by 
I was asked by someone recently whether I had experience of Second Life the online virtual world being used as an engagement tool. The answer was no, though I did hear of it being used that way some time ago. Eager to learn more and brim full of curiosity I created an account and leapt into my second life. About an hour later I was a little confused and a lot bored so I parked my character in an Irish pub and left. Although I have not been tempted to return and actually went so far as to remove the Second Life software from my machine on a recent clear out; I do take some comfort that, having spent the last 6 months drinking virtual Guinness, the Second Life me is doubtless happy and fulfilled.
My main reservation about using Second Life as a platform for community engagement is whether, given you have to download software specially to use it and it takes time to become accustomed to using the platform, anyone not already involved in Second Life would actually use it.
It would be wrong to write off the tool just because I didn’t enjoy my first experience of it or have the time or patience to immerse myself in a virtual world (there’s quite enough to do in this one for me). So, to learn more I revisited the issue recently by posting some questions about the use of Second Life for community engagement on the web and by doing some Googling around. This post is a little of what I discovered.
The Wikipedia is always a good place to start. It describes Second life in the following terms:
Second Life (SL) is a virtual world developed by Linden Lab that launched on June 23, 2003 and is accessible via the Internet. A free client program called the Second Life Viewer enables its users, called Residents, to interact with each other through avatars. Residents can explore, meet other residents, socialize, participate in individual and group activities, and create and trade virtual property and services with one another, or travel throughout the world, which residents refer to as the grid. Second Life caters for users aged over eighteen, while its sister site Teen Second Life is restricted to users aged between thirteen and eighteen.
Apparently Sweden, the Maldives, Macedonia, Albania and a number of other nations have SL embassies, many companies have a SL presence and that there are SL Dollars that exchange 1 for 1 with US Dollars.
The feedback I got from my Linkedin Group (Government 2.0) was a really useful account of instances where Second Life had been used, though I didn’t hear from anyone who professed to actually use it themselves.
There is a wonderful blog post by Darren G. Lilleker about use of Second Life in President Sarkozy’s election campaign in France. They created L’ille Sarkozy or Sarkozy Island where volunteers created buildings and monitored goings on. More than 400 virtual people visited and many became residents of the island. They were also subject to attacks from “bumbs, naked people, insults, mines dropped, weapons demonstrations…”
This sounds like a lot of fun but does raise some questions about how on earth to hold a meaningful and reportable community engagement process in the face of such things as naked people, mines and bumbs (no idea what they are but I don’t like the sound of it).
The Queensland Government published a study in July 2007 called Management of Legal Risk Associated with Use of YouTube, MySpace and Second Life. If you ever want to be put off doing something innovative ask the lawyers so this should be viewed as the ‘black hat’ guide to Second Life. They were examining a proposal by Smart Service Queensland to acquire an island, develop areas on the island to provide information to the public and to host meetings and events on the island to gain feedback on projects. They also were considering having private areas for meetings of closed groups and allowing the public to post information in some areas. It all sounds a bit like a forum with different visual presentation.
The study is an excellent document (though a bit legalistic) and for those of you who prefer not to read all 202 pages here are some of the main findings which relate to Second Life (though no doubt my interpretations would make the Lawyers cringe!):
- Defamatory or offensive material cannot always be removed though breaches of site rules do result in members being suspended or terminated and most bad behaviour such as harassment, intolerance, indecency etc is covered. However, to keep the space safe organisations may need a number of people mixing in the virtual crowds to spot inappropriate behaviour.
- The terms of use of the site prohibit remote monitoring making it harder to police the consultation and harder to collect all the data from a discussion.
- Risk can be reduced by use of private spaces only – though presumably this would limit the benefits in terms of community engagement.
- There is no automatic right of reuse of the content so theoretically there could be legal issues in reproduction of what takes place
- The terms of use allow the Second life people to remove content at their discretion
- There are complex copyright issues.
It should be recognised that this is a legal document that naturally focuses on risks rather than on the benefits to be gained by engaging the community in this way so I don’t think it reasonable to judge use of Second Life on these points alone.
I also discovered that Second Life has been trialled by the Canadian Archives and Library Service who noted that more than one person needs to be involved to maintain a viable departmental presence (backing some of the comments above about it being resource intensive).
Finally, it was used by the Ontario Public Service for recruitment. This Second Life destination featured six pavilions which showcased how communities, businesses and governments were using broadband and encouraged visitors to participate in research by providing feedback via surveys throughout the island tour path. Entrance and Exit surveys help reveal how the island’s content alters perceptions and shares knowledge. This video shows some of the content.
In all these instances I can see and understand how the Second Life tool is being used to inform communities and I can see how surveys and the like could be completed in the Second Life. However, what I cannot ascertain is how it can be effectively be used to gain meaningful feedback as part of a broader community engagement without significant resources being devoted in terms of constant monitoring of site activities. Particularly given the ban on remote monitoring.
I also remain sceptical as to whether Second Life engagements are ever likely to reach people within the community other than those already immersed in this virtual world. Second Life boasts some 2 million users globally but accepted wisdom on the web (bloggers and the like) seems to have it that only around 600,000 are repeat visitors. In other words there are about 1.4 million poor lost souls out there stuck for eternity in a virtual Irish bar. This means your Second Life consultation is unlikely to reach more than a handful of people in the community unless you are engaging on a very broad based issue.
A blog entry by Russell Shaw puts a forthright view relating to the use of Second Life in business that I think probably applies equally to engagement activities. I think perhaps this deserves the last word here. He is a little harsh and I am hoping those of you who object or disagree will be moved to comment.
The Los Angeles Times reports that some companies that have opened virtual presences on Second Life have closed their virtual doors or are letting them rot through lack of attention.
We’re talking Dell, Best Buy (Geek Squad) Sun Microsystems, American Apparel, Starwood Hotels (Westin, Sheraton, etc.) In fact, that’s the Los Angeles Times’ screencap of a bare storefront in American Apparel’s Second Life presence.
After reviewing the carnage, and then getting a quote from Forrester Research that only 30,000 to 40,000 Second Life users are logged on even at peak times, article author Alana Semuels hits on the real reason for these corporate defections from Second Life:
“For some advertisers, the problem is that Second Life is a fantasyland, and the representations of the people who play in it don’t have human needs. Food and drink aren’t necessary, teleporting is the easiest way to get around and clothing is optional. In fact, the human form itself is optional.”
Alana is being informative, but perhaps a bit overly polite. I am not going to be polite. Dang right I will shout.
Second Life is a really cool virtual world, but Second Life isn’t real. For business uses, it’s a fad and a crock.
This work by Bang the Table Pty Ltd is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia License.
Hey,
I liked reading your post, though found your overall conclusion questionable but still enjoyed reading it! Good stuff! You might find some interesting think pieces and peer reviewed papers on the journal of virtual worlds research (http://jvwresearch.org/). I bet that Irish bar you ended in was the Blarney stone bar? I ended up there the first time too, and left for a week before I came back lol. If you really want to get a good insight into SL, I would ask you to join a in-world group like NCI (New citizens incorp) for new members, they have loads of events throughout weeks which may help you see some more value. Try it. Obviously depends on your timezone, pdt at around 6pm onwards seems to be busy.
I’m not saying Virtual Worlds are the be all and end all. Personally I believe a great value of it is for educational use and the value it provides to certain users with physical diabilities.
As for it being real or not… it’s real just not physical.