http://www.buzzmachine.com/2009/10/03/the-model-of-the-new-media-model/

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=is%2028:23ff&version=NASB

And, yes, I'm going somewhere with this. 

Things about people my age and younger that get overlooked:

* We're night owls.  I think a big factor is that folks my age got used to the internet's best time for speed being between 2-3 AM.  So, we'd stay up to utilize that.  From there, I think it just got more complicated. Or was complicated already. 

* We can get information to and from each other more quickly, efficiently, and tersely than ever before.  This leads to communities developed by the members, instead of easy acceptance of the limits of geography, socio-economic class or age, even.  My group of friends, as I've mentioned, is online.  We come from all sorts of levels of each.  We share a couple things in common and that's what the "community" is based on.  It works. 

* Because of the ease of information and surface stuff, when we do go do something, we want it to be something that's deep / specialized / worth our time and effort.  If it isn't, we'll just blow it off and get the summary later via text, IM or twitter from someone else.  So, to attract our attention, it either needs to be new enough, or very high quality. Bonus points if it's both. 

* Also because of the easy access of information, we get very specific and particular with who we spend our time / invite into our groups.  It's not even "Music fans", or "genre fans".  It's "Fans of this really obscure band that only plays on every third full moon."  Or something similar.  There are usually one or two defining characteristics for each set of friends.  For example:  I have my HP gaming friends, my Christian-I-went-to-YWAM-with-you friends, my Christian-I-grew-up-with-you friends, my ASL-class friends, and more.  Some people fit into two or three categories, but early on, I learned that if you were in more than one category, I had to treat you a little different in each group.  For me, this started very early.  Like when I moved to Idaho-early. 

* We tend to use whatever tools we've got available to make ourselves "heard".   Blog, tweet, tee-shirts, texting, forum, facebook... We're used to having a say -- talking back.  We're used to being able to change things by involvement -- with minimal effort.  If we really feel passionate about something, it gets plastered pretty much everywhere in our "tech footprint".   We blog about it.  We tweet about it.  We comment to others over IM / text about it.   Sometimes, it's because we want a lasting record of it, and doing that and telling others at the same time saves us time and effort.  However, I think it's because that's become our primary modes of communication.  Watercooler chat has gone by the wayside when you can get that information delivered to a screen (tiny or big) near you.  And when your friends of choice aren't near you geographically, necessarily, you put it out there for the world to see, knowing your friends will read it if they care. 

* Sometimes, we're willing to sacrifice security for this community we've built.  We'll share some personal things with the only other fan of "Third Full Moon" (my example band) that we've found for days.  The connection is made quickly, strongly, and sometimes violently (not physically, but just strongly felt and strongly dealt with).  A lot of us will go visit places we've never been because we know someone there.  From these communities.  Sort of like the old "Pen Pals", but more involved with less effort. 

* We don't really tolerate intentional stupidity / ignorance very well.  We're alright with someone who "just doesn't know" or "isn't aware", but if someone seems to know and disregards that knowledge, especially to the point of messing up a community, then they're labeled pretty quickly as "troll", or worse yet, "asshat" or something similar.  This also applies to people who only have one tune to sing.  If every post you ever make on a forum is about the Mets (and it's not a specifically tailored "Mets Forum"), then be prepared to be disregarded at the least and taunted at the worst.  We're virulent and passionate, whether it be positively or negatively.   And the nature of the technology and its dependence on words only makes that more clear. 

Maybe someone else has done all this work and I'm just parroting him or her.  However, I've been thinking about this in regards to the American church.  I think in a lot of ways, the way it's set up by default seems to miss a lot of these things.  Many churches have had the same focus for ten years. Even the more progressive churches change a few more times within that same span, but by their very nature need to keep a certain focus for a while.  My generation (and those after me) honestly get very bored by this.  There is value in waiting and quiet and patience, yes, but we find that to be a personal thing, done in the privacy of our own homes. 

We'll put our money where our interests are. Easily.  But when something seems to stop working, we want an update.  A new version. 

I posted those two links for a reason. The first has a video on it (at the bottom). It's long, but I thought it was very enlightening. It's Leo Laporte talking about how media has to change their ways because people my age (and younger) just don't really read newspapers or watch most television anymore. If you want to get your ad out there, then you have to go where the people are.  I think there's a huge lesson in that for us as proponents of the Gospel.  Jesus did just that.  And really, he wasn't afraid of using examples that they'd understand.  Fish.  Bread.  Grain.  Even going so far as to quote some of their poets sometimes to get the point across.  To keep up, I think we really need to understand the people we're talking to. 

The second one was part of my reading last night.  People who plant food know where  and when  as well as what to plant.  I think unless we take at least a few of these to heart, we'll cease to be effective.  Crop rotation.  Changing methods to get more yield.  The seed  stays the same.  The gospel stays sacrosanct.  However, the way to get it out there has to change.  Or we'll get left behind.