Bear with the audio glitches in the first few minutes during my intro. Promise I’ll re-record things. Also, if you listen, you’ll get a preview of what the podcast is all about. I’ll also share the cleaned up version with Tim Allik for the PRobecast.

Mitch then went on to quote SocialSphere advisor Joe Trippi, which is of course when my ears perked up. Mitch wrote that

Obama used a combination of television, the Internet, and social media to recruit volunteers and supporters, and cement relationships with them. He asked supporters to supply their cell phone numbers, and sent out regular text-message blasts, even announcing his selection for vice president over text message. Using a custom social-networking site, created with the help of a Facebook co-founder, Obama supporters were able to log in and find lists of people they could call, or whose doors they could knock on, to try to persuade others to vote for their candidate.

And it’s only the beginning, said Trippi. That kind of networking will likely transform the White House. Trippi anticipates Obama will create a similar social networking for his legislative initiatives, and recruit supporters to lobby Congress to get his policies enacted into law.

The result will be further increase of presidential power, and erosion of Congressional authority. “Congress will be put between a rock and a hard place, if millions of citizens sign up to help the President pass his agenda,” Trippi said. “If the President says, ‘Here are the members of Congress who stand in the way of us passing healthcare reform,’ I would not want to be one of those people. You’ll have 10 or 15 million networked Americans barging in on the members of Congress telling them to get in line with the program and pass the healthcare reform bill. That will be a power that no American president has had before. Congress’s power will be taken over by the American people.”

Mitch and Joe paint a picture that is at once scary and inspiring. Setting the political implications of a weaker congress aside (this isn’t a political blog, after all), this will—we hope—be a new kind of presidency. But don’t get fooled—BusinessWeek reminds us that Barack wasn’t the first presidential candidate to be good at tech.

The real test will be in how well Barack is able to transform his social media marketing machine into a true engine for change. Don’t get me wrong, we’ve taken the first step toward change by electing him, but his mastery of social media will not be solidified until his social media adoption becomes more than marketing. As Mashable’s Adam Ostrow writes, “How Will President Obama Use His Massive Social Media Influence?” Or as FreshNetworks asks,

How would [the Obama/Biden administration] use social media and online communities to continue to engage with people when they are in power[?] Social media can really help engage people when it provides away for them to have a real exchange about things that matter to them, where they can find out information on things they are interested in, share ideas and thoughts with peers and with politicians, report things to them and feel that they continue to be part of a campaign.

Newsweek cautions us that his road will not be an easy one, and the American public may have to be patient. Keeping us feeling connected is one way to do that, and social media is the way to do it. I hope I’m still getting emails from him two years from now (and maybe tweets too!).

I am very much enjoying Paul Gillin’s new book “Secrets of Social Media Marketing”. I’ll write a full review shortly, but I was inspired by the leadoff quote in chapter one, from A.G. Lafley, CEO of Procter & Gamble:

The more in control we are, the more out of touch we become. But the more willing we are to let go a little, the more we’re finding we get in touch with consumers.

Being a science nerd, I was struck by the similarities of this to Heisenberg’s uncertainty principal, which essentially states that the more precisely you know a particle’s position, the less precisely you can know its momentum.

Media training has been part of my job for about 8 years now, and boy has it changed. Anybody who’s still trying to sell the control paradigm is selling snake oil. Even old school PR master Apple can’t keep the genie in the bottle when it comes to secret projects and bad news (though the news has been good lately).

Here’s what I wrote way back in 2006 while at Topaz (emphasis mine):

It’s clear that companies are learning to give up control. Our media training slides, for instance, don’t talk about controlling the conversation any more. Richard Edelman stressed this issue of control at the last Syndicate show, and most PR agencies, if they haven’t fully embraced social media, are definitely talking about blogs and how they change the corporate conversation. A few of them are taking a stab at podcasting and even video.

Those who remain staunch supporters of the old “command and control” model of PR will ultimately either adapt or die. Forget “disruptive technology:” In astronomical/geological terms, social media is what you would call an ELE (Extinction-Level Event, pronounced “Ellie”).

I used to think that there was room for tradition. But the more I work in social media, the more I see all media heading in this direction. Yes there’s still plenty of room for good media training and good messaging. But if you don’t prepare your company or your clients for this, it will be your loss–look out for that fireball.

Folks, as Paul Gillin so deftly states in his opening chapter, bad news isn’t always bad news (emphasis his):

Negative feedback isn’t necessarily bad. We know that criticism is more useful than praise. It helps us to understand our shortcomings and make our products and business better. If customers are willing to offer you free advice, why would you not want to listen? If negativity exists, wouldn’t you rather find out now than wait until it turns up in The Wall Street Journal?