Reaching out to an online generation?
Right now we have a worrying situation: the growth of the internet, in terms of numbers and influence, is not being met by an equivalent growth in response from the church. There are numerous church related websites but no where near the sort of engagement required. We in the church run the risk of falling even further out of touch and eventually becoming some sort of quaint club.
So what is required? The first step is coming to grips with the massive internet driven shift, in particular how it is affecting human behavior. In short, the shift is so dramatic that just setting up a nice website won’t do. It requires a much more significant change. To assist you in understanding the internet driven shift I have recently written a short paper called, The Digital Revolution and the Church which can be downloaded by clicking here: The Digital Revolution and the Church (1308)
The second step is setting aside time to discuss how best to respond. I am presently leading a strategic planning process at the Bible Society in New Zealand where I am CEO, and we are asking the question, ‘What needs to change about how we deliver our mission to make it relevant for many years to come?’
The third and most difficult step is making the necessary changes to our operation. What makes this particularly difficult is that the change in most cases will be quite significant. In a upcoming post I will detail how best to approach this change process, drawing on some of my doctoral research which focuses on change within a Christian organisation.
I would love to hear how you and your organisation are responding to the challenge of reaching out to the online generation.
Filed under Anglican, Future, Web 2.0 | |
18 Responses to “Reaching out to an online generation?”
Leave a Reply
When you mentioned “quaint club” it made me think of organizations like Masons, Kiwanis, Rotarians, etc. I can imagine “church” going in that direction. Even within the Second Life community all spiritual groups could be made more prevalent by banding together to advertise in more secular surroundings.
I like the idea of ‘banding together’, pooling resources and recognising our shared heritage. The challenge is always that a successful group/church has behind it a team of motivated (opinionated) leaders who are used to their style.. So with a commitment to working through the differences and setting aside egos, anything is possible!
In the spirit of sharing resources, have you seen the “Mooks, Midriffs, Myspace & More: Engaging a Plugged-in Generation” workshop by Jeremy Del Rio in New York? Here’s the content description:
“Corporate profiteers produce and market media for a target youth audience they call mooks and midriffs — caricatures that exploit adolescent insecurities and hormones — a strategy described as “grabbing below the belt and reaching for their wallets.” The result: average teens now consume digital media for 72 hours each week and increasingly digest that media online in what the New York Times calls, “Websites Without Rules.” This workshop will:
1) Expose the strategy behind mooks and midriffs;
2) Examine the rise of “Websites Without Rules” and ministry opportunities they create; and
3) Explore ways to engage this plugged-in generation.”
You can download the powerpoint, audio, video, and source material for free here: http://tinyurl.com/3e7o2d
Hey, great comments. We too are staring to ask these questions.
As we start to see the internet develop with web 2.0 ID 2.0 and others, how we behave and relate online is up for a radical change. we are only now starting to see the effects of this change. The big problem is that Churches are slow to change and the Internet is not.
The question used to be “How can we present the message?”
now the question is “How can we engage the listener?”
We seems to have moved from presentation to participation.
Mark poses good questions and I appreciate Roy’s response. Participation is indeed a key. The metaphors of salt and light are quite appropriate, still. Both infuse and infiltrate the surrounding substance. Participation in the culture will lead to presentation and in an authentic, matter of fact manner.
Another point to consider is that we, as Christian people, have much to learn from those who are not. These non-Christians are our neighbors, colleagues, co-workers and friends. We can learn and grow from what they can contribute to us as we contribute to them. And we can learn not only about the media, about the process of adapting to the technology, but also principles and views that are foundational to the decision making and behaviors of those in the networked culture.
I have been studying on-line education for the past five years(I am particularly interested in open access education) and have watched in that short time a tremendous change in the way the internet is used not only in the church but also by educators.Christians are making tentative steps. I am now sending out one organisation’s prayer letter by email and my church has a website (but people were reluctant to comment on it). Most of my communications are by email. However, there are difficulties for my generation. My second life character is stuck in the sea because I have no idea how to manipulate her so I will never get to see your church.What seems to digital natives easy and intuitive is actually very difficult for older people. We need to ensure that the digital divide (excluding the poor and the digital immigrants) does not divide the on-line church in the same way that racial and cultural differences divided the church in the past. Making access easy should be a priority.
Thanks for the link to the Jeremy Del Rio blog and workshop. Unfortunately I was unable to watch the video but enjoyed the audio. He sounds like an inspirational guy!
Great comment Roy, you are right to say that they key is engagement. Involving people rather than simply showing them. The days of the church setting the agenda may well be numbered. Which in another way is saying in that direction used to be set by a few, but we are now seeing a move away from this to many deciding the direction. A good example is the typical church service on a Sunday morning..
A few leaders set the liturgy, a few lead the service and most of the congregation turn up and receive.
Perhaps what we are seeing is a desire now for everyone to be involved, to take some part in the service. At church this morning for the first time I can recall, under the banner of a ‘kids service’ we had an extended time of testimony where a large number of congregants got up and shared how God is working in their life. Then with an appropriate carol as a backing track, most of the congregation got up and formed a dancing line behind the children of the church, moving around the church and singing along. Others found some shakers etc.. and joined the fun.
All of the congregation in some way were involved. And how did it go? A church service full of activity, enjoying each others company and praising God.
So what does it mean to involve people in the church? Is it just about signing up to lead youth group? Or perhaps something more?
G’day Scot, An excellent point you raise about the need to dialogue with non-christians. A two way exchange not a lecture! Thanks.
G’day Kathy, your concern about a digital divide is spot on. As the prevalence of the net grows the issue will be to avoid simply connecting with those like us. Which in my experience is not that dissimilar to human behavior in the local setting; we tend to club together, the net just provides a wider pool of like minded people to connect with. How do you suggest your concern is addressed?
Are we forgetting that the Christian way of life is supposed to model how God designed us to live? If our online activities/contact doesn’t get us out of our church buildings, homes, work places and into the real world of flesh and bones (and soul) then what is the point??? Looking someone in the eye, holding someones hand, crying with someone, laughing with someone and really caring for someone can only be done on a very superficial level through the “Digital Revolution.” We, the church, need to be the revolution!
While I agree with Andrew regarding needing to get out and be Jesus to ‘real’ people in the real world, it seems as though a lot of these real people are spending more time on their computers. I don’t think it’s an either/or thing: for some people ministry via the Internet is where they’ll be engaged, for others the good old fashioned face to face stuff is where it happens.
Oh, I so agree. It’s interesting. I ran across you early on in my blogging, specifically because of your sim church.
One of the major trends I started following several years ago (when involved in a new church start) is that our society is undergoing major changes in the syntax of our lifestyles and communications. It isn’t defined by age/generation . It is defined by technology and mindset. People either utilize digitally enhanced/enabled media or not.
I even coined a new tag to define GEND (digital generation). Simply stated you either are digitally connected or not. You either get it or you don’t get it. This digitally enhanced/enabled media is re-defining the boundaries on how various socio-economic groups and generations interface with each other: on some very basic levels, i.e. general preferences in lifestyle, communication and worship environments. A new language of interactivity has evolved. And this is giving rise to this digitally divided generation bracket.
I have to blaze off to work, but I’ll be back to read the articles you linked. We need to talk more. We appear to have a lot in common.
http://designingforphilistines.blogspot.com/search/label/GEND
Mark, I so agree with your post and paper.
Like you, one of the trends I have been following for many years is that our society is undergoing major changes in the syntax of our lifestyles and communications. What has really struck me is this paradigm shift is defined by technology and mindset. It isn’t defined by age/generation .
It really struck me when I was involved in a (brick and mortar) new church start.
(excerpt from a post last year): “I even coined a new tag to define GEND (digital generation). Simply stated you either are digitally connected or not. You either get it or you don’t get it. This digitally enhanced/enabled media is re-defining the boundaries on how various social groups and generations interface with each other: on some very basic levels, i.e. general preferences in lifestyle, communication and worship environments. A new language of interactivity has evolved. And this is giving rise to this digitally divided generation bracket.’
I look forward to more discussion about this topic.
[…] so, but the Faith itself is extremely robust. I was thinking this when I recently read where Brownblog said: “There are numerous church related websites but no where near the sort of engagement […]
A couple of responses. Firstly, the banding together of different spiritual groups in some ways has happened with Alpha. Alpha has also tried to adapt to different sectors of society. I went to an Alpha conference last year at Holy Trinity Brompton and what they recommend in terms of venue, worship style and food was very different depending on who the target audience was. In the worship seminar it was suggested that you look at what radio station people would listen to as a guide and the music you would choose for an Alpha held at a nursing home would be different to one held for students at a pub.
Paul met his hearers where they were, and you will never meet everyone with “one style.” The internet, while it will obviously not have a large impact in rural Nepal yet does have a very varied clientelle. My email friends include University students, people who are grandparents and retired and others in between. It contains different nationalities and personalities. Now one of the strengths of the church is its diversity. At sixteen I joined a bible study where I was the youngest be over ten years - and learned a lot.
So the challenge is how do we respond to the diversity of the online community, one style will not attract everyone, but still having communities involving a healthy mix of people that are able to learn and grow together.
The other challenge is numbers. I don’t particularly like very large churches. With church being a family it is nice to get to know the people in the church and form real relationships with them. You cannot form real relationships with several thousand people. A church I went to one of the strengths was its sense of community. We used to have a sharing time and it was amazing because we all knew each other and were a close knit family. Many sites on the web, when they become popular become so big that it would be very hard to keep that personal element.
I just found your blog today and I’m very thankful for the resources you are making available. Great paper on The Digital Revolution and the Church. I’ll be giving it a second read.
In my work I find we have to first talk about online safety before we can make much progress with some of the digital immigrants. Online dangers have been, in my opinion, over-hyped by the media here in the US. That has instilled a fear of using some of the new technologies in the Church. I find that if we acknowledge the dangers, and teach safety strategies, it sets the stage for the Church to be more receptive to embracing the digital revolution.
God Bless.
www.21stCenturySheep.com
[…] The Anglican Cathedral in Second Life was founded nearly two years ago, as an attempt to somehow be church on the internet. We are commanded in Matthew 28:19 to “go forth and make disciples of all nations.” However, due to the rapid expansion of the internet, the concept of “nations” is quickly giving way to that of “networks.” This concept does not seek to discount the bonds of home, parish and nation, but to add another dimension to them. As more and more people spend their time in such trans-national locales as Second Life (as of this writing, there are 60,752 people online in Second Life), the need for the presence of the church become clear. For more information on the implications of this for the church, I refer you to the excellent paper written by The Rev. Mark Brown, “The Digital Revolution and the Church” which may be accessed here: http://brownblog.info/?p=665. […]