Following my essay on New Media and the Christian Message, pastor Jacob Vanhorn asked me:
How do you recommend balancing the very real value of ‘presence’ with the distance that is involved in much of new media? First from a theological idea of ‘presence’ and then implementation.
As a pastor on the street, I am asking:
- What impact on ‘presence’ does video venue have? What problems are down the road with this? Lack of intentional leadership development to raise up pastors? The development of super-pastors?
- What impact does the widespread distribution of podcasts have on the local congregation, its pastors and those under his care? Certainly we can learn from other teachers, but we also see conflict arising here as well. Should we be following our local congregational leadership or the guy we podcast?
- What about church-based web-based social networks? Are they good as alternatives to Facebook? etc? Do we use them or not?
Jacob’s question is commendable in its commitment to the gospel advancing without neglecting the fundamental role of the local church in the life of the believer. This framing of the issue gives us the right context within which to evaluate the opportunities for new media presence. I’ll try my best to do that over a few posts.
There are many competing messages out there, and presence allows one to touch an audience in as many compelling ways as possible to get their attention in this overloaded environment. Key metrics for presence are total eyeballs and unique site visitors.
This is not a bad goal for Christian communication, but I see it as a means to an end–our goal is to engage the hearts and minds of individual people with the gospel, and that means real relationships.
Real relationships can be virtual, but more often than not they’ll be with people in our day-to-day lives–because how deep can you really get in a virtual relationship?. That said, this is no place to be dogmatic. God’s irresistible grace works through numerous means, and we should not think Him confined to one way of doing anything. He is a Trinity, after all.
Two common mistakes of doing anything novel, such as churches thinking through new media efforts, include, on the one hand, going into the new thing without clear goals, or, on the other hand, trusting the planning process too much. New efforts are filled with variables and unknowns. It’s no time for analysis paralysis on this one. Being afraid to take wrong steps is no valid reason not to take the opportunity of new media seriously.
Let’s be humble, have faith, and try some stuff. Of course we’ll make mistakes. But the bigger mistake is to be afraid to fail. Few things work right the first time. So focus on the opportunity. New media allows us to sow liberally with messages that touch on a range of issues, and from there see who’s listening. That makes new media a new “talent” for which we will have to give an account. We should feel a weight of stewardship responsibility here.
If my own experience means anything to any pastor considering how to leverage new media–I have found blogging to be like most of the new ventures I have been a part of. It’s about doing things wrong first, and in the learning process testing my own ability to think and write in a way that better serves both Christians and non-Christians. Progress is slow. Thoughts about “presence” or having “eyeballs” in any sense seems almost laughable to me at this point.
Yet, there are real people who I have had the pleasure of engaging through my blog that mean a lot to me. By them I have refined and tested my thinking against a plurality of views. Isn’t this what makes real-life relationships most satisfying? These people have a presence with me, and I think that counts for a lot in this whole question. I am curious what others think.
Having been around many entrepreneurs, I know that those who tend to succeed first failed. So, the indispensible first step for a local church in considering new media is to have a humble, relational focus that isn’t too scripted, but instead wants to serve others in a few specific areas. This starting point gives Christians and churches the right balance of focus and flexibility, and, I believe, a better chance of incrementally improving their content.
I know of no better path to success. And there is no reason why ambassadors of the Christian message should not achieve success is terms of online presence–but it won’t happen until our messages hit a deep chord among people tired of being sold anything, even a message of salvation.
Bring value, and then things may get viral.
And when the do get viral, you can go places. If you doubt that, look at the frontrunner in today’s presidential race. We get an insight into the nature of online presence in comparing Obama’s overwhelming online edge over McCain, as the Washington Post did this week:
And what’s most telling about the online drubbing is its spontaneous, grass-roots nature — the way Obama’s Internet portrait is drawn and refreshed every day by enthusiastic supporters, whose blogging, YouTubing and networking aren’t controlled or limited by any campaign.
Yes, online presence has strategic value to the Christian message, but it is not something to be controlled or limited by a bunch of central planning. To be most effective, I believe our online presence should grow organically and relationally through crisp, compelling, credible messages. That’s how online social networks grow. We should not expect the impartial God to be partial to us in this, or any other area in the marketplace of ideas–though we should expect all things to work for our good.
