During my time working for local cancer charity Wessex Cancer Trust, I was tasked with creating a fun-themed campaign to boost brand awareness and engagement with the local community.
The campaign ‘Make our Mascot’ was aimed at local children and parents. Using an participation form children were tasked with designing the mascot as well as choosing it’s name – with the winning mascot being created for real; to be used at numerous charity events in the future as a key brand feature.
Over 200 applicants entered, sourced from local schools and community centres as well as using a pop-up stand in West Quay shopping centre (featured in the slideshow). After a shortlist was chosen, local people were asked to vote for the winner using a Facebook poll. The number of voters far exceeded typical reach with around 1000 taking part; over 25% of the total following following!
The winning design was Wolly the Lion, created by 11 year old Emily. Once the creation was complete Wolly met his designer and has since been appearing at numerous fundraising events ever since.
Video content was also created with to introduce Wolly, which can be found using this link. This became the highest viewed video the trust had released and helped to further engage supporters across a number of media channels.
October 31, 2016 at 8:06 am
First of all – I absolutely love the way you opened your blog. I feel ‘The Meta Ego’ perfectly captures the idea of partial identities. It also highlights that the distinction between multiple online identities and multiple partial identities (which a lot of other blogs failed to highlight and often got confused).
Furthermore, your use of multiple examples and statistics illustrates that you researched this topic carefully and really understood it in depth – in fact I can’t really find much fault.
Another blog raised the idea of whistle-blowers using a separate online identity. So I will ask you what I asked the other blogger. Personally, I think that in the age of so many fake profiles and anonymous web communities, like 4Chan, how would police be able to identify if the whistle-blower is legitimate? It would be great to hear your thoughts on this.
October 31, 2016 at 2:14 pm
Thanks so much for your comment!
I’m glad to hear you liked the ‘Meta Ego’ and that it was successful in representing the idea of an online identity in a simple way – I agree that in many blogs I read through, people may have struggled to fully distinguish between partial and complete online identities.
The question about whistleblowers is an interesting one. In the Google Ideas debate about anonymity vs identity, Chris Poole does mention that 4chan only provides ‘front end’ anonymity, therefore further details such as an IP address could be located in whistle blowing circumstances. However, if a whistleblower had used anonymising back end software such as Tor, combined with 4chan, then perhaps it would be up to the Police to take a view upon the seriousness of the report and decide if it is something they want to spend time exploring further.
I hope you’ve found my answer useful and please feel free to comment on anything you agree/disagree with.
November 2, 2016 at 7:01 pm
Your blog post was very well laid out and enlightening to read. Your infographic was interesting and brought up the group Anonymous who are people I’ve never of before. This is something I’d like to look into further and learn more about.
The Jonty Hurwitz’s video was a different video to others; it was a refreshing way of explaining what online identity is and how to protect it. A Meta Ego is something that I also haven’t heard of before and it was fascinating listening to his explanation of how it was created and what it meant. I agree with your point that he should’ve considered integrating a way to have multiple Meta Egos.
However, I think that we only really have one Meta Ego and the parts of us are split depending which part of the Internet we use – they’re all partials of a whole.
November 2, 2016 at 7:28 pm
The ‘Meta Ego’ is a piece that I came across in my own research and something that I feel perfectly introduces the message of your post. I also, however, like the fact that you challenge, to a certain extent, the accuracy or representative capacity of Hurwitz’s piece given the theme of having more than one identity.
Where your post differs from most is that you point out the fact that the media is prone to emphasising the negative connotations of multiple online identities, as it does with most things, and that this may not be an accurate portrayal of the morality of using more than one online identity. I hadn’t necessarily thought at length about the security advantages of and lack of bias in using an anonymous or different online identity, and you really highlighted some good examples of this. My only question would be whether or not you think that the benefits of the ability to maintain online anonymity outweigh the risks, such as your own observations of fake Facebook profiles being used for bullying. It is fair to say that individuals such as Christopher Poole may not be where they are today without the virtues of online anonymity. I personally believe that in an ideal world, greater accountability could still be advantageous to everyone.
Overall I really enjoyed your post. Your writing style is very engaging and you explain each point in depth but with a casual clarity. I completely agree with your conclusion, as you present both sides of the argument, making it clear that the effects and implications of having more than one online identity are in the hands of those who choose online anonymity.
November 3, 2016 at 2:02 pm
Thanks for your comment, I really appreciate the thorough feedback. I have found both of your posts to be an absolute pleasure to read and will certainly be commenting again in future topics.
In response to your question, without thorough research and analysis it is difficult for me to provide an answer as to whether the positive uses of anonymous multiple identities outweigh those the opposing. A complete view would have to be created using figures of the number of multiple identities against the number of cases in which they are used for adverse activity. Even then, however, I doubt we could paint the full picture, as the internet is just too vast and the anonymous nature of these users may stop them from appearing on the radar at all.
I agree that accountability is a positive thing and personally I ensure that I have a singular online identity that I am proud of and represents the ‘real me’. However, I can not assume that everyone feels this way and therefore I suppose I will have to take an open minded view of the topic, whilst remaining cautious of the mask the internet allows some users to hide behind.
All the best!