|
March, 2002 Diablo Blue Page 11 |
|
or she last traveled. There is no information transferred to the reader except for advertisements. I've often wondered why the group wants to spend its money publishing each month. Possibly it's because it is a source of revenue and the monetary reward is all that is important to them. The less insidious form of funnel vision is more widespread. These newsletters are by and large a good-looking publication with a decent layout. The funnel vision becomes evident when it becomes apparent that only members of the group are contributing to it. Sadly, the editor has elected to only publish articles written by its own membership. As I watch them over a period of time it becomes apparent that few new insights or ideas are being shared. All the information is basically being recycled into new forms of wording but little new information is offered. Over the years I have watched the publications of these groups diminish in size. One that I looked forward to reading each month has shrunk from a 12 page to a 4-page publication because of lack of content. Every so often an article will appear by one of its writers that contains a tip or trick, a warning, a new idea or an insight about something the writer experienced the purpose of publishing a newsletter. Sometimes, I receive a newsletter where the editor has left a page or two blank with a note on it that reads: "This page is blank because nobody contributed anything this month." While it is intended to encourage writers to contribute it has a negative effect. People join user groups for two purposes: to be informed or entertained. When people are cajoled into having to write something, even if it's trivial, this is in my opinion funnel vision at its worst. Reviews To often publications contain nothing but reviews written by its members. I'll admit that I am not one to get really excited about reading reviews. I'm not opposed to publishing reviews but I feel that there is a need for balance. My reason for speaking on reviews is that I see it as a form of funnel vision because it again restricts information to a closed group. An argument is that it is a method of getting people to write and contribute to the newsletter. The intent is to have the writer develop into a person who will write creatively. Yet, if the only information attained is from the closed group where do the seeds of creativity come from? How creative can a person get if all they are reduced to is writing a review in order to have something to print in a newsletter? Possibly, if they were exposed to articles written by authors of other groups they would get the vision and motivation to write something truly creative. When they see what others do they learn to see outside of themselves and look at new products and ideas with a new purpose. Looking Through The Funnel To this point I have been speaking of how I perceive some groups look at their organization through a funnel. When the focus of information is contained from within their own group they are looking at the user group community from the large end of the funnel and seeing it restricted by the small end their own group. I suggest they take the funnel, turn it around and look through it from the small end. You'll see a bigger picture. This bigger picture is the APCUG community. I, as an editor, scan newsletters printed and electronic for fresh new information and use them in our publications. No, the SVCA is not unique in this approach. Some of my favorite exchanges are the newsletters that also contain a nice mix of articles written by their own members plus those attained from others. These groups have learned to use the whole APCUG user group community for |
