I could keep all this stuff close to my chest until we actually do this, or I could post this paper and invite a dialogue in the best traditions of the Internet. This is my current thinking about a Social Media experiment for Greenbelt 2013. The worship has not yet been commissioned for GB13 and is only therefore a proposal. The experiment will take place at 2pm on Sunday 25th August 2013 based at (but not limited to) the Greenbelt Festival.
Introduction
This paper outlines a technical and theological approach to using social media to engage a diverse community of users to engage in an online worship event during the Greenbelt Festival
The impact of social media on the world and on communities have been significant. However, business and churches especially have been slow to properly understand the significance of social media and use it in effective ways to extend their reach into the lives of individuals. Hitherto, business organisations and churches have been broadcasters of information: using print, TV, radio and even SMS as methods of sending a one-way message to consumers which is entirely made up of the marketing-sanitised message which they desire to broadcast.
This is in direct contrast with the true purpose of social media which is to engage in a dialog with individuals also using the service. Whilst there is an element of broadcasting, it is moderated by responses and engagement. The most important part of the social media engagement is the stream: the composite flow of information which is significant both an individual elements but also as a gestalt: a complete whole.
Worship, once considered, is not simply a broadcast event. It does have some elements of that, as a message is delivered from a person (pastor, priest, or preacher) but response is also elicited. What Churches have been poor in achieving is in permitting, in encouraging a diversity of responses which might challenge a single accepted viewpoint. It would not be considered acceptable, for example, to stand up and engage in debate during the delivery of a homily, for example.
However, there are many emergent groups which do value diversity and the contribution of the ecclesia to the narrative of the community, and it is with these values that this proposal for social media worship is couched. Any community which lacks the confidence to engage with its users cannot authentically use social media in its true sense. If there is only one perspective which can be tolerated, and only one channel of communication, then the possibilities of social media as a process of theologia have not yet been fully realised. Such a community might use social media as a medium for broadcast, but it will only be in a limited way[1. Any community which is more interested in the process of engagement, in responding in pastoral and theological terms to its user base, can find that social media in its true form is a useful tool for this.
The mechanism of social media worship
There are some limitations to the form and variety of worship that can be achieved entirely via social media. In 2010, I documented in my book Creative Ideas for Alternative Sacramental Worship a Twucharist liturgy. This was not so much a socially mediated worship as an experiment in communication as it supported a live face-to-face act of worship using a liturgy written in 140-character bursts. The liturgy and the responses were both tweeted and displayed on a screen.
I still do not consider that it is possible to hold an authentic Eucharist without face-to-face engagement with the sacred elements.
For this reason, the worship proposed is non-eucharistic, but which confirms to a traditional shape, reinterpreted in the light of the new media, and the new channels of communication which social media affords us.
Other experiments have used social media as an adjunct to face-to-face worship: eliciting feedback in the midst of live worship, but this is only possible when there is a locus of physical sacred space. How might this look when placed entirely in the ether?
When broken down and analysed, the shape of this worship could look like this:
- Gathering
- Welcome & Engagement
- Penitential Rite
- Absolution
- Word
- Response
- Meditation
- Intercession
- Blessing & Dismissal
Within each of these elements there is an element of broadcast and an opportunity for response, which is linked to a response to that response. As suggested earlier, it is that element which transcends traditional church models and moves the worship into the truly socially-mediated world.
In practical terms, the social media worship therefore needs to be delivered by a team whose collective purpose is to both broadcast and respond. This requires a reasonable level of access to the Internet to achieve this. For this experiment, I propose that a team of three or four (depending on expected scale) are connected to the Cheltenham Racecourse internet (by WiFi or hardwire, whichever is more convenient) via laptop. internet via a phone as the GB technical teams were unwilling or technically unable to permit us to access their Internet.
One of these machines can be set up to send out the key broadcast elements of the act of worship. We will call this the Worship Leader. They can be scheduled (using an application such as Tweetdeck) so as to provide a structure for the act of worship. The other users are poised to monitor and respond to the responses and the dialogue which the Worship Leader generates. I will refer to these as the Deacons.
Although the key medium of communication will be Mastodon (largely because of the number of users able to access it), this can be mirrored onto a Facebook page/group to involve those not using Mastodon. It can also incorporate links to other social media platforms such as Instagram and Flikr to elicit other (non-textual) responses. Other links to video and audio can be embedded into the stream and can enrich the multimedia experience of the worship. The vast majority of users will be able to engage in worship via smartphones using WiFi or mobile internet, but a proportion will also access it via SMS which is still a valid and widely used Mastodon platform. The growth in bandwidth for the mobile internet has been phenomenal in the past 12 months and market penetration of smartphones will mean that those who are interested in such an engagement will be able to access it. Although the act of worship is intended for those primarily at the Greenbelt location, it is in no way limited to them as it will be available worldwide.
The worship will be accessed by following a dedicated Mastodon Account: @tw_worship and during the act of worship all interaction will be tagged with the suggested hashtag #GB40SMW
It is a given disadvantage that one has to sacrifice characters for clarity in names and tags. This reduces the amount of available characters for interaction but as short mnemonics can be difficult to identify and are often used by others resulting in “crosstalk”. A good example of this was in 2012 when a far-right US rally led by Glen Beck was tagged with #gb12 over the same weekend as the Greenbelt festival also using the #gb12 hashtag. The confusion between social-conservatism and social justice was both amusing and potentially destabilising.
Example
This is entirely conjectural and does not represent any part of the Social Media worship as yet unplanned.
|
Worship Leader |
Typical Responses |
Deacons |
| #GB40SMW The Lord be with you | ||
| @gb40socialmedia and also with you #gb40smw | ||
| @gb40socialmedia ok | ||
| @gb40socialmedia what? | ||
| @GB40SMW We call to mind our sin. | ||
| @GB40SMW Consider where you have let God down | ||
| @GB40SMW when you have brought them to mind respond with Amen | ||
| @gbsocialmedia amen | ||
| @gbsocialmedia AMEN | ||
| @gbsocialmedia I need to confess | @user You can DM confidentially | |
| D gbsocialmedia I confess <redacted> | D user God hears you. You are forgiven | |
| #GB40SMW God hears all of you. You are forgiven | @gbsocialmedia amen | |
| #GB40SMW where do you find yourself? post a pic of your location | ||
| @gbsocialmedia bit.ly/MADEUPURL | ||
| @gbsocialmedia inst.gm/MADEUPURL | ||
| #GB40SMW Psalm 150: Video link: you.tb/URLHERE | ||
| @gbsocialmedia I love that vid. Where is it shot? | ||
| #GB40SMW Psalm 150: text bit.ly/LINKHERE | @user Dartmoor. goog.le/MAPREF | |
| #GB40SMW What do you need to ask of God in prayer? | ||
| @gbsocialmedia my dad is very ill | @user your prayer is heard | |
| RT @user @gbsocialmedia my dad is very ill | ||
| @gbsocialmedia I need help | @user would you like to talk confidentially?<dm conversation ensues> | |
| @gbsocialmedia why does God allow my Dad to suffer? | @user <response and conversation direct or broadcast depending on confidentiality issues> | |
| #GB40SMW Our worship is concluded. Go in peace. | ||
| @gbsocialmedia Amen! Thank you! #gb40smw |
What do we envisage people to be doing in Social Media Worship?
A mixture of direct questions and open invitations can gather responses from those participating in worship. In common with most social media engagement, we do not see it as an exclusive activity. A very few will be connected to a laptop somewhere; others will access it on a tablet or a smartphone in the middle of another activity: eating lunch, attending another talk. Is this multitasking a dilution of worship? Alternatively, even when engaged in worship are there not plenty of distractions already in play which makes the intrusion of worship into everyday life just a mirror of the notion that everyday life intrudes into worship?
As this is an experiment into an unfamiliar territory, it might be worthwhile seeking some feedback from those who participated through a simple user survey (surveymonkey) or direct responses. This could determine reactions to the concept as well as trying to understand the context in which participants engaged (if at all).
If it is determined that this form of social media worship is unsuccessful, then at least we can cross off this particular model as an unsuitable one for worship.
Let’s experiment!
[1 Nicky Gumbel, the Vicar of Holy Trinity, Brompton and all things Alpha has tens of thousands of followers (https://twitter.com/nickygumbel) but only sends out messages (good though they are) and only follows around 200 people. This is not dialogue so much as broadcast
oooh yes. Liking this. Some of us are unable to be at greenbelt but I can see this as a way of being able to take part in the worship
Very intriguing and it would good to hear how this develops. I wonder what scope there would be to extend such an act of worship over a much longer period of time. Freed from physical and practical restrictions that can hinder our worship and aware that most conversations I engage through social media invariably go on for a few days with various ebbs and flows, I would be intrigued to see how your model would work over a more extended period. Eg. a day of penance that calls that will transform our mindset as we go about our lives; the challenge to respond to a piece of scripture with something we may see or hear during the course of the day. etc. Essentially, adopting your structure for worship as a rule and rhythm of life.
I hope to be at Greenbely this year and will be really interested to experience how this works. My gut feeling is that as a member of the “congregation” it will be difficult to fully engage if doing something else like a attending another talk etc. however the only way to really find out if this will work is to take the risk and do it. I agree with Tom’s comments about the ebb and flow of discussions over social media taking time and one issue could be that where you want to encourage response at some time you may to cut the flow of discussion off at an interesting point because of time restraints. Maybe you could factor something in akin to coffee and biscuits after the service where discussions can restart and continue. I think this is a great idea and anything that gives us a another arrow in our missional quiver can only be a good thing.
I’ve experimented a bit with online services having been inspired by ‘tweet remembrance’ back in 2011: http://www.tweetremembrance.com/
I put together an online 9 lessons and carols service: http://onlinecarols.posterous.com/ and then went on to do Stations of the Cross and Resurrection: http://bigbible.org.uk/tag/easterjourneys/ 9 Lessons and Carols came back in 2012: http://onlinecarols2012.wordpress.com/ and this year we’re hoping to do an Easter Service on the Big Bible site again.
What I like in your proposals, Simon, are the interactive elements which were perhaps not so evident in the services I ran. The twitter remembrance service worked really well as the hashtag was used a lot and it was very moving to see people share their memories. One of the real benefits of worshipping using social media is that it can be happening literally anywhere with an internet connection – this has huge implications for those who are housebound for whatever reason. This will be a great opportunity to include people who can’t be at Greenbelt this year – there will probably be more engagement from them than from those actually there.
This is an intriguing idea. Despite being a passionate-but-pragmatic proponent of social media, I’m yet to be convinced that Mastodon is a suitable medium for gathering for worship, so I will watch with interest.
A few thoughts…
While I appreciate your reasons for using Mastodon, I do wonder if another, more real-time platform might be better. A P2-themed WordPress blog for example (http://p2theme.com/) or use of the Disqus commenting platform, which also has real time updates now.
This would allow a faster flowing ‘stream’ AND would allow responses to be grouped/threaded with the original broadcasted text.
Another medium would be a Google+ Hangout. Hangouts are visual but participative. You’d need more bandwidth than most people could get on the Greenbelt site, but it is accessible by mobile, and with the broadcast feature you can let anyone view and save it to YouTube for later too.
I’d also have concerns about allowing people to respond in some of the ways that you’ve suggested. People like you and I probably take Mastodon’s DM funtion for granted, but how would you deal with a situation where someone less experienced got confused and publicly confessed/prayed/conversed. And what responsibilities do the deacons have? What if there are, say, child protection issues in a conversation?
And what’s the plan for if/when the hashtag gets hijacked/spammed?
I am genuinely intrigued. The spiritual nature of worship does not, I suppose, demand a physical presence with others, so, while not a replacement for a physical gathering, I’d be interested to see how this works. There are certainly people I know who can’t get to church every week and maybe an online gathering could work for them? Though, I’m also reminded of the Ship of Fools online church experiment which, if I recall, was only mildly successful.
May God bless this venture though!
I am looking forward to taking part whilst toddler minding. We had a Facebook morning prayer during experimental worship week at college which fell into the more broadcast than faithful to the interactive nature of social media. Love the idea of deacons for responding.