<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Coming Soon: A Facebook for Your Faith?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.faithandweb.com/2007/04/03/will-we-soon-see-religious-facebooks/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.faithandweb.com/2007/04/03/will-we-soon-see-religious-facebooks/</link>
	<description>A Church Web Diva&#039;s Musings on Excellence in Religious Websites</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Dec 2011 02:21:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Anna Belle</title>
		<link>http://www.faithandweb.com/2007/04/03/will-we-soon-see-religious-facebooks/#comment-4</link>
		<dc:creator>Anna Belle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Apr 2007 23:24:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.faithandweb.com/?p=6#comment-4</guid>
		<description>Philocrites -- What a nice surprise that you have found this blog already!  Iâ€™m delighted that you are the first to make a comment on it.  It seems an auspicious start.

I think (perhaps incorrectly) of these as niche compared to what I imagine Project Agape to be.  One other for this list: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.mychurch.org/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;mychurch&lt;/a&gt;.

Itâ€™s funny you should bring up how marketing prefers institutionally controlled initiatives.  You are spot on.  It&#039;s not only denominational organizations.  Just today I was reading this in &lt;i&gt;MHS&lt;/i&gt;, a healthcare marketing magazine:  &quot;The rapid dissemination and acceptance of Internet-based pull technologies ... will probably require a substantial rethinking of marketing priorities.  As consumers increasingly create their own online experiences with organizations, marketers should expect that greater opportunity for social networking in other areas will transfer to user expectations for their organizations.  Those organizations that do not proactively support this evolution ... will likely suffer.&quot;  [Dale Boylston, Spring 2007, p.35]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Philocrites &#8212; What a nice surprise that you have found this blog already!  Iâ€™m delighted that you are the first to make a comment on it.  It seems an auspicious start.</p>
<p>I think (perhaps incorrectly) of these as niche compared to what I imagine Project Agape to be.  One other for this list: <a href="http://www.mychurch.org/" rel="nofollow">mychurch</a>.</p>
<p>Itâ€™s funny you should bring up how marketing prefers institutionally controlled initiatives.  You are spot on.  It&#8217;s not only denominational organizations.  Just today I was reading this in <i>MHS</i>, a healthcare marketing magazine:  &#8220;The rapid dissemination and acceptance of Internet-based pull technologies &#8230; will probably require a substantial rethinking of marketing priorities.  As consumers increasingly create their own online experiences with organizations, marketers should expect that greater opportunity for social networking in other areas will transfer to user expectations for their organizations.  Those organizations that do not proactively support this evolution &#8230; will likely suffer.&#8221;  [Dale Boylston, Spring 2007, p.35]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Philocrites</title>
		<link>http://www.faithandweb.com/2007/04/03/will-we-soon-see-religious-facebooks/#comment-3</link>
		<dc:creator>Philocrites</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Apr 2007 13:42:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.faithandweb.com/?p=6#comment-3</guid>
		<description>A few denominations are taking small but significant steps toward engaging social-networking sites. The United Methodist Church has launched &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.umc.org/site/c.lwL4KnN1LtH/b.2454807/k.A7C4/UMCorg_Community.htm&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;UMC.org Community&lt;/a&gt;, perhaps the least sexy social networking site ever, and the United Church of Christ launched &lt;a href=&quot;http://i.ucc.org/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;i.UCC&lt;/a&gt;. Both sites are interactive community sites, but they&#039;re not really set up on the viral-marketing/Web 2.0 model of YouTube or Flickr. Denominational organizations are cautious about things posted to &quot;official&quot; sites; they also prefer institutionally-controlled marketing initiatives rather than peer-to-peer outreach. That makes true social-networking models a very hard sell, but obviously elements of the model are being adapted for use by church groups.

P.S. Welcome back to tech-blogging!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A few denominations are taking small but significant steps toward engaging social-networking sites. The United Methodist Church has launched <a href="http://www.umc.org/site/c.lwL4KnN1LtH/b.2454807/k.A7C4/UMCorg_Community.htm" rel="nofollow">UMC.org Community</a>, perhaps the least sexy social networking site ever, and the United Church of Christ launched <a href="http://i.ucc.org/" rel="nofollow">i.UCC</a>. Both sites are interactive community sites, but they&#8217;re not really set up on the viral-marketing/Web 2.0 model of YouTube or Flickr. Denominational organizations are cautious about things posted to &#8220;official&#8221; sites; they also prefer institutionally-controlled marketing initiatives rather than peer-to-peer outreach. That makes true social-networking models a very hard sell, but obviously elements of the model are being adapted for use by church groups.</p>
<p>P.S. Welcome back to tech-blogging!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

