Companies are always looking for new ways to raise their profile and market themselves on twitter, but sometimes its the charity and even public sector that lead on innovative ways to raise awareness, forced to try news ways on limited budgets and powered by enthusiasm to make a difference.
One example of this is the 24 hour twitter experiment which gets a new look today. This has been tried a few times before with varying success:
- Manchester police - kick-starting the idea was Manchester tweeting every incident over a 24 hour period to show the breadth and depth of their daily workload. The BBC wrote up the experiment: www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-11537806
- Walsall Council – following Manchester’s lead, Walsall also spent a day tweeting what their staff got up to over 24 hours. This got a rather mixed response as the comments on the Guardian website illustrate: www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/mar/03/local-government-twitter-walsall-24
- Today: WaterAid – the international NGO is tweeting it’s activities from across the globe, taking the idea to the next level and really showing the world wide communication opportunities that are available.
Best of luck to WaterAid.
How do you get a 96.99% reduction in crime around your home? Move from East London to West Sussex. It’s a shame my car and home insurance didn’t drop by the same amount.
Thanks to the online photographer for highlighting the PM’s response to an e-petition on photography laws. Currently the law states:
Section 58A makes it an offence to publish, communicate, elicit or attempt to elicit information about any of such persons which is of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism.
Which has been mis-used by many police officers to ban members of the public from taking innocent pictures (which I’ve talked about before here: Photography presents a unique problem for law enforcement because it is not illegal).
The response is as useful as the law:
An officer making an arrest under section 58A must reasonably suspect that the information is of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism.
While also stating that:
It is a statutory defence for a person to prove that they had a reasonable excuse for eliciting, publishing or communicating the relevant information.
I’m so glad that’s all cleared up.
I like taking pictures and I’m not fussy about what I take pictures of. But I hear more and more about people who are very fussy and claim that it’s against the law. There’s been a few cases recently – The Register have just published a piece on the problems photographers face – having film removed from cameras, memory cards taken, threats to confiscate equipment – which paints a worrying picture. They also follow it up with some useful advice on what the law actually says about taking pictures (So, what can you photograph?).
This issue was raised earlier in the year by The Online Photographer who shows a great clip about restrictions on film and photography, including a film maker being stopped at Oxford Circus by two community support officers and questioned aggressively with no reason what so ever.
And it’s not just in the UK. DCist and The Online photographer both picked up a comical story of the Head of Cumminications of Union Station being stopped from conducting a TV interview. An interview where he was trying to report that there was nothing wrong with filming or taking pictures in the station.
