NHS Salford communication boss gets "Twitterviewed"

I phoned Karl to discuss the issues raised in this micro debate as it would have been churlish not to. I was glad that I did. It did not change my views on SM as being a being all end all method of communication and that was not what was suggested. Instead the discussion satisfied my curiosity about how it was being used in Salford, how it was measured, what its intent was and how little it cost. The other part of the discussion took in parts of the current public perceptions about the NHS. I found the whole conversation refreshing and informed. On the basis that it was a phone call from a resident rather than someone conducting an interview I wont attempt to accurately quote the guy, but suggest strongly that he very much knows what he is doing and was neither stoned nor an eejit. My issue with this particular NHS Salford initiative is closed satisfactorily.

As co-founder of Healthcare Social Media Europe (Twitter hashtag: #hcsmeu), just a note to say that in my opinion the #nhssm initiative was a great success. Kudos to all those involved from NHS Salford for sticking their heads above the parapet.

They listened, they responded, and they should be commended for doing so

Seems to me there are two strands to this argument. A) Should the NHS be targeting health positive messages to the general public and B) if so, how? Seems to me that the first argument is fairly academic. Based on the deplorable state of health (and increasingly so) of many people in this country, we have to do something. From a purely practical point of view if next decade's cancer sufferer/diabetic/heart attack victim can be weaned off whatever it is that he/she/it is doing to help cause this state of affairs, then i for one will have more of my hard-earned in my sky rocket. So, based on the fact that any sensible health system focuses at least as much on prevention as it does on cure, the argument moves to how to go about doing it. The fact that this discussion (like countless others) is being played out online is a big clue in my opinion. A few years ago there was no How-Do (strange as it may now seem) and in a few years time with t'internet piped through people's TVs to chav and sundry it will be genuinely ubiquitous (for better or for worse). So the utilisation of social media as a channel is valid, it just needs to be controlled and monitored. Whether it is or not i don't know, but the fact that nobody from NHS Salford has responded to this thread would seem to indicate that they've yet to learn that Social Media is as much about monitoring and responding to relevant online conversations as it is about developing flash facebook campaigns.

Comparethemeerkat got in his last sentence 'if it was Coca Cola or Virgin....I doubt the vitriol'

Yes because they spend their own money to entice consumers to their products and if it doesnt work they lose their own money. Perhaps the issue is really how you determine the role of the NHS, as a healthcare provider or as a Nanny educator? If you accept some belief in it partly being an educator (as I do to a degree) then why does each Trust set out to be different from the next in how it puts its message out - that wastes millions of £ annually. For example the variety of non smoking initiatives. Every place in Britain creates its own. Barking mad when the messages are universal.

Nigel's comments are irrelevant as far as I am concerned. Even on the very place (here)where the OECD report was published, he has overquoted it by 3% or has been too lazy to find it again and quote it accurately. Facts matter and if they are under your nose and you cant be bothered to use them accurately dont enter debates with alleged primitive thinkers. You just look idiotic... again