way to be light in the dark on the internet.
steve
I gather that is what you are trying to do… but I guess the trick is that isn’t it the Christains that are the ones who are supposed to be able to help the rest of us understand what is happening? If thats the case then I guess Christians need to have these tools work for them. Some of the stuff absolutely sucks and should be thrown out but there is some really cool stuff that I would have never known about ubless soem of these tools were ther. Granted I don’t get whats the deal with all the mumbo jumbo christian talk but the reality is there are people on the internet looking for answers and I hope that in those moments there is someone there when we need them, I just don’t get when you say ‘thats for Christians.’ If I need it then its for me … I don’t care if it has meaning for you… or if it fits with your ideological grid… all I care about that it means something to me and helps me when I need it.
I totally agree with you that there is this ‘ugly’ christian culture thing that feeds only itself … but unless somebody attempts to step out of that it will not change… these sites that are trying the ones you listed and others that are out there… kudos to them… I am sure that the big guy in the sky honors their efforts even though they might be somewhat half ass.
“But I guess the trick is that isn’t it the Christians that are the ones who are supposed to be able to help the rest of us understand what is happening? If that’s the case then I guess Christians need to have these tools work for them.”
That is exactly my point. Christians carry the great message – a message of hope for those in need and grace beyond imagination. The internet and Web 2.0 are tools that I believe we are NOT using to communicate that message effectively. When I say “that’s for Christians” I mean that what non-believer is going to stumble across a site like GodTube? “If I need it, then its for me…” But not if you don’t know it exists! The intended target audience of mychurch.org is Christians. It is not intended to be a tool/medium to convey the Gospel. That’s not who they are talking to.
I’m trying to brainstorm the site that will use these tools to reach new people for Christ. Those sites maybe perfect for what they are. But there is still a huge hole on the internet filled with people who are dead in their sin that I want to reach.
I don’t think ‘a’ site can do that… thinking that way certainly is not 2.0 … 2.0 is about the open collaboration of people to gather around and draw on the collective brilliance of individual in their humanity.
From what I know about the church that entire value system is counter to this.
Maybe there are a variety of sites, tools, and strategies that will accomplish what you are thinking.
You are absolutely right. In fact, just today I was thinking that maybe referring to “websites” in nomenclature already is too reminiscent of Web 1.0 to accurately describe the collaboration that defines 2.0. The site (no matter what you call it), instead of being an information-giver, becomes a participation service.
I do think you hit on something though – “From what I know about the church that entire value system is counter to this.” I recently wrote an article on how the traditional church has been the clergy speaking down to the passive attendees. Maybe that needs to change. My article on “No more top-down leadership” hits on that.